■  ■<'iM)!''i   I'ii'.i'hU'i 'V--:'*)i'S '•■''■'   '.'h^-.   ••'^.  \   , 

^iiiHl:  p  iii|ii: ;:i'  i:;^':: in,;r  I 

'WM(    'i'':    II'.  M'.'i;  /■'.;.  lii'i' ■.■.:.■,.  ■  ■    -• 


J 


;»';:,{; 


/'!; 


•Kf 


m 


mmmtmMmimmM 


■\m 


i 


.L27  4 
1875 


COMMENTARY 


ON  THE 

HOLT  SCEIPTUEES 

CRITICAL,  DOCTRINAL,  AND  HOMILETICAL, 

WITH  SPECIAL  REFERENCE  TO   MINISTERS  AND  STUDENTS. 

BY 

JOHN  PETEE  LA^GE,  D.D.,    . 

Bf  COKNECTIOX   WITH    A.  NDUBEK  09  KUIKENT  SC&OPXAH  DITimS, 

TRANSLATED  FROM  THE  GERMAN,  AND  EDITED,  WITH  ADDITIONS^ 


BY 

PHILIP  SCHAEF,  D.D., 

IK  CONNECTION  WITH   AMERICAN   SCHOLARS   OF  TARI0U3  ETANOELICAL  DENOMINATIONS. 


VOL.  V.    OF  THE    NEW  TESTAilENT:    CONTAININQ   THE    EPISTLE  TO   THE 

ROMANS. 


NEW  YORK: 

SCRIBNER,   AIlMSTRONG^&    CO., 

BCCCESSOBa  TO 

CHARLES   SCRIBNER  &  CO., 

064    BROADWAY. 
1872. 


THE 


EPISTLE    OF   PAUL 


TO    THB 


EOMANS. 


BY 


V 
J.  F.  LANGE,  D.D.,  and   the  Eev.   F.  R.  FAY. 


TRANSLATED  FROM  THE  GERMAN 
BY 

J.   F.   HURST,   D.D., 

N  REVISED,  ENLARGED,  AND  EDITED 

BY 

■p.  SCHAFF,  D.D.,  and  the  Rev.  M.  B.  RIDDLE. 

8E00NIK  EDinOX. 

NEW  YORK: 

SCEIBNER,   ARMSTRONG    &.    CO., 

SUCCESSORS  TO 

CHARLES   SCRIBNER  &   CO., 

654    BROADWAY. 
1872. 


• 


Entkbed",  according  to  Act  of  Congress,  in  the  year  18M,  by 

CHARLES  SCRIBNER  AND  COMPANY, 

Id  the  Clerk's  Office  of  the  District  Court  of  the  United  States  for  the  Southern  Distriol 

of  New  York. 


PREFACE  TO  THE  AMERICAN  EDITION. 


Thb'  Epistle  to  the  Romans  is  the  Epistle  of  the  Epistles,  as  the  Gospel  of  John  is  the 
Gospel  of  the  Gospels.  It  is  the  heart  of  the  doctrinal  portion  of  the  New  Testament. 
It  presents  in  systematic  order  the  fundamental  truths  of  Christianity  in  their  primitive 
purity,  inexhaustible  depth,  all-conquering  force,  and  never-failing  comfort.  It  is  the 
bulwark  of  the  evangelical  doctrines  of  sin  and  grace  against  the  obscuration  of  the 
gospel,  whether  by  judaizing  bigotry  or  paganizing  licentiousness.  Addressed  to  the 
Christians  at  Rome,  and  imfolding  to  them  the  gospel  as  a  spiritual  power  of  Ood  unto 
salvation  far  exceeding  in  effect,  and  outlasting  in  time,  the  temporal  power  of  the  Imperial 
City,  it  prophetically  anticipates  and  positively  overthrows  every  essential  error  of  Roman- 
ism, and  is  to  this  day  the  best  antidote  against  popery.  No  wonder  that  it  was  so  highly 
prized  by  the  Reformers.  Luther,  whom  Coleridge  regarded  "the  only  fit  commentator 
on  Paul,"  called  the  Romans  "  the  chief  part  of  the  New  Testament,  and  the  purest  gospel, 
well  worthy  to  be  committed  to  memory  word  for  word  by  every  Christian  man,  and  to  be 
pondered  daily  and  enjoyed  as  the  daily  bread  of  the  soul.  It  can  never  be  too  often  nor 
too  well  read  and  considered,  and  the  more  it  is  understood,  the  better  it  tastes."  Those 
who  have  studied  it  most  carefully,  are  most  likely  to  fall  in  with  the  judgment  of  Cole- 
ridge, that  it  is  "  the  most  profound  work  in  existence." 

But  it  is  certainly  also  the  most  difficult  book  of  the  New  Testament,  unless  we  except 
the  Gospel  of  John  and  the  Revelation.  Meyer,  the  ablest  philological  exegete  of  the  age, 
humbly  confesses,  in  the  preface  to  the  fourth  edition  of  his  commentary,  to  a  growing 
sense  of  our  inability  to  dp  justice  to  "  the  grandest,  the  boldest,  and,  in  all  its  depths  and 
heights,  the  most  complete  composition  of  the  greatest  apostle."  If  St.  Peter  did  not 
hesitate  to  state  that  there  are  "  some  things  hard  to  be  understood  "  in  the  Epistles  of  his 
"beloved  brother  Paul,"  we  need  not  be  surprised  that  even  such  divines  as  occupy  the 
same  general  platform  widely  differ  in  their  interpretations.  The  Epistle  to  the  Romans, 
more  than  any  other,  is  a  battle-field ;  and  every  chapter,  especially  the  third,  the  fifth,  the 
seventh,  and  the  ninth,  is  contested  ground.  Not  a  few  commentators  deal  with  it  aa 
Procrustes  dealt  with  his  victims,  in  adapting  them  to  the  length  of  his  iron  bedstead — 
either  stretching  out  or  cutting  off  their  legs.  But  after  all,  vast  progress  has  been  made, 
especially  within  the  last  fifty  years,  toward  an  impartial  and  thorough  understanding  of 
this  wonderful  production  of  a  wonderful  man. 


PREFACE. 


Among  the  many  noble  contributions  of  German  learning  and  industry  to  this  end^ 
Dr.  Lange's  Commentary — which  is  here  presented,  with  many  additions,  in  an  English 
dress — will  occupy  an  honorable  and  useful  position.  It  appeared  first  in  1865,  and  in  a 
second  edition  in  1868,  in  a  small  but  closely-printed  volume  of  289  pages,  as  part  of  his 
Bibelwerk.  It  is  evidently  the  result  of  much  earnest  labor  and  profound  research,  and 
presents  many  new  and  striking  views.  These,  however,  are  not  always  expressed  with 
that  clearness  demanded  by  the  practical  common  sense  of  the  English  reader ;  hence  th« 
difficult  labor  of  translation  has  been  occasionally  supplemented  by  the  delicate  task  of 
explanation. 

Dr.  Lange  prepared  the  Exegetical  and  Doctrinal  parts,  the  Rev.  F.  R.  Fay,  his  son-ia- 
law,  and  pastor  at  Crefeld,  Prussia,  the  Homiletical  sections. 

The  English  edition  is  the  result  of  the  combined  labor  of  the  Rev.  Dr.  Hurst,  the  Rev. 
M.  B.  Riddle,  and  the  General  Editor.  Dr.  Hurst  is  responsible  for  the  translation  (which 
was  an  unusually  difficult  task),  and  for  the  valuable  HomUetical  selections  from  the  best 
English  sources.  The  General  Editor  and  the  Rev.  M.  B.  Riddle,  besides  carefully  com- 
paring the  translation  with  the  original,  prepared  the  text,  with  the  Critical  notes,  and  the 
additions  to  the  Exegetical  and  Doctrinal  sections.  The  initials  indicate  the  authorship 
of  the  various  additions  in  brackets,  which  increase  the  volume  of  the  German  edition  nearly 
one  half.  Upon  no  other  book,  except  Matthew  and  Genesis,  has  so  much  original  labor 
been  bestowed. 

I  am  responsible  for  the  General  and  Special  Introduction,  and  the  first  six  chapters 
(exclusive  of  the  last  few  verses  of  chap,  vi.),  which  cover  about  one  half  of  the  volume.  I 
examined  nearly  all  the  authorities  quoted  by  Dr.  Lange,  from  Chrysostom  down  to  the  latest 
editions  of  Tholuck  and  Meyer,  and  also  the  principal  English  commentators,  as  Stuart, 
Hodge,  Alford,  Wordsworth,  Jowett,  Forbes,  «&c.,  who  are  sublimely  ignored  by  continental 
commentators,  as  if  exegesis  had  never  crossed  the  English  Channel,  much  less  the  Atlantic 
Ocean.  The  length  of  some  of  my  annotations  {e.  g.,  on  chaps,  i.,  iii.,  and  v.)  may  be  justi- 
fied by  the  defects  of  the  original,  and  the  great  importance  of  the  topics  for  the  English 
and  American  mind. 

I  had  a  strong  desire  to  complete  the  work,  and  to  incorporate  portions  of  a  German 
Commentary  on  Romans  which  I  prepared  years  ago  in  connection  with  my  lectures  aa 
professor  of  theology,  as  well  as  the  results  of  more  recent  studies.  But  a  multiplicity  of 
engagements,  and  a  due  regard  for  my  health,  compelled  me  to  intrust  the  remaining  chap- 
ters, together  with  my  whole  apparatus,  including  my  notes  in  manuscript  and  a  printed 
essay  on  the  ninth  chapter,  to  my  friend,  the  Rev.  M.  B.  Riddle.  As  an  excellent  German 
and  Biblical  scholar,  and  as  editor  of  the  Commentaries  on  Galatians  and  Colossians  in  the 
Biblework,  Mr.  Riddle  has  all  the  qualifications  and  experience,  as  well  as  that  rare  and  noble 
enthusiasm  which  is  indispensable  for  the  successful  completion  of  such  a  difficult  and 
responsible  task. 

It  is  hoped  that,  by  this  combination  of  talent  and  labor,  the  Commentary  on  Romani 
has  gained  in  variety,  richness,  and  adaptation  to  the  use  of  English  students. 

PHILIP  SCHAFF. 
No.  6  Bible  Hocse,  New  Tore,  April  20,  1869. 


THE    EPISTLE    OF   PAUL 


ROMANS. 


INTRODUCTION. 


PRELIMINARY    OBSERVATION. 

As  the  Epistle  to  the  Romans  is  the  most  important  and  prominent  of  the  Pauline 
Epistles,  we  must  here  discuss  first  the  general  preliminary  questions  connected  with  the  life, 
doctrine,  and  writings  of  the  Apostle,  This  introduction,  therefore,  divides  itself  into  a 
general  and  a  special  introduction.  The  first  connects  with  the  general  introduction  of  the 
*'  Bible-Work  "  on  Matthew  [p.  20  fi".  Am.  ed.]  for  the  New  Testament,  and  on  Genesis  [p.  1 
ff.  Am.  ed.]  for  the  Old ;  the  second  corresponds  with  the  introductions  to  our  commentaries 
on  the  remaining  Epistles  of  Paul. 

•  I.     GENERAL  INTRODUCTION  TO   THE  EPISTLES  OF  PAUL. 

§  1.    THE  PAULIKE  PORTION  OF  THE  NEW  TESTAMENT. 

The  apostolic  activity  of  the  great  Apostle  to  the  Gentiles  was  so  comprehensive  and 
fruitful,  that  the  greater  portion  of  the  labors  of  the  original  twelve  apostles  was  merged 
into  the  historical  current  of  his  work.  It  is  only  the  Coptic  Church,  and  a  few  other 
isolated  Oriental  sects,  that,  as  a  portion  of  the  original  apostolic  territory,  have  continued 
isolated  from  Paul's  great  field  of  labor.  Since  the  second  century,  Paul's  peculiar  type  of 
teaching  began  indeed  to  give  way  more  and  more  to  the  forms  of  ancient  and  mediaeval 
Catholicism ;  though  Catholicism  cannot  be  termed  Petrine  in  that  sense,  and  much  less  in  that 
degree,  in  which  the  Church  of  Rome  claims  to  be  built  on  Peter.  Yet  Paul's  spirit  continued 
to  exert  its  influence  through  the  middle  ages,  not  only  in  the  heretical  foi-m  of  Paulicianism 
and  other  sects,  but  also  in  the  orthodox  type  of  Augustinism,  until  it  broke  forth  from  the 
innermost  life  of  the  Church  as  the  chief  organizing  power  of  Evangelical  Protestantism.* 

♦  [Dr.  Lanoe  {Das  Apostol  Zeitalter,  vol.  ii.  p.  649)  adopts  Bubstantially  the  ingenious  viev,  first  suggested  by  Joachim 
Floris,  and  recently  more  fully  developed  by  tie  great  philosopher  Schellino,  and  favored  by  eminent  German  divines, 
uch  as  Neandkr,  Ullmann,  Thiersch,  that  the  three  representative  apostles,  Peter,  Paul,  and  John,  are  the  types  of  three 
ucccssive  ages  of  Christianity  :  Peter  the  apostle  of  law  and  Catholicism,  Paul  the  apostle  of  freedom  and  Protestantism, 
John  the  apostle  of  love  and  the  church  of  the  future  which  is  to  harmonize  authority  and  freedom,  unity  and  variety. 
Schelling,  shortly  before  his  death,  at  Ragatz,  Switzerland,  Aug.  1854,  in  a  very  interesting  conversation  with  the  writar 
of  this  note,  emphatically  affirmed  his  unshaken  belief  in  this  view,  to  which  he  had  given  repeated  and  profound 
reflection.  It  is  certainly  no  mere  accident  that  Catholicism  professes  to  be  founded  on  Peter,  while  Protestantism  has 
It  all  times  mainly  appealed  to  Paul,  the  apostle  of  faith,  of  freedom,  of  independence,  and  of  progress.  Even  the 
1 


THE   EPISTLE    OF   PAUL    TO   THE   ROMANS. 


As  far  as  the  Pauline  portion  of  the  New  Testament  is  concerned,  it  constitutes  not  only 
the  greatest  part  of  the  apostolic  epistles,  but  also  a  large  share  of  the  entire  New  Testament ; 
especially  when  we  include  both  the  writings  of  Luke  and  the  E])istle  to  the  Hebrews,  which 
were  evidently  written  under  the  influence  of  the  Apostle  of  the  Gentiles. 

An  et<;rnal  triumph  of  Christianity,  an  imperishable  sign  and  pledge  of  its  world-conquer- 
ing power,  lies  in  the  fact  that  the  greatest  part  of  the  Christian  Church,  the  greatest  portion 
of  the  New  Testament,  and  the  most  powerful  expression  of  Christian  doctrine,  proceeded 
from  a  man  who,  endowed  with  a  lofty  genius  and  a  heroic  energy  of  will,  had  cast  all  the 
enthusiasm  of  his  youth  into  a  fanatical  hatred  of  Christianity,  and  who  had  made  it  the 
great  object  of  his  life  to  exterminate  that  religion  from  the  face  of  the  earth.  With  the 
conversion  of  Paul,  the  noblest  prince  of  Pharisteism  was  changed  from  an  arch-enemy  of 
Christ  into  his  most  active  apostle  and  witness.  This  was  a  prelude  to  the  world-historical 
change  by  which  the  eagle  of  the  heathen  power  of  Rome  was  converted  from  the  work  of  a 
vulture  that  vexed  the  fold  of  Christ,  into  the  sei"vice  of  a  dove  of  peace  for  the  nations  of 
tlie  earth.  Saul  became  Paul.  In  this  one  word  all  the  past  triumphs  of  Christianity  over 
it?  foes  are  embraced,  and  all  its  future  triumphs  are  described  in  advance.  To  bend  or  to 
break — that  is  the  question  ;  to  bend,  like  Paul,  or  to  break,  like  Julian  the  Apostate.  The 
cause  of  this  wonderful  power  of  conversion  and  of  judgment  lies  in  the  universal  triumjih 
of  Christ,  against  whom  a  Paul  was  not  too  great  an  enemy,  nor  a  Julian  too  crafty  a  poli- 
tician and  emperor. 

Concerning  the  signification  of  Paul  in  the  New  Testament,  Calmet  thus  speaks  in  the 
introduction  to  his  commentary  on  the  Epistle  to  the  Romans :  "  Post  sacrosancta  ecangelia 
venerahile  maxime  ac  ceterorum  omnium  pretiosissimum  monumentum  Pauli  epistolce  haltendcB  sunt. 
Omnia  in  illis  continentur,  qtm  foiinandis  mwilms,  site  ad  mysteria  et  religionem  constituendam  a 
Jesu  Christo  tradita  svnt.  Tamqunm  s^ijyplementum  et  interjyretatio  eorvm,  quae  Jesus  Ckristua 
docuit,  ac  veluti  alterum  evnngelium  Jesu  Christi  e  mortuis  redivivi  jure  meritoque  rejmtantur.^^ 
[H.  EwALD,  the  great  orientalist,  commences  his  Commentary  on  the  Pauline  Epistlea 
(Gottingen,  1857),  with  the  following  striking  and  truthful  eulogy :  "  Considering  these 
Epistles  for  themselves  only,  and  apart  from  the  general  significance  of  the  great  Apostle  of 
the  Gentiles,  we  must  still  admit  that,  in  the  whole  history  of  all  centuries  and  of  all  nations, 
there  is  no  other  set  of  writings  of  similar  extent,  which,  as  creations  of  the  fugitive  moment, 
have  proceeded  from  such  severe  troubles  of  the  age,  and  such  profound  pains  and  sufferings 
of  the  author  himself,  and  yet  contain  such  an  amount  of  healthfuhiess,  serenity,  and  vigor  of 
immortal  genius,  and  touch  with  such  clearness  and  certainty  on  the  very  highest  truths  of 
human  asjiiration  and  action.  .  .  .  The  smallest  as  well  as  the  greate-t  of  these  Epistles  seem 
to  have  proceeded  from  the  fleeting  moments  of  this  earthly  life  only  to  enchain  all  eternity ; 
they  were  born  of  anxiety  and  bitterness  of  human  strife,  to  set  forth  in  brighter  lustre  and 
with  higher  certainty  their  superhuman  grace  and  beauty.  The  divine  assurance  and  firmness 
of  the  old  prophets  of  Israel,  the  all-transcending  glory  and  immediate  spiritual  presence 
of  the  Eternal  King  and  Lord,  who  had  just  ascended  to  heaven,  and  all  the  art  and  culture 

antftgonism  of  rrotestantii^m  and  Romanis-m  has  its  typical  nnteccilcnt  in  tho  temporary  collision  of  Paul  and  Peter  at 
Aiitiocli,  and  the  earnest  protest  of  Paul  iigainst  any  compromise  with  judair.ing  principles  or  customs.  The  idea  of  Schel- 
lintc  furnishes  a  fruitful  hint  for  a  comprehensive  evangelical  Catholic  philosopliy  of  Church  history.  But  it  must  ho 
wisely  dcfliiecl  and  qualified,  and,  a«  Lanife  intimates,  it  holds  (food  only  with  regard  to  the  elements  of  truth,  and  not  to 
the  extremes,  contradictinns,  and  dcfecis.  In  the  variotis  hislnrlcal  types  of  Christianity.  For  in  the  Epistles  of  Peter 
there  is  not  the  fainlCKt  trace  of  hierarchical  pretension  and  judaizing  legalism  and  ritualism  ;  on  the  contriu-y,  a  striking 
Rulistantial  agrcemeiit  with  the  systom  of  I'aul.  Nor  do  wo  find,  on  the  other  haixl,  that  Paul  gives  the  leist  countcnaiioo 
io  that  unhistorical  and  unchurchly  individualism  and  one-sided  intoUcctualli-m  Int^i  which  much  of  our  modern  I'rotest- 
uitisin  has  degenerated.  It  must  also  he  admitted,  that  in  no  age  or  section  of  Christianity  was  the  spirit  of  any  of  th« 
three  leading  apostles  entirely  wanting.  There  were  truly  oyangelicnl  men  and  tendencies  at  work  in  the  bosom  of 
medicuval  Catholici«m,  and  they  are  not  wholly  extinct  even  in  the  Roman  church  of  the  present  day  ;  while  the  tendency 
to  icn-.ism,  formality,  intolerance,  and  exclusivism  may  l>e  found  also  in  tho  bosom  .>f  Protestantism  ;  and  tho  lovely 
harmonizing  spirit  of  John  is  alive  more  or  lees  among  true  believers  In  all  sections  of  Christendom.  So  in  a  simllo] 
way  the  law  and  the  promise,  the  eacordotnl  offlco  and  the  prophetic  spirit,  accompanied  the  Old  Testament  dispcnsatiol 
through  the  stages  of  its  development  to  .lohn  the  Baptist,  tho  immediate  forerunner  of  the  first  advent  of  Christ 
Corap.  below,  p.  13,  and  Scuafp's  llislnnj  qf  the  Apo«t.  Church,  pp.  C71-C;8.— P.  S.] 


§  2.    PAUL  THE  APOSTLE  TO  THE  GENTILES.    HISTORY  OF  HIS  LIFE.  ft 

of  a  ripe  and  wonderfully  excited  age,  seem  to  have  joined,  as  it  were,  in  bringing  forth  th« 
new  creation  of  these  Epistles  of  the  times  which  were  destined  to  last  for  all  times."  Upos 
the  whole,  St.  Paul  is,  perhaps,  the  most  remarkable  man,  and  his  Epistles,  next  to  the  Gos- 
pels, the  most  important  literary  production  of  all  ages.  Dr.  Wobdsworth  strongly  recom 
mends  the  reading  of  the  Pauline  Epistles  in  their  chronological  order,  so  as  to  accompany 
the  Apostle,  with  the  help  of  the  Acts,  in  his  missionary  career  from  the  call  at  Damascus  to 
the  martyrdom  in  Eome,  and  his  development  of  Christian  doctrine  from  the  elementary 
truths  of  the  Thessalonians  to  the  farewell  instructions  of  the  Pastoral  Letters.  The  reader 
will  thus  trace  with  growing  delight  this  spiritual  river  of  Paradise  from  its  fountain-head, 
'ihrough  Syria,  Asia  Minor,  and  Greece,  to  Rome,  diffusing  purity  and  health,  flowing  onward 
in  a  majestic  and  ever-widening  flood,  fertilizing  the  banks,  that  they  may  bear  the  flowers 
and  trees  of  Christian  graces,  and  terminating  at  last  in  the  ocean  of  eternity. — P.  S.] 

§  2.     PAUL  THE  APOSTLE  TO  THE  GEiNTILES.    HISTORY  OF  HIS  LIFE.* 

The  history  of  the  life  of  the  Apostle  Paul  divides  itself,  according  to  great  crises,  into  the 
following  periods  :  I.  The  time  of  his  youthful  development  to  his  conversion  ;  II.  The  time 
of  his  apostolic  training,  his  impulsive  and  enthusiastic  beginnings,  and  his  purifying 
retreats ;  III.  The  period  of  the  three  great  missionary  journeys  recounted  in  the  Scriptures, 
down  to  his  capture  in  Jerusalem,  and  his  transportation  from  Csesarea  to  Rome ;  IV.  The 
termination  of  his  career  to  his  martyrdom. 

A.     The  History  of  ihe  Youth  of  Paul  to  his  Conversion. 

Paul  appears  first  before  us  at  the  place  of  execution  of  the  protomartyr  Stephen,  under 
the  Jewish  name  of  Saul  (^^>"ij),  Acts  vii.  57.  He  is  a  young  man,  who  pursues  his  studies 
in  Jerusalem  in  the  school  of  the  conservative  Pharisee,  Gamaliel  (Acts  xxii.  3 ;  comp.  Acts 
V.  34)  ;  but  in  consequence  of  his  fanatical  enthusiasm  for  the  Pharisaic  law,  which  he  iden- 
tified with  the  ancestral  faith  (Phil.  iii.  5,  6),  he  became,  while  a  student,  the  most  bitter  per- 
secutor and  disturber  of  the  youthful  Church  of  Christ ;  for  he  considered  that  Church  a 
fatal  Jewish  heresy,  and  one  which,  by  virtue  of  the  rights  of  zealots  for  the  law,  he  designed 
to  combat,  and  hoped  utterly  to  destroy.  Probably  Moses,  Phiuehas,  and  Elijah  were  his 
imaginary  prototypes ;  while  he  adjudged  Christ  to  be  the  greatest  of  those  false  prophets 
against  whom  destruction  was  prophesied  and  appointed  (Dent,  xviii.  20).  From  an  accom- 
plice who,  being  i^resent  at  the  execution  of  Stephen,  took  charge  of  the  clothes  belonging 
to  his  witnesses  and  executioners  (Acts  vii.  58),  he  soon  became  a  servant  of  the  Sanhedrinf; 
and  having  become  excited  by  the  martyr-blood  of  Stephen,  he  not  only  continued  the  perse- 
cution, and  scattered  the  congregation  in  Jerusalem,  but,  being  clothed  with  extraordinary 
authority,  he  entered  upon  a  journey  to  Damascus  for  the  purpose  of  destroying  the  Christian 
congregation  in  that  city.  The  Sanhedrin  did  not  at  that  time  possess  authority  over  the 
life  and  death  of  the  Jews  (John  xviii.  31),  but  it  was  nevertheless  at  liberty  to  exercise,  in 
matters  of  religion,  the  Jewish  authority  to  imprison,  to  scourge,  and  to  arrange  all  the  jire- 
liminaries  of  a  trial  for  capital  punishment.  The  execution  of  James  the  Just,  as  recounted 
by  Josephus  (in  his  Antiq.  xx.  9,  1),  explains  the  martyrdom  of  Stej^hen  and  the  subse- 
quent threats  against  Paul's  life  (Acts  xxiii.  30),  and  shows  that  a  tumultuous  occasion  could 
lead  to  the  infliction  of  capital  punishment.  (On  the  laws  of  punishment,  comp.  Winer,  art. 
Bynedrium  [iL  551,  and  Smith,  iii.  1136,  art.  Sanhedrim,] ).  J 

•  In  the  follo^ng  section  I  have  borrowed  considerably  from  my  own  article  on  Paul,  in  Herzoq's  Seal-EncycCO' 
pierJie  [vol.  xi.  1859,  pp.  239-269, — P.  S.] ;  but  I  have  enlarged  it  according  to  necessity.  Compare  also  the  respective 
BC'Ctions  in  the  works  of  Neander,  Schaff,  Lanoe,  Thiersch,  on  the  History  of  the  Apostolic  Church  (Schaff,  pp.  239- 
347),  and  Coxtbeaee  and  Howson  :  The.  Life  and  Epistles  of  Sf.  Paul.    London,  1S53,  republished  in  Xew  York. 

t  [The  proper  spelling  is  not  Sanhedrim,  but  Sanhedrin  (Talm.  "p'I'inzO  ,  formed  from  <ruveSpiov),  but  there  is  no 
uniformity  in  this  even  among  scholars. — P.  S.] 

X  (The  reader  will  meet  in  this  and  all  other  parts  of  Dr.  Lange's  Commentary  very  frequent  i  efetences  to  WinerIi 
Biblical  Dictionary  {Biblisches  JRealworterbuch  zum  Handgehrauch  fUr  Sludirende,  etc.,  3d  ed.    Leipsic,  1849,  2  vols.) 


THE   EPISTLE   OF   PAUL   TO   THE   ROMANS. 


Saul  had  already  taken  the  lead  in  Jerusalem  in  the  work  of  incarcerating  the  Christians,! 
but  the  ajjparent  result  of  his  efibrts,  which  was  only  the  wider  promulgation  of  tlie  gospel 
by  means  of  the  scattei'iug  of  the  congregation  (Acts  viii.  4),  exasperated  him  still  more. 
Therefore  he  solicited  those  fatal  letters  of  authority  which  directed  him  toward  Damascus. 
A  proof  of  the  confidence  reposed  in  the  fiery  zeal  of  the  young  Pharisaic  student  may  be 
Been  in  the  fact  that  the  Council  not  only  gave  him  full  authority,  but  also  an  obedient  escort. 
The  enterprising  youth  designed  to  destroy  the  whole  Christian  flock  in  Damascus,  and  to 
drag  back  to  Jerusalem  even  women,  and  all  who  were  at  his  mercy. 

But  the  Divine  visitation  came  ujjon  him  when  near  Damascus.  Saul,  by  a  sudden  miracle, 
became  a  Paul,  as  we  are  accustomed  to  say  ;  the  greatest  and  most  dangerous  of  all  the 
persecutors  of  the  Christians  (for  he  persecuted  the  Church  in  its  infancy),  was  transformed 
into  the  greatest  promulgator  of  Christianity  in  the  world. 

Paul  was  a  descendant  of  the  tribe  of  Benjamin,  and  a  native  of  Tarsus,  the  polished  and 
venerable  capital  of  Cilicia,  situated  on  the  river  Cydnus,  the  home  of  the  great  naturalist, 
Dioscorides,  and  of  other  distinguished  men,  and  the  burial  i)lace  of  Emjjeror  Julian  the 
AjDOstate.  Jerome  (JDe  riris  illudrib.  cajj.  v.)  mentions  the  report  that  Paul  had  eniigrated 
with  his  parents  from  Qishala,  but  he  afterwards  declares,  in  his  commentary  on  Philemon, 
that  it  is  a  fable.  As  the  stock  of  Levi  became  gloriously  resplendent  in  John  the  Baptist, 
BO,  under  the  new  dispensation,  did  Benjamin,  the  son  of  Rachel,  receive  higher  honor  than 
any  other  tribe  save  Judah,  which  had  previously  risen  to  the  greatest  glory.  And  the  same 
mighty  energy  which  the  blessing  of  Jacob  ascribed  to  the  character  of  Benjamin  (Gen.  xlix. 
27),  and  which  was  confirmed  by  later  events  (Judges  xx.  21),  found  its  perfect  expression  in 
Paul.  He  was  first  a  ravenous  wolf  in  the  midst  of  the  flock  that  ate  his  prey  in  the  morning ; 
but  in  the  evening  he  combined  the  strength  of  the  wolf  and  the  mildness  of  the  lamb  ;  and 
though  he  sjjrang  like  a  wolf  into  the  metropolitan  cities  of  heathendom,  his  puqjose  was  to 
"  divide  his  spoil  in  the  evening."  His  parents  appear  to  have  been  in  good  circumstances. 
They  were  "  Roman  "  citizens,  though  not  as  inhabitants  of  the  city  of  Tarsus  (for  that  city 
had  not  then  obtained  its  freedom),  but  by  special  conditions  with  which  we  are  not 
acquainted.  Notwithstanding  their  high  social  standing,  they  strictly  adhered  to  the  Jewish 
faith,  and  designed  their  son  to  be  a  Pharisaic  Rabbi.  According  to  Jewish  custom  he  had 
learned  a  trade ;  he  was  a  tent-maker  (that  is,  a  weaver  of  a  kind  of  cloth  which  was  applied 
to  tent-making ;  crKiqvoiToioi,  Acts  xviii.  3).  The  great  talents  of  Saul  could  be  early  developed 
in  the  schools  of  cultivated  Tarsus,  if  we  may  sujjpose  that  the  rigid  Pharisaic  sentiment  of 
his  parents  (which,  however,  was  often  mollified  in  heathen  cities  far  away  from  Palestine) 
permitted  him  to  visit  those  schools.  From  Paul's  philosojihic  analysis  of  heathendom  (Rom. 
i,  and  ii.),  from  his  discourse  at  Athens  (Acts  xvii.),  and  from  other  similar  expressions,  wo 
may  very  readily  infer  that  his  acquaintance  with  sentences  of  heathen  philosojihers  and 
poets  (Acts  xvii.  28;  Tit.  i.  12  sq.),  is  not  attributable  to  mere  popular  intercourse,  but  to 
reading  and  study.  When  in  Jerusalem,  he  became  familiarly  acciuainted  with  the  Old  Tes- 
tament,, rabbinical  traditions  and  dialectics,  and  probably  also  with  the  doctrines  of  the  Jew- 
ish Alexandrian  school.  It  is  probable  that  he  found  there  some  family  connections;  at  least, 
he  was  subsequently  sujjported  very  earnestly  by  a  nephew  (Acts  xxiii.  16).  As  King  Saul 
of  old  is  said  to  have  gone  forth  to  seek  she-asses,  but  found  a  crown,  so  with  the  Apostle; 
but  he  took  better  care  of  his  crown. 

The  conversion  of  Saul  is  one  of  the  greatest  miracles  of  the  exalted  Saviour — one  of  the 

which  18  justly  prized  in  Germany  as  a  mastcrwork  of  ripe  scholnrship  and  critical  accuracy.  The  English  and  Amcrienn 
student  who  has  no  access  to  it,  may  in  nearly  all  such  cases  profitably  consult  the  same  articles  in  W.  Suitu's  Dictioiiari/ 
of  the  Bible,  large  edition,  London  and  Boston,  18C3,  3  vols. ;  large  American  edition,  with  many  improvements  and  addi- 
tions, hy  I'rof.  II.  B.  IIackktt  and  liziiA  Abbot,  New  York,  1868  ff.,  to  be  completed  in  i  vols.  ;  and  the  superb  third 
edition  of  Kitto's  Cyclopitdia  of  JHblical  Literature,  prepared  by  "W.  Lindsay  Alexandeb,  B.T).,  etc.,  London,  1865,  3 
vols.  These  English  works,  being  the  result  of  the  combined  labor  of  many  contributors,  have  less  unity  and  symmetry 
than  that  of  Winke,  but  are  more  extensive  and  embody  the  latest  information  (especially  Hackbtt  and  Abbot'^ 
edition  of  Smith  unabridged,  now  in  course  of  preparation  and  publication,  with  the  help  of  o  number  of  American 
scholars).  A  new  Qerman  Dictionary  of  the  Bible  has  been  recently  commenced  with  a  considerable  array  of  coUaboRv 
tors  by  3cui:nkei  of  UelJtlberg,  and  will  ropreBont  the  liberal,  aemi-rationalistio  school  of  German  theology  —P.  8.1 


§   2,    PAUL  THE   APOSTLE   TO  THE  GENTILES.     HISTORY  OF  HIS  LIFE.  * 

greatest  miiacles  of  conversion  in  the  kingdom  of  grace.  The  fact  especially  that  the  most 
earnest  zealot  for  Pharisaic  legalism  became,  by  Divine  appointment,  the  chief  apostle  of  a 
free  gospel  and  faith,  and  the  most  successful  destroyer  of  Pharisseism  in  Judaism,  and  in 
the  Christian  Church  through  all  ages,  is  without  a  parallel  in  history.  True,  some  of  tha 
greatest  opponents  of  Jesuitism  have  come  out  of  Jesuit  schools.  Luther,  the  former  monk 
was  the  strongest  antagonist  of  monastic  righteousness ;  and  Luther,  the  Augustinian,  the 
strongest  antagonist  of  intolerance,  which  St.  Augustine  unfortunately  first' established  in 
theory  in  opposition  to  the  Donatists ;  but  not  one  of  these  contrasts  reaches  that  miraculous 
transformation  in  which  the  glorified  Christ,  as  with  an  ironical  smile,  changed  the  most 
formidable  power  of  the  enemy  into  His  most  victorious  agency  for  conquest. 

And  yet  this  miracle,  too,  was  conditioned  by  justice  and  truth.  We  must  not  ignore  for 
the  miraculous  manifestation  of  Christ  all  connecting  points  of  preparation  in  the  unconscious 
spiritual  life  of  Saul  (as  Batjmgaeten  has  again  done).  This  would  be  as  partial  and  un- 
tenable as  the  opposite  extreme  of  rationalistic  writers,  who  vainly  attempt  to  explain  l\ia 
conversion  by  psychological  antecedents  and  extraordinary  natural  phenomena  (see  Winer, 
Real-Wdrterluch^  art.  Puulus).  The  history  declares  positively  that  the  glorified  Christ 
appeared  to  him ;  and  we  cannot  interpret  it  in  any  other  light.  But  Paul's  own  accounts 
show  that  the  objective  manifestation  of  Christ  was  mediated  by  a  visionary  or  ecstatic 
elevation  of  Saul  himself  (Acts  ix.  7  ;  xxii.  9). 

[The  rationalistic  interpretation,  after  having  exploded  in  Germany,  has  been  ingeniously 
renewed  in  France  by  E.  Renan,  Les  Apotres,  Paris,  1866,  p.  181.  There  is  a  third  view  on 
the  conversion  of  Paul,  not  mentioned  by  Dr.  Lange — the  mythical — which  resolves  the  event 
into  a  purely  subjective  process  in  Paul's  own  mind,  and  explains  the  supernatural  light  to  be 
simply  the  symbolical  expression  of  the  certainty  of  the  real  spiritual  presence  of  Christ  in  the 
Church  and  the  believer.  This  view  was  ably  defended  by  the  late  Dr.  Baur,  of  Tubingen, 
in  his  work  on  Paul,  1847,  p.  68.  But  after  a  renewed  investigation  of  the  subject,  the 
celebrated  historian  arrived  at  the  conclusion  that  the  conversion  of  Paul  was  an  enigma, 
which  cannot  be  satisfactorily  solved  by  any  psychological  or  dialectical  analysis.  See  the 
second  and  revised  edition  of  his  work  on  Christianity  and  the  Christian  Church  in  the  first 
three  centuries,  which  appeared  shortly  before  his  death,  a.  1860,  p.  45,  and  the  second 
edition  of  his  Paul,  edited  by  Zeller,  1867.  The  character  and  apostolic  life  of  Paul,  and 
the  very  origin  and  continued  existence  of  the  Christian  Church,  is  an  inexplicable  mystery 
without  the  miracle  of  the  actual  resurrection  of  our  Saviour. — P.  S.] 

Observations. — 1.  On  the  splendor  of  the  city  of  Tarsus  in  culture  and  institutions  of 
learning,  see  Winer,  article  Tarsus.  Also  the  particulars  concerning  Gamaliel,  by  the  same 
author  [and  in  Kitto's  and  W.  Smith's  Bible  Dictionnries]. 

2.  On  the  life  of  Paul  in  general,  compare  the  article  Paul  in  the  various  Bible  diction- 
aries ;  the  relevant  chajiters  in  Neander,  Schaff,  Thiersch,  and  Lange,  on  the  Apostolic 
Age ;  the  work,  Die  Biographien  der  Bihel,  Stuttgart  and  Leipzig,  1838 ;  and  Reuss,  Die 
Gesch.  der  heil.  Schriften  Neuen  Testaments  [4th  ed.,  1864],  p.  45  ff.,  where  a  comprehensive 
catalogue  of  literature  may  be  found.     For  particular  references,  see  below. 

3.  The  literary  education  of  the  Apostle  has  been  much  discussed.  Comp.  Niemeyer, 
Charakteristik  der  Bibel ;  Thalemann's  treatise,  De  eruditiohe  Pauli  Judaica  von  Gracfi  (and 
Winer,  Real-Worterhuch,  ii.  213).  The  parents  of  Paul  may  have  been  prevented,  by  their 
religious  prejudices,  from  sending  their  son  to  the  brilliant  Grecian  schools  in  Tarsus  ;  but  it 
does  not  therefore  follow  that  the  vigorous  mind  of  the  youthful  Paul  did  not  become 
acquainted  privately  with  the  principles  of  Grecian  learning.  Possibly  his  parents  may  have 
Bent  him  to  Jerusalem  for  the  very  reason  that  they  discovered  in  him  a  dangerous  suscepti- 
bility for  the  charms  of  Grecian  literature. — "  Paul  received  a  learned  Jewish  education  in 
the  school  of  the  Pharisa;an  Rabbi,  Gamaliel,  not  i-emaining  an  entire  stranger  to  Greek  litera- 
ture, as  his  style,  his  dialectic  method,  his  allusions  to  heathen  religion  and  philosophy,  and 
his  occasional  quotations  from  heathen  poets  show.  Thus,  a  '  Hebrew  of  tlie  Hebrews,'  yet 
at  the  same  time  a  native  Hellenist  and  a  Roman  citizen,  he  combined  in  himself,  so  to  speak, 
the  three  great  nationalities  of  the  ancient  world,  and  was  endowed  with  all  the  natural 
qualifications  for  a  universal  apostleship.  He  could  argue  with  the  Pharisees  as  a  son  of 
Abraham,  of  the  tribe  of  Benjamin,  as  a  disciple  of  the  renowned  Gamaliel,  surnamed  'the 
Glory  of  the  Law,'  and  as  one  of  the  straitest  of  their  sect.     He  could  address  the  Greeks  in 


6  THE   EPISTLE    OF   PAUL    TO    THE   ROMANS. 

their  own  beautiful  tongue,  and  with  the  force  of  their  strong  logic.  Clothed  with  tlie  dig 
nity  and  majesty  of  the  Koman  people,  he  could  travel  safely  over  the  whole  empire  with  the 
watcliwor(^l:  '  Vivis  liimumus  mm.'' ''"'  From  Pu.  Scuakf,  lliiiUny  of  Aucitut  Cliristiunity,  vol.  1. 
p.  08.  Comp.  also  Chakles  Hodge,  Commentary  on  the  EpUtle  to  the  liomnnti,  revi.-^ed  edition, 
first  section  of  the  Introduction  :  "  His  (Paul's)  natural  character  was  ardent,  energetic,  un- 
compromising, and  severe.  How  his  extravagance  and  violence  were  subduetl  by  the  grace 
of  God,  is  abundantly  evident  from  the  moderation,  mildness,  tenderness,  and  conciliation 
manifested  in  all  his  epistles.  Absorbed  in  the  one  olyect  of  glorifying  Christ,  lie  was  ready 
to  submit  to  any  thing,  and  to  yield  any  thing  necessary  for  this  purpose.  He  no  longer 
insisted  that  others  sliould  think  and  act  just  as  he  did.  So  that  they  obeyed  Christ,  he  was 
satisfied  ;  and  he  willingly  conformed  to  their  jjrejudices,  an<l  tolerated  their  errors,  so  far  as 
the  cause  of  truth  and  righteousness  allowed.  By  his  early  education,  by  his  miraculous 
conversi<m  and  inspiration,  hy  his  natural  disposition,  and  by  the  abundant  grace  of  God, 
was  this  Apostle  fitted  for  his  work,  and  sustained  under  his  multiplied  and  arduous 
labors."— P.  S.] 

4.  On  the  chronology  of  the  Apostle's  life,  see  Wiker,  Heal-Wiirterbuch,  ii.  p.  217;  Wie- 
6ELER,  Chronology  of  the  Apostolic  Age  [GOttiugen,  1848 ;  also  the  Chronological  Chart  in  the 
American  edition  of  Lange's  Commentary  on  Acts,  and  Alford's  Commentui-y  on  Acts,  5th 
ed.,  I860,  [pp.  22-27. — P.  8.]  On  the  various  suppositions  concerning  the  time  of  Paul's  con- 
version, Winer,  ii.  p.  219. 

5.  On  the  conversion  of  the  Apostle  in  particular,  see  the  Commentary  on  the  Acts  of  the 
Apostles,  chap.  ix.  [p.  161,  Am.  ed.]  The  olvjectivity  of  the  appearance  of  Christ  is  there 
justly  maintained.  But  we  should,  in  addition  to  it,  make  proper  account  of  the  element 
of  a  vision  as  the  medium  of  the  appearance  of  Christ.  Here  belongs  also  the  treatise  of  C. 
P.  HoFSTEDE  DE  Groot,  PauU  coHversio,  prcecijmus  theologice  PattUnoe  fons,  Groningen,  1855. 
(^^  Itaque  inveni  principia  gravis»ima  tria,  e  quU/us  tota  PauU  theologia  est  oi'ta ;  jjrirnum  mentis, 
Jtsu  vitam  novam  semper  cogitantis,  alterum  animi,  gratiam  divinam  constanter  experti  ct  sen- 
tientis,  tertium  vita',  Christi  ecclesiam  2^<^''P^tM0  sjfcctantis^)  Also  the  essay  of  Paret,  The 
Testimony  of  the  Apostle  Paul  concerning  the  Appiearance  of  Christ,  in  the  Jahrliicher  far 
deutsche  2'heol.,  vol.  iv.,  pt.  2.  For  a  full  list  of  literature,  see  Reuss,  1.  c,  p.  51,  and  Winer, 
ii.  p.  214. 

B.     The  Preparation  of  Paul  for  the  Apostolic  Office,  and  his  Apostolical  Missionary  Joumeyt 
to  the  time  of  his  First  Captivity  in  Borne. 

A  man  of  such  mighty  genius,  notwithstanding  his  apostolic  call,  was  not  qualified  for  an 
evangelist  immediately  after  his  conversion.  His  first  zeal  would  have  been  too  stormy,  too 
powerful,  and  too  much  the  outburst  of  immoderate  excitement.  After  his  fii-st  attempt  in 
Damascus,  he  had  to  withdraw  to  Arabia  for  a  quiet  stay  of  about  three  years  (Gal.  i.) — a 
period  over  which  a  veil  is  drawn.  He  probably  spent  it,  not  in  missionary  labor,  but  to 
greater  advantage  in  contemplative  life,  although  he  may  have  made  some  single  missionary 
efforts  during  this  time  (see  Lange's  History  of  the  Apost.  Age,  ii.  p.  124).  After  his  first 
attempt  in  Jerusalem,  also,  where  Barnabas  introduced  him  to  the  apostles,  Paul  was  again 
required  to  retire  to  private  life.  But  this  time  he  chose  Cilicia,  his  native  country.  We 
may  infer  from  his  character  that  he  did  not  remain  absolutely  passive,  but  that  he  occasion- 
ally testified  of  Christ ;  yet  he  did  not  engage  in  apostolic  labors  in  their  strictest  sense. 

Barnabas  sent  for  him  to  come  from  Cilicia  to  Antioch,  to  coOi)erate  with  him  in  that 
newly-arisen  metropolis  of  Gentile  Christianity  (Acts  xi.  25).  Paul  entered  into  the  most 
intimate  relations  with  the  congregation  of  Gentile  Christians  living  there,  and  the  destina 
tion  that  he  had  received  at  his  call  to  become  the  Apostle  to  the  Gentiles  (Acts  ix.  15),  now 
approached  its  fulfilment.  But  it  Avas  in  accordance  with  the  apostolic  spirit  that  the  Gen- 
tile Church  should  remain  in  perfect  unity  with  the  Jewish-Christian  Churcli.  This  tendency 
toward  unity  was  strengthened  by  the  first  mission  of  Paul  to  Jerusalem,  in  comjjany  with 
Barnabas  (Acts  xi.  30).  We  may  therefore  consider  this  mission  as  the  introiluction  tc.  the 
apostolic  labors  of  the  Ajiostle ;  and  since  it  also  constitutes  one  of  the  strongest  chrono- 
logical links  in  his  career,  we  will  now  speak  of  the  chronological  relations  of  his  life. 

We  pass  over,  as  unreliable  points  of  connection,  the  government  of  Damascus  by  the 
Arabian  king  Aretas  (Acts  ix. ;  2  Cor.  xi.  82),  and  the  meeting  of  Paul  with  Aquila  in 
Corinth,  in  consequence  of  the  banishment  of  the  latter  from  Rome  l)y  an  edict  of  the  Empe- 


§   2.    PAUL  THE   APOSTLE   TO  THE   GENTILES.     HISTORY   OF   HIS  LIFE.  7 

ror  Claudius  (see  Wueseler,  Chronologie  des  Apostolisclien  Zeitalters,  p.  167,  aud  p.  125).  The 
safest  date  at  tlie  beginning  of  the  apostolic  career  of  Paul  is  tlie  year  of  the  death  of  Ilerod 
Agrippa,  a.  d.  44  (Joseph.,  De  lello  Jud.  ii.  11,  6)  ;  and  the  safest  one  at  the  end  of  the  same 
is  the  recall  of  the  procurator  Felix  from  Judea  in  the  year  60.  The  execution  of  James  thft 
Elder  took  place  shortly  before  the  death  of  Herod  Agrippa  (Acts  xii.  2).  About  the  samt 
time,  Paul  and  Barnabas  went  to  Jerusalem  as  bearers  of  the  collection  taken  at  Antioch.  If, 
according  to  the  usual  method,  we  reckon  l)ackward  from  this  date,  the  year  44  (one  year 
spent  in  Antioch,  about  one  year  in  Jerusalem  and  Tarsus,  three  years  in  Arabia  and  Damas- 
cus), the  conversion  of  Paul  occurred  about  the  year  39.  Then,  reckoning  forward,  let  us  fix 
the  time  of  the  Apostolic  Council,  under  the  supposition  (which  has  been  vainly  contested)* 
that  the  journey  described  in  Acts  xv.  is  identical  with  that  of  Gal.  ii.  (see  my  Gesch.  dei 
Apost.  Zeitalters,  i.  99),  and  that  the  fourteen  years  which  Paul  reckons  as  occurring  previous 
to  this  journey  are  to  be  numbered  from  his  conversion.  This  being  the  case,  the  Apostolic 
Council  occurred  about  the  year  53.t  The  first  missionary  tour  of  the  Apostle  therefore  took 
place  between  the  years  44  or  45  and  52  or  53.  The  second  and  thii-d  were  made  between  the 
years  53  and  59-60. 

In  reference  to  the  more  particular  dates,  compare  the  already  mentioned  work  of  WiE- 
6ELER  (whose  parallel  of  Paul's  journey  mentioned  in  Acts  xviii.  22,  with  that  in  Gal.  ii.,  does 
not  seem  to  be  warranted)  ;  the  article  Paul  in  Wiker  ;  G.  W.  Agardh,  Von  der  Zeitrechnuiig 
der  Lebensgeschiclite  des  AposteU  Panlus,  etc.,  Stockholm,  1847.  On  the  time  of  the  ecstasy 
narrated  in  2  Cor.  xii.  7,  compare  my  Almost.  Zeitalter,  ii.  p.  8. 

In  regard  to  the  credibility  of  the  account  of  the  Acts  on  the  apostolic  life  of  Paul, 
ScH^vECKENBTJRGER  maintained  the  hypothesis,  that  the  author  of  that  book  converted  the  life 
of  Paul  from  real  historical  materials  into  a  parallel  to  the  life  of  Peter.  Baur  has  outdone 
this  hypothesis,  and  endeavored  to  carry  out  the  hypercritical  notion  that  the  narrative  of  the 
Acts  of  the  Apostles  is  an  unhistorical  production,  written  for  the  purpose  of  bringing  about 
a  compromise  between  Jewish  Christianity  and  Gentile  Christianity,  On  this  vain  attempt 
to  convert  the  history  of  the  Acts  into  a  myth,  or  rather  a  conscious  fiction,  compare  Lech- 
LER,  The  Apostolic  and  Post-Apostolic  Age,  p.  6  ft'. 

There  was  no  doubt  a  gradual  approach  of  the  two  sections  of  apostolic  Christianity,  in 
harmony  with  the  first  fundamental  principle  of  the  Word  made  flesh  and  the  working  of  the 
spirit  of  the  apostolic  history.  Conscious  of  the  essential  unity  of  faith  and  hope,  the  Gentile 
Church  moved  towards  the  Jewish  Church,  as  the  Jewish  Church  sought  and  found  the  Gen- 
tile Church.  It  is  from  this  point  of  view  that  we  must  study  Paul's  journeys  to  Jerusalem 
as  they  alternated  with  his  missionary  tours.  Every  new  missionary  journey  to  the  heathen 
world  was  followed  by  a  renewal  of  the  bond  of  union  with  the  parent  society  in  Jerusalem  ; 
and  the  more  deeply  the  Apostle  penetrated  the  heathen  world,  and  the  more  fully  he  kept 
the  Gentile  Church  free  from  Jewish  ordinances,  the  more  decidedly  did  he  afterward  show, 
by  his  own  conduct  in  Jerusalem,  his  respect  for  Jewish  customs.  Only  those  who  are 
unable,  like  Paul,  to  distinguish  between  dogmatic  and  ethical  rules,  can  find  a  contradiction 
in  this  fact,  and  especially  in  the  diversity  of  requirements  between  Gal.  ii.  16  aud  Acts 
XV.  20. 

The  farthest  limit  of  the  first  missionary  tour  of  the  Apostle  was  Derbe,  in  Lycaonia,  Asia 
Minor.  The  appointment  of  Barnabas  and  Saul  in  Antioch  by  the  direction  of  the  Holy 
Spirit,  their  ordination  by  the  united  act  of  the  congregation  and  its  leaders,  the  voyage  to 
Cyprus,  the  triumph  of  Paul  over  the  false  prophet  Bar-jesus,  his  change  of  name,  the  jour- 
ney to  Pamphylia,  and  the  return  of  Mark,  the  apostolic  attendant,  the  missionary  address  of 

*  [By  W'lESELEB  who,  in  his  very  learned  and  able  chronology  of  the  Apostolic  Age,  identifies  the  visit  mentioned, 
Gal.  11  1,  with  the  fourth  journey  of  Paul  to  Jerusalem  mentioned  Acts  xviii.  21,  22.  He  has  defended  his  view  in  an 
Excursus  to  his  Commentary  to  the  Galatians,  p.  552  If.  Compare  igainst  his  view  and  in  f;>vor  of  the  identity  of  the 
journey  of  Gal.  ii.  1  with  that  to  the  Apostolic  Council,  Acts  xv.,  my  History  of  the  Apost.  Church,  p.  215  if. ;  and  the 
Commentary  on  Gal.  ii.  1. — P.  S.] 

^  (The  chronologists  of  the  Apostolic  Church  differ  in  the  date  of  the  Council  of  Jerusalem  from  47-53.  Wineb, 
De  ■Wbttb,  Wieselee,  Schatf,  and  Altoed,  put  it  in  50  or  51 ;  Olshaise.n,  dieter,  Ewald,  in  52.— P.  S.] 


8  THE   EPISTLE   OF   PAUL   TO   THE   ROMANS. 


J 


the  Apostle  in  the  synagogue  at  Antiocb  in  Pisidia,  the  persecutions  on  the  part  of  the  Jewa 
in  Autioch  and  Iconia,  Paul's  miracle  at  Lj'stra,  and  his  success  in  Derbe :  these  are  the 
prominent  points  of  the  first  missionary  tour.  We  must  observe  especially,  1,  That  the 
apostolic  men  at  that  time,  as  well  as  later,  always  directed  their  first  attention  to  the  Jews, 
and  consequently  entered  the  synagogue,  although  at  Antioch,  in  Pisidia,  an  important  crisis 
occurred  in  their  zeal  for  Gentile  missions  (Acts  xiii.  46)  ;  2.  that  Paul,  the  younger  messen- 
ger, appears  more  and  more  decidedly  in  the  foreground ;  3.  that  on  their  return  the  societies 
of  converts  were  organized  into  fixed  congregations,  especially  by  the  appointment  of  elders 
(Acts  xiv.  23)  ;  4.  that  the  free  spirit  with  which  Paul  carried  on  the  missionary  work  among 
the  Gentiles  produced,  in  all  probability,  that  reaction  of  the  more  rigid  Jewish  Christiana 
■which  led  to  the  first  Apostolic  Council,  and  Paul's  journey  to  Jerugalem  in  connection  there- 
with ;  5.  that  the  enmity  of  the  Jews  against  the  preaching  of  the  two  men,  especially  of 
Paul,  became  more  intense  from  his  expulsion  (in  Antioch)  to  the  attempt  to  stone  him  (in 
Icouium),  and  to  his  real  stoning  (in  Lystra). 

On  the  change  of  Paul's  name,  various  views  have  betin  advanced  (see  Winer,  article 
Paul;  ScuAFF,  History  of  the  Apost.  Church,  p.  226  ;  comp.  Com.  on  Ch.  i.  1.).  We  are  of  the 
opinion  that  Saul,  as  a  Roman  citizen,  was  already  in  possession  of  a  Roman  name,  but  that, 
while  at  Cyprus,  he  was  induced,  not  only  by  the  friendship  of  Sergius  Paulus,  but  especially 
by  his  antagonism  to  the  false  proj^het  who  called  himself  Elymas  the  Sorcerer,  the  mighty 
magician,  to  term  himself,  as  that  man's  conqueror  in  the  name  of  the  Lord,  Paul  the  miaU 
man  (so  far  as  David's  victory  over  Goliath  had  repeated  itself  here  in  a  New  Testament 
character)  ;  and  particularly,  also,  because  the  Apostle,  being  now  about  to  enter  into  active 
intercourse  with  the  Grecian  and  Romitn  world,  could  travel  more  conveniently  under  a  Roman 
name. 

The  second  missionary  journey  passes  over  Asia  Minor  to  Europe,  and  finds  its  farthest 
limit  in  Corinth.  It  is  specially  characterized  by  the  following  events :  (1.)  The  separation 
of  Paul  and  Barnabas  on  account  of  Mark,  and  the  beginning  of  a  sejiarate  and  independent 
mission  of  Paul,  in  which  he  was  followed  at  first  by  Silas,  and  later  by  Timothy  and  Luke ; 
(2.)  the  tour  of  visitation  into  the  earlier  missionary  field  (Cyprus  being  jjassed  over,  and  left 
to  the  care  of  Barnabas),  which  was  changed  into  a  new  mission  of  colossal  proportions ; 
(3.)  the  harmonization  of  the  body  of  Jewish  Christians  and  Gentile  Christians  by  means  of 
the  ethical  principles  established  by  the  Church  in  Jerusalem  (Acts  xvi.  4) ;  (4.)  the  new  sta- 
tions :  Cilicia  (before  the  repeated  visit  of  the  elder  stations),  then  Phrygia,  Galatia,  Troas ; 
after  this  in  Europe :  Phili])pi,  Thessalonica,  Berea,  Athens,  Corinth ;  also  the  persecutions, 
vphicli  varied  in  strength  in  jjroportion  to  the  greater  or  less  results  of  the  preaching  of  the 
gospel ;  (5.)  the  miraculous  aid  and  manifestation  of  the  Spirit,  which  led  Paul  to  Europe 
(Acts  xvi.  6,  7,  9) ;  (6.)  the  contrast  between  the  ministrations  of  the  Apostle  in  Athens  and 
in  Corinth  ;  but  we  err  if  we  suppose  that  Paul  corrected  his  learned  discourse  in  Athens  by 
his  exclusive  preaching  of  the  Cross  in  Corinth ;  (7.)  the  meeting  of  Paul  with  Aquila  and 
Priscilla  in  Corinth,  which  so  greatly  afi'ected  his  subsequent  mission  ;  (8.)  the  longer  stay  of 
the  Apostle  in  Corinth,  and  the  importunities  of  the  Jews  against  him  in  the  presence  of  the 
deputy,  Gallio  ;  (9.)  the  new  journey  of  the  Apostle  to  Jerusalem  for  the  accomplishment  of 
a  vow,  during  which  he  touches  at  Ephesus,  and  there  makes  preparation  for  his  mission  by 
leaving  beliind  Aquila  and  Priscilla. 

The  third  missionary  tour  is  so  far  an  enlargement  of  the  second,  as  that  Paul  at  this  time 
makes  Ephesus,  in  Asia  Minor,  his  great  object,  which  city  he  had  been  ccnnpelled  to  pass  by 
in  his  journey,  and  which  he  could  only  touch  at  on  his  return.  Apollos  was  his  pioneer 
here,  and  the  silversmith  Demetrius  became  his  principal  opponent.  His  victory  was,  on  the 
one  hand,  a  triumph  over  the  nocturnal  magic  of  this  city  dedicated  to  Diana,  the  goddess 
of  the  Moon  ;  and,  on  tin;  other,  over  idolatry.  This  journey,  which  was  at  first  supplement- 
ary in  its  design,  assumed  the  character  of  a  visitation  ;  for  Paul  departed  from  Ephesus,  and 
again  visited  the  congregations  in  Macedonia  and  Greece.  The  supposition  of  a  third  mis- 
aionary  visit  to  the  Corinthian  church  between  the  second  and  third  missionary  tours  has 


§   2.    PAUL  THE  APOSTLE   TO   THE   GENTILES.     HISTORY   OF  HIS  LITE.  9 

been  shown,  in  a  variety  of  ways,  to  rest  upon  a  misunderstanding  (see  my  Apost.  Age^  i 
p.  199).  The  third  missionary  journey  is  characterized  by  the  more  decided  jirominence  ot 
the  missionary  calculation  and  self-determination  of  the  Apostle  (see  1  Cor.  xvi.  5  ;  2  Cor.  i. 
15)  ;  by  his  miraculous  works,  especially  in  Ephesus  and  Troas  (Acts  xviii.  11 ;  xx.  10) ;  by 
the  establishment  of  a  metropolis  of  the  church  of  Asia  Minor,  which  was  destined  to  become 
the  home  of  John,  and  the  maternal  city  of  Christian  si^eculation ;  by  the  founding  of  a 
larger  association  and  Pauline  school ;  and  finally,  by  the  decided  premonition  of  his  cap- 
tivity which  the  Apostle  felt,  as  he  drew  his  missionary  journey  to  a  close,  and  entered  upon 
his  pilgrimage  to  Jerusalem. 

The  performance  of  a  Nazarite  vow  in  Jerusalem  (a  step  counselled  by  James)  grew,  from 
a  measure  of  accommodation  to  the  narrow  views  of  the  Jewish  Christians,  into  an  offence  on 
the  part  of  the  Jews.  It  led  to  the  persecution  of  the  Apostle  in  Jerusalem,  his  abduction 
and  imprisonment  in  Csesarea,  his  appeal  to  the  judgment-seat  of  Caesar,  and  his  transporta- 
tion to  Rome  (in  the  year  63  ;  according  to  Auger  and  Winer,  in  the  spring  of  61).  From 
this  captivity  he  was  released  (in  the  year  64),  not  only  according  to  the  testimony  of  tradition 
(EtJSEB.,  ii.  23 :  \6yos  e^ft,  Cyrill.  Hieros.,  Hieronymus,  etc. ;  see  Winer),  but  also  accord- 
ing to  certain  hints  of  the  Scriptures,  yet  only,  after  a  new  journey  for  missions  and  visi- 
tation, to  fall  into  a  second  imprisonment,  and  to  suffer  martyrdom  under  Nero. 

Observations. — 1.  For  a  statement  of  relevant  literature,  see  Reuss,  1,  c,  p.  54,  55,  56 
sqq.  [Smith,  Did.  of  the  B.,  art.  Paul,  at  the  close,  vol.  iii.  763). 

2.  Ananias  at  Damascus,  a  ijredecessor  of  Barnabas  for  the  introduction  of  Paul  into  the 
Church  of  Christ,  as  Stephen  had  been  a  predecessor  of  Paul  himself. 

3.  Paul's  three  years  of  instruction  in  the  quiet  solitude  of  Arabia,  a  counterpart  and 
parallel  to  the  three  years  of  instruction  spent  by  the  twelve  apostles  in  intercourse  with  the 
Lord.  The  latter  was  an  external  and  historical  communion  ;  that  of  Paul  was  undoubtedly 
of  a  mysterious  and  internal  character,  and  kindred  to  the  great  mysterious  fact  of  his  con- 
version. See  my  Apost.  Age,  ii.  p.  123.  [Schaff,  M.  of  tlie  Ap.  Ch.  p.  236  ;  and  Com.  on  Gal. 
i,  17.] 

4.  The  development  of  the  Apostle's  consciousness  of  his  specific  call  to  the  Gentiles  was 
gradual,  and  commensurate  with  the  gradual  definiteness  of  his  call  to  the  apostolic  oifice  in 
general.  This  may  be  seen  from  Acts  ix.  15,  29 ;  comp.  xxii.  21 ;  xiii.  46  ;  xix.  9 ;  xxviii. 
17  sqq.;  Gal.  ii.  But  this  call  to  the  Gentiles  did  not  exclude  a  purpose  to  convert  the  Jews; 
for  not  only  must  he  first  seek  in  the  synagogues  those  heathen  who  were  susceptible  hearers 
of  his  message,  especially  the  proselytes  of  the  gate  (Acts  xiii.  48),  but  Paul  also  recognized 
the  conversion  of  the  Gentiles,  apart  from  their  personal  salvation,  as  a  means  for  the  conver- 
sion of  Israel  (Rom.  xi.  13,  14).  The  gradual  development  of  his  apostolic  knowledge  by 
virtue  of  continued  revelations  and  illuminations,  was  not  precluded  by  the  Apostle's  prepa- 
ration, derived  from  a  historical  knowledge  of  the  Holy  Scriptures  and  of  the  life  of  Jesus, 
and  by  his  great  miraculous  illumination  when  his  call  occurred. 

5  On  the  person  of  Barnabas ;  on  Cilicia,  Antioch,  Asia  Elinor,  etc.,  sec  the  relevant 
articles  in  the  Biblical  dictionaries.  Also  the  introductions  to  the  respective  parts  of  this 
Commentary.     On  Antioch  in  particular,  see  my  Apost.  Age,  ii.  p.  158. 

6.  The  reciprocal  action  between  the  three  missionary  journeys  of  the  Apostle,  and  hia 
pilgrimage  to  Jerusalem  at  the  close  of  each  of  these  journeys,  are  in  themselves  sufficient  to 
overthrow  as  an  untenable  fiction  Baur's  hypothesis  above  alluded  to. 

7.  On  the  identity  of  the  fact  related  in  Gal.  ii.  with  that  narrated  in  Acts  xv.,  see  Retjss, 
p.  55,  and  Schaff's  History  of  the  Apost.  Church,  p.  245  ff. 

8.  The  relation  of  the  apostolic  deliberations  in  Acts  xv.  to  the  so-called  Noachian  com- 
mands, is  also  maintained  by  Recss,  1.  c,  p.  56.  See  thereon  my  Apost.  Age,  ii.  p.  184. 
Reuss  maintains  that  Acts  xv.  21  avows  the  validity  of  the  law  for  the  Jewish  Christians. 
But  the  absence  of  all  dogmatic  obligation  in  the  same  passage  is  veiy  plain  from  the  trans- 
actions of  the  apostolic  council.  Yet,  as  far  as  the  national  and  ethical  validity  of  the  same 
is  concerned,  it  was  in  perfect  harmony  with  the  apostolic  spirit  that  the  continuance  of  the 
law  should  not  be  violently  abrogated.     For  the  relevant  literature,  see  Reuss,  p.  56. 

9.  For  a  catalogue  of  the  friends  and  followers  of  the  Apostle,  see  the  same,  p.  58. 

10.  The  Apostle's  missionary  method  and  policy  :  (1.)  A  prudent  adjustment  of  his  uni- 
versal mission  to  the  Gentile  world,  even  to  Rome,  and  the  western  limit  of  the  Old  World 
(Spain),  tc  the  primitive  historical  trunk  of  Christianity  in  Jerusalem — that  is,  the  incorpo- 
ration of  the  missionary  spirit  with  the  vital  power  of  the  Church.  (3.)  Perception  of  the 
hLstorical  links  for  communicating  the  gospel  to  the  world.     Therefore  he  first  turned  hia 


10  THE   EPISTLE   OF   PAUL   TO   THE   ROMANS. 

attention  to  the  Jews,  and  rose  in  their  synagogrues,  but  made  full  account  of  the  prejudice* 
of  the  Jews,  and  the  roccptibility  of  the  heathen  for  Christianity.  Therefore  he  embraced  in  his 
view,  and  also  seized  upon,  the  points  of  connection  in  the  Gentile  world  (see  his  address  at 
Athens  on  the  inscription  of  an  altar),  and  with  equal  clearness  he  discovered  and  opposed 
all  real  barriers  to  the  truth  (righteousness  by  works  among  the  Jews ;  luxurious  life  in 
Corinth,  1  Cor.  i.  2;  and  the  gloomy  sorcery  of  superstition  in  Ephesus).  (3.)  M)st  careful 
observance  of  Divine  guidance  to  go  forward  or  to  hold  back  (Acts  xvi.  6,  9  ;  xxv.  10  ;  Kom. 
i.  13,  etc.).  (4.)  Careful  consolidation  of  his  missionary  work,  by  instituting  congregational 
offices,  and  the  organization  of  congregations  (Acts  xiv.  22,  23),  and  promoting  the  inner 
unity  of  the  chiu-ches  by  their  community  of  prayer  and  love  (see  especially  the  Epistle  to 
the  Philippians).  (5.)  A  comprehensive  and  free  use  of  all  chosen  companions  iji  faith  for 
cooperation  in  the  form  of  helpers,  evangelists,  messengers,  and  pioneers  in  a  general  sense. 
He  is  surrounded  by  his  helpers;  he  sends  them  out  upon  new  paths;  he  leaves  them  behind 
in  churches  already  organized.  That  they  may  be  strengthened  and  encouraged,  the  spirits 
of  the  gospel  come  and  go  in  his  presence,  just  as  the  messengers  come  and  go  at  the  court 
of  a  prince ;  he  sets  all  the  powers  of  faith  in  motion,  in  order  to  set  all  the  workl  in 
motion.  (6.)  He  greatly  advances  the  personal  usefulness  of  himself  and  of  his  coadjutors,  by 
his  apostolical  epistles.  (7.)  The  marvellous  concentration,  development,  and  elaboration  of 
his  doctrine  in  a  manner  adajited  to  the  necessities  of  the  congregations,  and  in  perfect  har- 
mony with  a  most  careful  preservation  of  the  fundamental  character  of  his  doctrine.  The 
rock-like  steadfiistness  and  adherence  to  the  doctrine  of  free  grace,  uniteil  with  that  most 
faithful  development  which  is  exhibited  also  in  his  style  as  a  progressive  creative  power,  pro- 
ducing a  rich  treasure  of  ana^  Xfyo^xtva.  (8.)  The  supplementing  of  his  burning  activity  by 
sacred  retreats,  when  he  sank  even  into  the  depths  of  visionaiT  contemplation  ;  likewise  his 
union  of  apostolic  consecration  to  the  demand  of  the  moment  (see  his  Eijistle  to  Philemon) 
■with  his  all-embracing  care  for  the  whole  Church  and  for  its  whole  future. 

11.  On  the  three  missionary  tours  and  the  life  of  the  Apostle,  and  the  particular  events 
of  the  same,  compare  the  Commentary  on  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles,  and  the  well-known 
"works  of  Neandek,  Schaff,  Thleksch,  and  Ewaxd,  on  the  Apostolic  Age,  and  the  literature 
referred  to  by  Reuss,  p.  59  sqq. 

C.     The  Second  Imprisonment  and  tlie  Martyrdom  of  Paul. 

The  second  imprisonment  has  been  lately  discarded  even  by  theologians  who  accept  the 
authenticity  of  the  Pastoral  Epistles,  such  as  W:eseler,  Ebrard,  Schaff,  Thiersch  (see  my 
Apost.  Age,  ii.  p.  374).  Yet  we  still  hold  to  the  testimony  of  the  old  ecclesiastical  tradition 
for  the  following  reasons :  (1.)  Because  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles  concludes  at  the  time  when 
the  first  imprisonment  of  Paul  must  have  come  to  an  end,  without  taking  any  cognizance  of 
his  death;  (2.)  because  the  Apostle  himself,  about  the  end  of  this  period,  anticipated  his 
deliverance  (Phil.  ii.  24) ;  (3.)  because  the  Pastoral  Epistles— whose  Pauline  character  can- 
not be  doubted  if  we  take  into  the  account  an  advanced  development  of  Christianity  of 
some  years'  duration — cannot  be  comprehended  in  the  early  career  of  Paul  down  to  the  year 
64,  without  great  violence ;  and  the  same  is  the  case  still  more  with  the  Apostle's  stay  in 
Crete  (Tit.  i.) ;  (4.)  because  the  development  of  the  germs  of  Ebioniam  and  Judaizing 
Gnosticism,  which  are  taken  cognizance  of  in  the  Pastoral  Epistles,  is  clearly  indicated  by 
the  Epistles  of  the  Apostle  written  some  years  earlier,  during  his  imprisonment  from  G3  to  64, 
but  had  not  gained  the  strength  which  they  possessed  at  the  time  when  the  Pastoral  Epistles 
■were  composed  ;  (5.)  because  the  tradition  of  the  Church  distinguishes  positively  between 
the  judicial  execution  of  Peter  and  Paul,  and  the  first  great  persecution  of  the  Christians  as  a 
body  under  Nero ;  (6.)  the  testimony  of  the  Roman  Clement  (1  Cor,  v.),  that  Paul  came 
fni  TO  Ttpfia  T  r)  s  Sutrfwr  Ka\  fia  prv  prj  a  at  fn\  tSuv  tjyov  fit  v  a>v ,  having  been 
•written  in  Rome,  cannot  refer  to  Rome,  and  supports  the  tradition,  harmonizing  with  the 
purpose  of  the  Apostle  (Rom.  xv.  24),  that  Paul  visited  Spain  after  his  deliverance  (comp, 
my  Apost.  Age,  ii.  p.  386).* 

•  (Tho  passage  of  Clctnunt  of  Rome,  which  hna  given  rise  to  different  Interpretations,  must  ho  translated  thus  . 
"  Paul  .  . .  having  ome  to  the  limit  («  n  i  rh  rcpfia,  not :  br/nrt  llif  hiijhfM  Iriliuiml,  u  jr  b  tJ)  ■ripu.a)  of  the  West,  and  having 
died  a  martjT  under  the  rulers  (othera  :  hiiviii({  home  witness  hoforc  tho  rulers),  he  departed  from  the  world  and  went  to 
the  holy  place,  havini;  furnished  tho  suMimest  model  of  endurance."  The  dispute  aliout  tho  true  roadinK  in  the  pussaj^e 
(somcwhut  ohlitcratcd)— «ir"i  rb  riptia  or  iiirb  rb  ripiia  T^t  Jtiatut— is  now  settled  in  favor  of  «iri  hy  tho  testimony  of 
Profesiiors  JatousoM  and  TiscniuiDoaF,  who  hnro  carefully  rc-esamincd  tho  only  extant  and  defective  MS.  of  tht 


§  2.    PAUL  THE  APOSTLE  TO  THE  GENTILES.    HISTORY  OF  HIS  LITE.  H 

If  we  may  judge  from  intimatioDs  in  the  Pastoral  Epistles,  Paul  hastened,  after  his  deliv 
erance,  first  to  Ejjhesus,  where  the  Christian  truth  was  threatened  by  the  first  development 
of  Christian  heresy.  "We  cannot  decide  whether  he  was  permitted  to  visit  Jerusalem  onct 
more  on  this  journey,  as  was  anticipated  by  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews,  and  might  be  ex- 
pected from  the  three  visits  of  his  earlier  missionary  tours.  From  Ephesus  he  went  to  Mace- 
donia and  Greece;  then  over  Troas  and  Miletus  to  Crete.  Afterwards  he  proceeded  to 
Epirus,  where  he  spent  the  winter  in  Nicopolis,  and  subsequently  left  Titus.  He  then  directed 
his  course  westward,  to  the  rt pfia  ttjs  Suo-ews,  where  he  was  probably  seized  and  taken 
a  prisoner  to  Rome,  before  being  able  to  found  another  permanent  organization  [in  Spain].* 
Meanwhile,  Peter  either  came  or  w^as  brought  to  Rome,  and  both  sufiered  martyrdom  there 
together  (according  to  Clement  of  Rome,  Irenseus,  Tertullian,  etc. ;  see  the  article  Peter,  in 
Herzog's  Beal-EncydopcEdie).  The  Roman  Church  celebrates  the  death  of  Peter  and  Paul  on 
the  same  day — the  29th  of  June. 

[The  views  on  the  year  of  Paul's  martyrdom  vary  from  64  to  68.  This  question  depends, 
of  course,  mauily  on  the  question  of  the  second  captivity,  Wieseler  contends  for  the  year 
64,  shortly  lefore  the  great  Neronian  persecution  (the  only  one  properly  authenticated  by  his- 
torical evidence),  which  broke  out,  according  to  Tacitus,  Annul,  xv.  44,  in  consequence  of 
the  conflagration,  July  19th,  64  ;  but  the  general  tradition  of  the  Church  connects  Paul's  and 
Peter's  martyrdom  with  this  persecution,  which  probably  gave  rise  to  several  isolated  execu- 
tions afterwards.  If  we  adopt  the  hypothesis  of  a  second  imprisonment,  we  may  arrive  at  a 
more  definite  result  by  referring  the  rjyoviKvoi  in  the  famous  passage  of  Clemens  Rom.  (1  Cor. 
v.,  fxapTvprjaas  (it\  tup  rjyovnevcov,  sui  prcefectis  martyrium  suHens),  either  (with  Hug,  Intr.  ii. 
323,  Hefele,  Patres  Ajjost.,  p.  61,  4th  ed.,  and  Dolllnger)  to  Tigellinus  and  Nymphidiua 
Sabiuus,  or  (with  Pearson)  to  Helius  Caesarianus  and  Polycletus,  who  in  the  last  years  of 
Nero,  especially  during  his  absence  in  Greece,  a.  d.  67,  had  charge  of  the  government  in 
Rome.  In  this  case  we  get  the  year  67  or  68  for  the  martyrdom  of  Paul ;  and  this  agree3 
with  the  Catholic  tradition  based  upon  Eusebius  and  Jerome  (who,  in  his  Catal.  Script., 
says  most  exjjlicity  of  Paul :  "  Hie  ergo  decimo  quarto  Neronis  aimo — i.  e.,  A.  D.  68 — eodem  die 
quo  Petrus  Roince  pro  Christo  capite  truncatus  sepultusque  est,  in  Via  Ostiensi).  The  Basilica  of 
St.  Paul,  in  commemoration  of  his  mai-tyrdom,  now  stands  outside  the  walls  of  Rome  {San 
Paolo  fuori  de^  muri),  on  the  road  to  Ostia,  and  the  Porta  Ostiensis  is  called  the  gate  of  St. 
Paul.  The  traditional  spot  of  his  martyrdom,  however,  is  a  little  distance  from  the  Basi- 
lica, where  there  are  three  chapels,  called  The  Three  Fountains  {Tre  Fontane),  in  commemora- 
tion of  the  legend  that  three  fresh  fountains  miraculously  gushed  forth  from  the  blood  of 
Paul's  head  as  it  was  cut  ofi"  by  the  executioner,  and  leaped  three  times  from  the  ground 

Clementine  Epistle  to  the  Corinthians  in.  the  British  Museum.  See  Jacobson,  Patres  Apost.  in  loc.  (Oxon.,  new  ed, 
1S63),  and  Tisc;hendorf,  Appendix  codicum  celeb.  Sin.  Vat.  Alex.,  etc.,  Lips.  1867.  This  sets  aside  Wieseler's  interpre- 
tation of  Tc'pua — supreme  power,  highest  tribunal  of  the  West  (t.  e.,  the  Emperor  of  Rome),  Into  which  I  myself  waa 
betrayed  in  my  History  of  the  Apostolic  Church,  p.  342  (Am.  ed.),  and  which  I  now  retract.  Although  ripfxa  in  itself  may 
mean  supreme  power,  it  can  hardly  do  bo  in  connection  with  the  geographical  term  Sucris.  At  all  events  iiri  to  Tepjuia 
T^5  Siio-eus  murt  here  be  rendered :  to  the  limit  of  the  West ;  and  this,  in  the  mouth  of  Clement  who  wrote  from  Rome, 
points  more  naturally,  though  by  no  means  necessarily,  to  Spain  (or  Gaul  or  Britain;  than  to  Rome,  especially  in  view 
of  the  fact  that  Paul  intended  to  visit  Spain,  Rom.  xv.  24  fit  Clement  therefore  may  be  quoted  with  tolerably  good  reason 
as  the  first  witness  to  the  anciont  tradition  (first  clearly  stated  by  EusEsrus,  H.  E.  ii.  2.5  :  Adyos  exei,  etc.)  of  a  second 
Roman  captivity  of  Paul ;  for  before  his  first  captivity  there  is  no  room  for  a  journey  to  Spain. — P.  S.] 

*  [There  is  not  the  slightest  historical  trace  of  the  labors  of  Paul  in  Spain,  much  less  in  Britain.  The  early  tradition 
of  his  journey  to  Spain  is  inferred  from  Clement's  repjuia  t^s  £v<reu9,  and  seems  to  be  obscurely  implied  in  the  mutilated 
Muratori  fragment  on  the  Canon;  but  it  maj'  have  originated  in  a  premature  conclusion  from  the  Apostle's  desire 
to  visit  that  country,  Rom.  xv.  24,  28.  Kevertheless  such  a  journey,  which  was  certainly  intended,  may  have  been 
executed,  and  rendered  comparatively  fruitless  by  difficulties  thrown  in  his  way,  or  by  a  speedy  return.  Ewald  (Apost. 
Zeitatler,  2d  ed.,  1858,  p.  631)  suggests  that  Paul,  on  hearing  in  Spain  of  the  terrors  of  the  Neronian  persecution,  hastened 
of  his  own  accord  back  to  Rome  to  bear  testimony  to  Christ,  and  being  seized  there,  was  again  brought  to  trial  and 
conrlemned  to  death  in  6,5.  Howsos  {The  Life  and  Letters  of  St.  Paul,  ii.  460  fif.,  482  ff. ;  Lond.  ed.),  in  follo-n-ing  and 
extending  the  combinations  of  Neander,  assumes  that  Paul,  after  his  liberation  in  63,  first  visited  the  East  (Philem.  ver> 
22  ;  Phi),  ii.  2 1),  then  Spain  by  an  unknown  route,  after  about  two  years  again  returned  to  the  East  (Ephesus,  Macedonia, 
Crete),  was  arrested  at  Nicopolis,  forwarded  to  Rome  for  a  second  trial,  probably  on  the  charge  of  having  instigated  the 
Roman  Christians  to  their  supposed  act  of  incendiarism  (?)  which  caused  the  terrible  persecution  in  64,  and  sufiTered 
martyrdom  early  in  June,  68,  shortly  before  the  death  of  Nero.— P.  S.] 


12  THE   EPISTLE    OF   PAUL    TO   THE   ROMANS. 


Q'ahsdsso  PauJi  atpite  triplici  sultti  sese  sustoUente,^^  Acta  Sanct,  vol,  vii.,  sub  June  29tli.) 
This  legend  is  less  credible  than  tbe  beautiful  legend  connected  with  Peter's  death  and  per- 
petuated in  the  little  church  of  Domine  quo  mdis,  on  the  Appian  Way.  Corap.,  on  Paul'g 
death  and  martyrdom,  my  History  of  the  Apost.  Church;  Conybeare  and  Howsox,  vol.  ii, 
602  S.  (Lond.  ed.)  ;  also  Prudentius,  PerkUjjh.  Uymnm  XII.  ;  Buxsex,  Bearhreihung  Boms, 
iii.  p.  440;  Alfred  von  RecmojsT,  Gtschkhte  tier  Stadt  Jioni  (Berlin,  1867),  vol.  1.  p, 
374  f.— P.  S.] 

Observatioxs. — 1.  On  the  treatises  for  and  against  the  second  captivity  of  Paul,  see 
Winer,  Jieal-Lixic,  ii.  p.  221,  and  Schaff,  Hist,  of  the  Apost.  Church,  §  87,  pp.  328-343.  Tha 
second  captivity  is  also  advocated  by  the  work  of  L.  Rcffet,  Saird  Ftcid;  m  double  copticite 
d,  Rome.  Paris,  1860;  and  by  Gams,  i^as  Jahr  des  Murtyrtodes  der  Apostel  Petrus  and  Paulm, 
Regensburg,  1807.  He  puts  the  martyrdom  of  Peter  in  the  year  65  ;  tliat  of  Paul  in  the 
year  67.  [Van  Ogsterzee  {Com.  on  'the  Pnstorrd  Epistles),  Ewald  {History  of  Israel,  vol. 
vi.,  or  Hist,  of  the  Apost.  Age,  2d  ed.  of  1858),  Bleek  {Introd.  to  the  X.  T.,  1862),  Hutuer 
{Com.  oil  the  Eqrp.  to  Timothy  and  Titvs  in  Meyer's  Com.,  3d  ed.  1866),  Conybeare  and 
Howsox,  Alford,  Ellicott,  Wordswortu,  and  most  of  the  English  coinmeutators  on  Paul, 
likewise  favor  the  second  Roman  captivity.  (Wordswortu,  in  the  interest  of  Anglicanism, 
defends  even  Paul's  journey  to  Britain  as  well  as  to  Spain).  On  the  other  hand,C.  W.  Otto 
(in  his  learned  and  astute  work.  Hie  historischen  Verhaltnisse  der  Pustoralbri^fe,  Lijjs.  1860), 
Niedxer  {Kirchengeschichte,  1866,  p.  114),  Meyer  {Itom.  p.  13  tf.),  and  again  Wiesei.er  (in 
his  learned  article  on  the  Epistles  to  Timothy  and  Titus,  in  the  last  supplementary  vol.  of 
Herzog's  Eiicycl.,  1866,  vol.  xxi.  p.  276  flf.),  oppose  the  hypothesis  of  a  second  Roman  cap- 
tivity of  Paul.     Adhuc  sub  jiulice  lis  est. — P.  S.] 

2.  Furtlier  on  the  necessity  of  admitting  a  second  captivity  of  Paul,  see  in  the  Bible- 
Work,  The  Pastoral  Epistles,  by  Dr.  Van  Ogsterzee,  2d  ed..  Introduction  (Am.  ed.  vol.  viii.), 
and  my  Ajyost.  Zeitalter,  ii.  p.  386.  Critical  prejudices  are  often  propagated,  while  the  original 
motives  and  reasons  are  lost  sight  of,  although  such  reasons,  sprung,  as  they  frequently  are, 
from  original  misconcei^tions,  have  lost  their  apparent  importance  in  the  course  of  time.  Foi 
example,  the  criticism  against  the  second  part  of  Zechariah  has  very  clearly  arisen  from  a  mis- 
understanding. Thus  many  negations  in  the  department  of  New  Testament  exegesis  have 
arisen  from  some  caprice  of  Schleiermacher,  some  fancy  of  De  Wette,  some  rationalistic 
short-sightedness  or  some  fixed  idea  of  Baur,  produced  by  the  Hegelian  theory  of  an 
oflBcious  construction  of  history. 

[The  question  of  the  second  Roman  captivity  of  Paul  is  simply  a  historical  problem, 
which  has  no  doctrinal  or  ethical  bearing,  and  which,  in  the  absence  of  sufficient  data,  can 
never  be  solved  with  mathematical  certainty.  Those  who,  like  Wieseler,  Thiersch,  Nied- 
ner.  Otto,  and  others,  hold  fast  to  the  Pauline  origin  of  the  Pastoral  Ei)istles,  lose  nothing 
by  denying  a  second  caj^tivity  and  trial ;  they  save  the  whole  extent  of  Paul's  kuoirn  labors, 
and  only  compress  tliem  into  a  smaller  number  of  years,  thus  intensifying  ratlier  than  dimin- 
ishing his  activity.  It  must  be  admitted,  however,  that  the  hypothesis  of  a  second  captivity 
offers  a  considerable  advantage  in  the  defence  and  exj^osition  of  the  Pastoral  Epistles ;  for  it 
is  much  more  difiicult  to  find  a  suitabfe  place  before  than  after  the  first  Roman  cajitivity  of 
Paul  for  the  composition  of  these  epistles,  and  a  number  of  historical  facts  therein  assumed 
(such  as  a  missionary  journey  of  Paul  to  Crete,  Tit.  i.  5  ;  a  visit  to  Troas,  2  Tim.  iv.  13  ;  a 
pretty  advanced  state  in  the  development  of  church  organization,  and  of  heresy,  1  Tim. 
lii.-vi.),  and  to  understand  their  farewell  tone  and  general  spirit,  as  compared  with  the  earlier 
writings  of  the  Apostle. — P.  S.] 

D.     The  Character  of  the  Apostle. 

The  character  of  the  Apostle  reflects  itself  in  his  work,  as  in  his  Epistles,  and  appears 
before  U3  in  the  energetic  and  harmonious  contrasts  of  a  great  apostolic  spirit.  He  was  as 
frank  in  his  deep  humility  as  the  sincerest  penitent  (Phil.  iii.  6),  and  eipially  joyous  in  hid 
acclamations  over  the  all-prevailing  faith  unto  salvation  (2  Cor.  xii.  10)  ;  steadfast  in 
adherence  to  his  convictions  (Gal.  i.  16),  and  at  the  same  time  cautious,  considerate,  and 
master  of  the  finest  and  purest  policy  (Acts  xxiii.  6,  7)  ;  full  of  enthusiasm,  able  to  speak 
wondrously  in  tongues,  and  to  rise  to  visionary  and  ecstatic  states  of  mind  (1  Cor.  xiv.  18; 
comp.  my  Apost.  Zeitalter,  i.  p.  199  sqq.),  and  yet  unwearied  in  active  practical  labors;  specu- 
lative, profound,  and  at  the  same  time  a  man  of  the  })eople  and  a  servant  of  the  congrega- 
tion ;  heroically  strong  and  outspoken,  and  yet  as  tender  and  refined  in  feeling  and  taste  a.s  a 
virgin  (comp.  his  Epistles  to  the  Philippians  and  to  Philemon)  ;  eagle-like  in  his  universal 


§  2.    PAUIi  THE  APOSTLE  TO  THE  GENTILES.    HISTORY  OF  HIS  LIFE.  IS 

view  and  work,  but  not  less  considerate  in  his  regard  and  care  for  the  smallest  details ;  an 
imperious  and  commanding  character,  and  yet  the  most  dutiful  servant  of  the  Church  ;  a  cul- 
tivated rabbinical  theologian,  and  at  the  same  time  a  modest  workman  at  a  trade  ;  burning  in 
his  love  for  the  Lord  and  his  brethren,  and  for  this  very  reason  overpowering  in  his  mora 
indignation  and  rebuke  of  all  that  was  opposed  to  the  honor  of  his  Master ;  a  great  Jew 
inflamed  by  a  tragic  sympathy  with  the  Jewish  people  (Rom.  ix.  2  flF.,  comp.  2  Cor.  xii,  7), 
and  nevertheless  the  most  bitter  opponent  of  all  Pharisaeism,  old  and  new  ;  of  all  the  apos- 
tles the  most  hated,  and  yet  the  most  beloved  and  popular ;  the  most  misinterpreted  and  mis- 
conceived (by  Antinomians,  Marcionites,  Paulicians,  etc.),  and  at  the  same  time  the  most 
studied  and  expounded.  Thus  Paul  has  developed  the  most  magnificent  life  of  a  hero,  whom 
the  world  could  neither  bend  nor  conquer,  but  whom  Christ  overcame  with  a  miraculous 
glance  of  his  glorious  revelation.     (Comp.  Sohafp's  Hist,  of  the  Apost.  Churchy  p.  441  f.) 

Concerning  the  apostolic  position  of  Paul,  two  points  are  to  be  observed  in  particular. 
First  of  all  is  the  fact  that  he  did  not  belong  to  the  apostles  of  the  first  foundation  of  Chris- 
tianity, but  that  he  was  charged  with  the  apostolate  of  the  first  historical  growth  and  expan- 
sion of  Christianity  into  a  universal  character  as  the  religion  of  the  whole  human  race.  He 
therefore  has  become,  in  an  emphatic  sense,  the  Apostle  of  evangelical  reform  in  all  succeed- 
ing periods  of  the  Church.  Secondly,  the  great  opposition  presented  by  the  Pauline  ajDos- 
tolate  to  all  external  legalism  and  stagnation  in  Christianity,  is  expressly  declared  in  his  call. 
He  was  not  of  the  number  of  the  historical  disciples,  witnesses,  and  chosen  ones  of  the  his- 
torical Christ ;  not  a  member  of  the  apostolic  college  established  by  Christ  during  his  pil- 
grimage on  earth.  Hurled  down  as  an  enemy  by  the  risen  Lord  in  a  heavenly  vision,  he  arose 
at  once  as  a  witness  of  faith  and  as  one  of  the  apostles,  and  received  his  apostolic  authority 
only  in  heavenly  voices  from  the  Church  (Acts  ix.  15)  ;  in  his  visions  (Acts  xxii.  21)  ;  in  his 
commisssion  from  Autioch,  the  mother  church  of  Gentile  Christianity  ;  in  the  living  epistles 
which  the  Holy  Spirit  wrote  in  the  form  of  vigorous  churches  of  his  planting  (2  Cor.  iii. 
2  flF.)  ;  and  in  the  decided  recognition  by  the  first  apostles  of  the  Lord  (Acts  xv. ;  Gal.  ii.). 

His  apostolate  remained  doubtful  to  a  great  number  of  traditional  Jewish  Christians  ;  the 
most  rigid  Jewish  Christians  rejected  it,  and  persecuted  him  ;  and  the  later  Ebionites  loaded 
his  memory  with  scorn,  as  an  errorist  and  a  heretic.  The  legalistic  Christianity  of  the  Mid- 
dle Ages,  while  professing  the  highest  respect  for  the  name  of  Paul,  has  persecuted  his  doc- 
trines as  they  have  been  exhibited  in  the  principles  of  the  Reformation,  in  the  form  of  JanseU' 
ism,  in  the  history  of  Port  Royal,  and  in  many  other  ways.  Even  in  the  Protestant  evangelical 
Church  there  obtains  a  legalistic  high-churchism,  which,  while  it  adheres  to  external  legiti- 
macy, traditionalism,  and  legalism,  is  opposed  to  the  principles  of  Christianity,  and  especially 
to  the  apostolate  and  doctrine  of  Paul. 

But,  on  the  other  hand,  the  antinomianism  of  all  Christian  ages  has  been  based  on  a  mis- 
understanding and  misinterpretation  of  liis  doctrines.  Amid  these  opposite  extremes,  there 
courses  the  mighty  stream  of  pure  blessings  with  which  the  Lord,  by  His  Spirit,  has  sealed 
the  testimony  of  the  great  Apostle  to  the  Gentiles,  and  with  which  He  will  seal  it  to  the  end 
of  time. 

Thus  Paul  will  still  maintain  his  position  with  the  other  apostles  in  the  Church  of  Christ. 
Yet  we  would  not  deny  the  measure  of  truth  in  the  viow  of  Schelling,  that,  as  far  as  the 
prevailing  type  of  the  Church  is  concerned,  the  Petrine  Church  of,  the  Middle  Ages  was  fol- 
lowed by  the  Pauline  Church  of  Protestantism,  and  that  the  perfection  will  hereafter  appear 
in  the  Church  of  the  Johannean  type.  It  would  be  a  great  misunderstanding,  however,  to 
conceive  of  this  type  as  a  syncretism  of  Judaizing  legalism  and  Pauline  freedom.  The  higher 
synthesis  of  the  genuine  Petrine  and  the  genuine  Pauline  theology  can  only  be  found  in  the 
deeper  ideal  development  of  the  revelation  of  the  law  and  the  Spirit}  as  set  forth  by  John. 

Obsertations. — 1.  The  natural  disposition  of  the  Apostle  must  be  characterized  as  an 
even  harmony  of  various  temperaments  and  gifts  in  genial  fulness  and  strength,  and  inspired 
by  a  heroic  energy  and  vitality  of  soul.  By  virtue  of  this  energetic  vitality  the  same  man 
could  always  remain  consistent  and  true,  and  yet  become  all  tMngs  to  all  men ;  he  could 


14  THE   EPISTLE    OF   PAUL   TO   THE   ROMANS. 

stand  and  sliine  first  in  this  and  then  in  that  pole  of  his  wondeiful  endowments;  at  this 
moment  in  ecstasy,  at  the  next  as  a  i)ractical  man  of  action ;  now  reminding  ns  of  the  con- 
templativeness  of  a  John,  tlien  of  the  fiery  energy  of  a  Peter ;  now  musically  lyrical  in  style, 
then  acutely  dialectical  even  to  the  subtlest  distinctions;  though  possessing  a  tragical 
national  sympathy  for  his  people  in  his  heart — the  depth  where  his  natural  melancholy  waa 
reflected  and  transformed — he  was  as  susceptible  of  joyous  sentiments  as  a  child,  or  rather  as 
a  man  in  Christ,  in  whom  the  freshest  impulses  of  a  sanguine  temper  were  consecrated  to 
God.  And  how  powerful  he  was  in  holy  indignation  an<i  wrath  !  If  the  phlegmatic  tem- 
perament consisted  in  cold  indifference  and  dulncss  of  spirit,  Paul  would  he.  entirely  free  from 
It ;  but  if  we  understand  by  it  a  natural  disposition  to  perseverance,  and  tough  tenacity,  we 
must  see  that  in  this  resjject  also  he  was  richly  endowed.  Ilis  endowments  reciprocally 
equalizx'd  and  attempered  themselves  in  his  person  as  cJiurismata,  or  gifts  of  the  Spirit,  as  he 
himself  desired  (1  Cor.  xii.)  that  all  the  various  endowments  should  harmonize  and  concen- 
trate in  the  Church. 

2.  The  rich  literature  in  connection  with  Paul  and  his  theology  is  enumerated  in  the 
bibliographical  works  of  Walch  (BiU.  TheoL,  iv.  p.  662  sqq.) ;  Wixer  {IJdndhvrh  der  theol. 
Literatiir,  i.  p.  252  fl",  pp.  294,  567;  Supplement,  p.  39);  Danz  {inirers'/brorterhich  der 
tfieohg.  Literatur,  p.  740  fl^". ;  Supplement,  p.  30) ;  in  the  well-known  Introductions  to  the  New 
Testament  [by  De  Wb'.tte,  Credner,  Reuss,  Bleek,  Guericke,  Davidson],  a.^  well  as  the 
appropriate  commentaries.  Besides,  we  must  also  compare  the  works  on  the  Apostolic  Age 
by  Neander,  Schaff,  Thiersch,  Lange,  Lechler,  Ritscill,  Ewald  ;  also  the  works  [of 
ScH.MiDT,  Van  Oosterzee,  etc.]  on  the  Biblical  theology  of  the  New  Testament.  Against 
Baur's  Ajwstle  Paul  [2d  edition,  by  Zeli.er,  1867,  in  2  vols.]  is  especially  directed  the  work 
of  Lechler,  already  referred  to  [also,  in  great  part,  Wieseler,  on  the  Chrowhxjy  of  the  Apost. 
Age].  Of  the  manj  pt'acticfd  works  on  the  Apostle  Paul,  we  niay  mention  :  Menken,  Ghinc^a 
into  the  Life  of  the  Apostle  Pavl  and  the  First  Christian  Congregation  (Bremen,  1828);  Ad, 
MoNOD,  The  Apostle  Paul,  Five  Sermons  (2d  ed.,  German,  Elberfeld,  1858  [also  in  En<.dish])  ; 
Nadmann,  Paulas — The  First  Victories  of  Christianity  (Leipzig) ;  Besser,  Paid  (Leipzig, 
1861)  ;  M.  Kahler,  Paul,  the  Servant  and  Messenger  of  Jesus  of  Nazareth  (Ilalle,  1862)  ; 
Oswald,  The  Missionanj  Work  of  Paul  (2d  ed.,  Stuttg.,  1864)  ;  Hausrath  (semi-rational- 
istic), The  Apostle  Paul  (Heidelberg,  1865).  The  life  of  the  great  Apostle  has  also  been  illus- 
trated by  poems,  songs,  and  dramas.  [Of  English  works,  besides  those  already  mentioned, 
Paley's  IIor(e  PaulincB,  Lord  Lyttleton  on  the  Conversion  of  St.  Pavl,  and  J.\mes  Smith's 
Voyage  and  Shijncreck  of  St.  Paul  (London,  1848),  deserv"  special  mention  as  illustrating  par- 
ticular points,  and  strongly  corroborating  the  historical  cuaracter  of  the  Acts  and  the  Epis- 
tles. The  instructive  and  entertaining  descriptive  vrork  of  Conybeare  and  Howson  is 
generally  known  in  America  as  well  as  in  England,  and  admirably  adapted  for  the  theo- 
logical lay  reader.  Comp.  also  the  literature  at  the  close  of  the  article  Paul  in  Smith's 
Dictionary  of  tJie  Bible. — P.  S.] 

i   3.      THE    EPISTLES    OF    PAUL. 

A.    Their  Historical  Order. 

If  we  except  the  Pastoral  Letter  of  the  Apostolic  Council  of  Jerusalem  about  the  year  53 
[50],  the  two  Epistles  to  the  Thessalonians  are  the  oldest  New  Testament  ejiistles.  They 
were  written  from  Corinth  in  the  year  54  or  55,  not  long  after  the  establishment  of  the  con- 
gregation, and  in  consequence  of  the  chiliastic  excitement  of  the  same  during  the  second 
missionary  journey  of  the  Apostle.  The  Epistle  to  the  Galatians  was  written  about  56-57,  in 
Ephesus,  during  the  third  missionary  journey.  The  two  Epistles  to  the  Corinthians  were 
written  by  Paul  from  Ejjhesus  and  Macedonia,  about  the  year  58;  and  soon  afterwards, 
about  the  year  59,  he  composed  the  Epistle  to  the  Romans,  from  Corinth.  Betv,'een  the  years 
62-04,  if  not  a  little  earlier,  the  Epistles  to  *^he  Ephesians,  Colossians,  and  Philemon  were 
vritten ;  and  toward  the  close  of  the  first  Ro- aan  captivity,  the  Epistle  to  the  Philippians. 
A  -ittle  later  still,  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews  ])r()ceedcd  from  the  company  of  Paul,  about 
conti-mporaneously  with  the  Gospel  of  Luke  and  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles.  The  First  Ejiistle 
to  Timothy  and  the  Epistle  to  Titus  must  be  assigned  to  the  intt-rval  between  the  first  and 
second  captivity,  64-66.  The  last  of  the  Pauline  Ei)istles,  the  Second  to  Timothy,  was  writ- 
ten about  the  year  67.  As  to  the  untenableness  of  the  hypothesis  of  a  Third  Epistle  to  the 
Corinthians,  as  well  as  of  an  Epistle  to  the  Laodiceans,  different  from  the  Epistle  to  the 
Ephesians,  comp.  my  Apost.  Zeitalter,  i.  p.  205  [and  Dr.  WiNO,  in  Com.  on  2  Corinthians^  p.  7 
-P.S.I. 


§    3.     THE   EPISTLES   OF   PAUL.  I5 

Observations. — 1.  Compare  the  Introductions  to  the  commentaries  on  the  various  Paul- 
ine Epistles. 

2.  Several  critics  (Schulz,  Schkeckenbtjrger,  Schott,  "Wiggers,  Thiersch,  Reuss, 
Meter,  Schenkel)  arc  of  the  opinion  that  the  Epistles  to  the  Ephesians  and  Colossians,  and 
that  to  Philemon,  were  written  during  the  captivity  of  Paul  at  Csesarea.  The  principal  argu- 
ment is  made  to  lie  in  the  circumstances  relating  to  the  slave  Onesimus,  who  ran  away  from 
his  master.  Onesimus,  it  is  assumed,  could  more  easily  have  escaped  from  Colosse  to  the 
neighboring  Caesarea,  than  to  distant  Rome.  But  why  did  not,  then,  Onesimus  flee  to  some 
place  which  lay  still  nearer  at  hand  ?  We  could  well  imagine  that  a  slave  in  Colosse  would 
have  a  more  decided  disposition  to  escape  to  the  world's  metropolis — the  refuge  of  fortune- 
seekers  and  adventurers — than  to  Caesarea.  Besides,  in  a  sea- voyage  it  makes  little  difference 
whether  the  distance  be  long  or  short.  It  is  easier  for  a  German  fugitive  to  flee  by  sea  to 
America,  than  by  land  to  Spain.  All  remarks  on  the  probably  greater  expenses  of  the  voyage 
to  Rome,  and  on  the  probably  greater  strictness  in  Rome,  are  as  inconclusive  as  the  principal 
argument.  The  other  argument  is  derived  from  the  following  circumstance  :  If  Tychicus,  ac- 
cording to  the  usual  supposition,  bad  made  the  journey  from  Rome  to  Colosse  with  Onesimus, 
then  the  two  travellers  must  first  have  arrived  at  Ephesus.  But  now  the  Apostle,  in  Eph.  vi.  21, 
where  he  recommends  Tychicus  to  the  Ephesians,  makes  no  mention  of  Onesimus,  while  the 
same  Onesimus  is  mentioned  and  heartily  recommended.  Col.  iv.  9.  But  the  latter  fact  admits 
of  a  simple  explanation.  The  poor  Onesimus  was  at  home  in  Colosse,  and  must  now  be  received 
as  a  Christian  by  the  congregation  there.  To  this  end  he  certainly  needed  the  recommenda- 
tion of  the  Apostle.  But  of  v.-hat  use  could  be  the  recommendation  of  the  Colossian  slave  to 
the  Ephesian  church,  for  which  he  had  no  signification  whatever  ?  If  we  maintain  that  the 
Epistle  to  the  Ephesians  was  an  encyclical  letter  to  those  congregations  of  Asia  Minor  which 
were  subsequently  grouped  definitely  in  a  cycle,  then  the  strange  assumption  that  Onesimus 
must  have  been  introduced  to  all  t  e  seven  churches,  will  appear  still  more  strange.  In  the 
first  argument  we  miss  all  traces  of  the  sea-breeze ;  in  the  second,  all  evidence  of  apostolic 
decorum.  Moreover,  it  would  be  very  dilficult  to  prove  that  the  way  from  Caesarea  must 
have  led  by  Colosse  to  Ephesus,  and  not  vice-versa,  if  one  will  only  remember  the  advantages 
of  a  sea-voyage.  We  will  direct  attention  to  only  one  of  the  reasons  for  the  composition  of 
the  already-mentioned  Epistles  in  Rome.  The  Apostle,  before  his  imprisonment,  Rom.  i.  10, 
had  informed  the  Romans  that  he  was  just  then  about  to  come  to  them ; — now,  should  he 
have  forgotten  this  solemn  promi-e  in  Caesarea,  under  (ielusive  hopes  of  a  speedy  deliverance, 
and  engaged  lodgings  among  the  Colossians  (Philemon,  ver.  22)  ?  But  the  chief  argument, 
in  our  opinion,  lies  in  the  very  advanced  development  of  the  churches  of  Asia  Minor  both  in 
sin  and  righteousness,  as  it  is  reflected  in  those  Epistles.  Such  a  development  presupposes  at 
least  a  period  of  fi"om  three  to  four  years. 


B.     Their  Contents. 

Every  Epistle  of  the  Apostle  bears  the  imprint  of  a  historical  occasion,  by  which  the  con- 
tents of  the  same  are  shaped. 

The  congregation  at  Thessalonica  was  misled,  amid  its  persecutions,  into  a  chiliastic 
excitement ;  hence  the  Epistles  addressed  to  it  partake  of  an  eschatological  character. 

The  Epistle  to  the  Galatians  is  chiefly  soterioUgical,  or  an  exposition  of  the  righteousness 
of  faith,  in  opposition  to  the  Judaistic  righteousness  of  works,  which  was  urged  by  the  false 
Galatian  teachers. 

The  Epistle  to  the  Romans  is  also  soteriological,  but  in  view  of  the  more  general  antagonism 
between  grace  and  the  righteousness  of  faith,  to  the  general  corruption  which  we  observe  in 
the  mutual  self-boasting  of  heathen  Christians  and  Jewish  Christians. 

The  Epistles  to  the  Corinthians  possess  an  ecclesiastical  character,  since  the  First  Epistle 
indicates  the  true  Church,  with  polemical  reference  to  the  disturbances  and  corruptions  in  the 
life  of  the  congregation  ;  while  the  Second  establishes  the  true  ministerial  office,  in  apologetic 
self-defence  against  the  attacks  of  his  personal  opponents. 

The  Epistles  to  the  Colossians  and  to  the  Ephesians  bear  a  decidedly  cTiristological  im- 
press ;  the  former  brings  out  chiefly  the  ante-mundane  (preexistent)  and  exclusive  mediator- 
ship  and  glory  of  Christ,  in  opposition  to  the  Colossian  errorists ;  the  latter  establishes 
mainly  His  subsequent  exaltation  over  all  things,  in  opposition  to  dogmatic  perversions  and 
dissensions. 

The  Epistle  to  the  Philippians  has  a  christological-pa^toi'al  and  prominently  ethical  charao- 


16  THE   BPISTLE    OF   PAUL   TO   THE   ROMANS. 


ter,  in  so  far  as  the  Apostle  makes  the  favorite  congregation  of  Philippi  his  special  co-worker 
in  his  apostolic  office  ;  and  in  order  to  make  that  congregation  ethically  complete,  he  holds  up 
for  its  imitation  the  life  of  Christ. 

The  Ejnstle  to  Philemon  is  decidedly  jaas/ora?,  with  special  reference  to  the  care  of  soult. 

Of  the  three  Pastoral  Epistles,  properly  so  called,  the  First  to  Timothy,  as  well  as  that  to 
Titus,  were  above  all  designed  as  the  apostolic  regulation  for  pa«toral  church  government/ 
and  the  Second  Ejnstle  to  Timothy  was  prominently  designed  as  the  ai^ostolic  rule  for  th« 
pastoral  conduct  and  call. 

Obsbrvations. — 1.  The  specific  fundamental  thoughts  that  control  every  one  of  the  Paul- 
ine Epistles  (as  of  the  Biblical  works  in  general),  are  still  vary  much  neglected,  to  the  injury 
of  a  truly  organic,  anatomical,  synthetical  and  analytical  exegesis.  These  writings  are  often 
not  only  treated  as  dead  objects,  but  they  are  dissected  in  every  direction,  as  if  they  wer« 
destitute  of  all  organic  structure. 

2.  Dr.  Baur  is  not  only  frequently  surprised  when  he  finds  a  new  Pauline  Epistle  contain- 
ing something  new,  but  he  makes  this  point  a  means  of  suspicion. 

C.     Their  Autlienticity. 

On  the  verifications  of  the  Pauline  Epistles  by  the  testimony  of  Church  history,  compare 
the  passage  in  the  New  Testament,  2  Peter  iii.  15,  and  the  testimonies  of  the  Fathers,  as 
KiRCHHOFEK  has  collected  them  in  his  Quellensammlung  for  the  history  of  the  New  Testa- 
ment Canon,  down  to  Jerome  (Zurich,  1842),  and  as  they  have  been  treated  in  the  introduc- 
tory works  of  Credner,  Reuss,  Guericke,  and  others,  as  well  as  in  the  respective  commen- 
taries.    On  the  apocryphal  literature  connected  with  the  name  of  Paul,  see  Winer,  ii.  p.  222. 

Among  these  pseudo-Pauline  works,  deserve  especial  mention  the  spurious  correspondence 
between  Paul  and  Seneca  the  philosopher,  which  is  contained  in  the  apocryphal  collection 
of  Fabricius,  ii.  p.  880  ff. ;  and  an  imaginary  third  Epistle  of  the  Apostle  to  the  Corinthi- 
ans, composed  as  a  substitute  for  one  which  was  imagined  to  be  lost  (see  my  Apost.  Zeitalter, 
i.  p.  205),  together  with  a  spurious  epistle  of  the  Corinthians  to  Paul,  which  therefore  pro- 
ceeded from  a  misunderstanding  (see  De  Wette,  Einl,  p.  271).  The  false  conjecture  of  a 
special  Epistle  to  the  Laodiceans,  on  the  ground  of  a  misunderstanding  of  Col.  iv.  16  (where 
we  are  to  understand  rather  the  Epistle  to  the  Ephesians  as  intended  also  for  Laodicea,  the 
last  of  the  Ephesian  cycle  of  congregations),  has  given  rise  to  a  fictitious  Ei^istle  to  the 
Laodiceans  (see  my  Ajmt.  Zeitalter,  ii.  p.  211).  Certain  critics  have  missed  also  another 
Epistle  to  the  Philippians  (Dk  Wette,  p.  271).  Compare  the  article  in  Herzog's  Jiml- 
Encyclopcedie,  Pseudepigraphen  des  Neuen  Testaments.  The  false  Acts,  which  have  been  attrib- 
uted to  Paul,  are  :  Acta  Petri  et  Pauli  ;  Acta  Pavli  et  Theclm.  The  Ebionites,  moreover,  have 
caricatured  the  portrait  of  the  Apostle  Paul  in  the  most  shameful  manner,  and  stamped  him 
with  the  likeness  of  a  heresiarch  (see  Neander,  Kirchengesch.^  3d  ed.,  i.  198). 

Appendix.— The  criticism  of  the  school  of  Baur  proceeds  really  on  two  pre-suppositions, 
with  which  the  founder  has  alienated  himself  from  the  Christian  standpoint,  and  surrendered 
himself  fully  to  a  pantheistic  philosophy.  Baur  has  evidently  designed  to  compensate  for 
his  want  of  respect  for  the  matter  and  spirit  of  revelation,  l)y  a  superstitious  yielding  to  the 
masters  of  science;  and  his  success  was  facilitated  by  the  fact  that  his  great  learning  and 
subtle  acuteness,  or  his  mere  scholariy  attainments,  have  served  to  hide  his  far  greater  inca- 
pacity of  judgment  concerning  the  phenomena  of  actual  life  ;  and  that  gravity  of  his  inquiry 
and  method  has  blinded  the  readers  to  his  frivolous  undervaluing  of  the  religious  juid  even 
of  the  moral  spirit  of  the  Biblical  writings.  His  superstitious  veneration  for  the  mere  method 
and  forms  of  science  was  already  apparent  in  his  Symbolik  und  MythAogie,  whlth  he  wrot« 
while  yet  a  follower  of  Sciileiermacuer,  in  the  years  1824-'25.  To  whom  else  than  to  him 
couhl  it  ever  have  occurred  to  divide  such  a  historical  work  after  the  scheme  of  Schleier- 
macher's  Dogmatics,  and  to  describe,  first,  "  the  pure  and  universal  feeling  of  inde])en- 
dence,"  and  then  "  the  antithesis  of  sin  and  grace  which  enter  into  the  religious  conscious- 
ness ? "  Such  a  disciple  of  Sciileiermacuer,  after  he  had  become  a  follower  of  Heoei.,  must, 
with  the  same  slavish  superstition  for  science,  and  with  the  same  want  of  perception  of  the 
peculiarity  of  the  olject  pervert,  by  his  Ebionitic  hypothesis,  the  evangelical  and  apostolio 


§   4.     THE    CHARACTER   OF   THE   PAULINE   EPISTLES.  17 

history,  according  to  the  Hegelian  misconception  of  the  development  of  life  and  history. 
Under  such  circumstances  there  could,  of  course,  be  no  proper  discrimination  of  the  difierent 
conceptions  of  imperfection  and  perfection,  nor  any  true  appreciation  of  original  and  new 
Mstoilcal  i^riuciples  and  factors.  But  his  yielding  was  only  a  partial  one,  so  long  as  he  was 
not  fully  immersed  in  the  pantheistic  view  of  Hegel ;  or  rather,  it  appeared  only  partial  so 
long  as  he  did  not,  with  Strauss  and  his  school,  apply  this  view  to  the  evangelical  history 
and  its  witnesses,  in  order  to  judge  them  upon  the  principle  that  miracles  are  impossible.  In 
the  end,  his  superstition,  which  he  had  transferred  from  Schleiermacher  to  Hegel,  led  him 
to  the  belief  that  his  own  science  and  school  were  infallible. 

Such  a  spirit  of  scholastic  superstition,  which  gradually  arose  to  fanaticism,  was  naturally 
connected  with  a  great  want  oi"  practical  common  sense,  and  an  incapacity  of  judgment  con- 
cerning the  real  facts  of  lif?.  We  pass  by  the  first  indication  of  the  same,  the  entire  absence 
of  faith ;  for  "  faith  is  not  given  to  every  man."  We  do  not  speak,  therefore,  of  a  defect  of 
religious,  but  of  scientific  and  moral  judgment. 

As  far  as  the  scientific  appreciation  of  objective  facts  is  concerned,  we  ask  once  more: 
How  can  a  scholar  write  a  history  of  mythology  and  religion  according  to  the  classification  of 
Schleiermacher's  Dogmatics  ?  Further,  how  can  a  scholar,  endowed  with  sound  judgment, 
write  a  history  of  the  Christian  Qriosis,  and  make  an  unheard-of  leap  from  the  old  Gnostics 
clear  over  the  whole  Middle  Ages  (Scholastics  and  Mystics),  down  to  Jacob  Boslim,  with  a 
very  superficial  touch  on  Manichseism  and  on  Augustine  ?  How  can  one  write  a  history  of 
the  doctrine  of  the  atoiiement,  which  should  have  its  point  of  departure  in  the  Gnostic  dualism, 
and  its  aim  in  the  Hegelian  system  ?  If  this  can  be  accomjjlished,  then  truly  can  the  history 
of  the  doctrine  of  the  Trinity,  as  well  as  of  the  incnrnation  of  God,  be  made  to  run  out  into 
the  desert  of  Hegelian  pantheism.  If  this  be  possible,  then  can  one  easily  interpret  historical 
deeds  allegorically  (the  Epistle  to  Philemon,  for  example),  and,  on  the  other  hand,  explain 
literally  what  is  really  an  allegorical  composition  (the  Apocalypse). 

The  worst  of  all  inadequacies  are  moral  ones.  It  betrays  a  veiy  perverted  taste,  when  one 
can  regard  the  Gnostics  as  a  central  force  of  development  in  the  conflict  between  the  Pauline 
and  Johanhean  theology ;  and  likewise,  when  one  so  far  misconceives  the  old  distinction 
between  apocryphal  and  canonical  writings  as  to  think  that  a  religious  romance  of  later  date, 
falsely  called  the  Clementine  Homilies,  is  made  a  proper  standard  for  the  adjudication  of  the 
Biblical  writings.  But  it  is  worst  of  all  to  attribute  to  the  Biblical  books  studied  and  inten- 
tional tendencies  of  human  parties,  and  even  crafty  fabrications.  In  this  respect,  Baur  and 
his  school  have  far  transcended  even  Strauss.  This  is  a  psychological  phenomenon,  which 
can  only  be  saved  from  the  charge  of  immorality  by  the  largest  stretch  of  charity,  and 
the  assumption  of  an  excessive  scholastic  fanaticism  in  the  treatment  of  difficult  critical 
problems. 

On  these  premises  the  value  and  probable  fate  of  Baur's  criticism  of  the  New  Testament 
writings,  which  has  spread  like  an  avalanche  in  Eastern  Switzerland,  France,  and  Holland,  is 
easily  determined.  This  false  system  has  arisen  from  a  diseased,  superstitious  worship  of 
modern  philosophy  and  criticism,  and  developed  into  maturity.  But  it  is  doomed  to  utter 
destruction,  since  it  has  no  root  in  the  objective  facts  of  revelation  and  of  the  kingdom  of 
God,  but  is  chiefly  grounded  in  the  j)antheistic  and  abstract  idealistic  conceptions  of  modem 
culture.  We  do  not  say,  in  the  sound  culture  itself.  The  only  plausible  occasion  and  excuse 
of  this  false  system  is  the  fact  that  the  ideality  and  the  universality  of  the  historical  Christ, 
together  with  His  roots  and  ramifications  throughout  the  whole  human  race,  have  not  always 
been  sufficiently  appreciated  in  the  orthodox  theology  of  the  Church.  The  beginning  of  a 
better  appreciation  does  not  certainly  belong  to  the  school  of  Baur,  but  only  the  heretical 
perversion  and  defacement  of  the  same.* 

§   4.    THE   character   OF   THE   PAUIilNE  EPISTLES.— HERMENEUTIC   HnfTS. 

According  to  Tholuck  (Epistle  to  the  Romans,  p.  22),  strength,  fulness,  and  fire  are  the 
spiritual  characteristics  of  the  Apostle,  and  they  are  reflected  in  his  style.  He  adduces 
two  statements  from  the  early  Church  concerning  the  Apostle's  manner  of  speech.    The  first 

•  [This  appendix  is  condensed  in  the  translation,  with  unessential  omissions.  In  the  preface  to  the  second  edition, 
and  in  self-defence  against  Schenkel,  Dr.  Lange  supports  this  severe  judgment  hy  a  number  of  quotations  from 
Baur's  work  on  Paul,  ■which  it  is  unnecessary  to  insert  here.  Baur  and  the  Tubingen  School  are  not  likely  ever  to 
acquire  the  importance  which  they  enjoyed  in  Germany  for  a  brief  period.  This  school  is  simply  a  modern  phase  of 
Gnosticism  (i^evSwioj/xos  yvwcris,  1  Tim.  vi.  20),  and,  like  the  Gnosticism  of  the  second  century,  it  has  been  ^^verruled  for 
a  good  purpose,  in  stirring  up  the  Church  to  a  deeper  investigation  and  defence  of  the  primitive  records  of  Christianity, 
■which  have  already  come  out  triumphant,  ■with  new  gains  of  knowledge,  of  this  as  of  every  other  trial.  I  say  this 
with  all  due  respect  for  t\e  genius  and  learning  of  Baur,  and  the  value  of  his  masterly  historical  criticism,  where  it 
ices  not  touch  matters  of  faith  which  he  did  not  understand  (1  Cor,  ii.  ^16).— P.  S.] 

2 


18  THE   EPISTLE    OF   TAUL   TO    THE    ROMANS. 

is  by  St.  Jekome,  Epist.  48  ad  Pammaddum*  c.  13 :  ^^Paulvm  profemm,  quern  quotiescumque 
lego,  videor  mihi  non  verba  audire  sed  tonitrua.  Videntur  quidem  verba  simplicia,  et  quad  inno* 
centis  hominis  ac  ritsticarii,  et  qui  nee  /acere  nee  declinare  noverit  insidias,  sed  quocunque  reqiexeris, 
fuhnina  sunt.  Hoeret  in  cau»a ;  capit  omne,  quod  tetigcrit ;  tergum  vertit,  ut  swperet ;  fvyam 
simulate  ut  occidat.  The  second  statement,  from  Chrysosttom,  De  Sa^erdotio,  i.  4,  7,  coaijjares 
the  Apostle  to  an  iron  wall,  which  surrounds,  with  his  Epistles,  the  churches  of  the  whole 
world ;  and  to  a  noble  military  chieftain,  who  leads  captive  all  modes  of  thought,  and 
brings  them  into  subjection  to  faith,  etc.  Tuoluck  adds,  that  Paul  is  lauded  as  a  master 
of  eloquence  in  a  fragment  of  the  heathen  critic  Lonoinus,  thoufjh  critics  have  declared  the 
passage  doubtful  (see  Hug,  Einl.  in's  N.  T.,  ii.  p.  334). 

Tholxick  then  proceeds  to  say :  "  With  these  oratorical  gifts  there  are  connected  also 
defects ;  namely,  an  excessive  conciseness  and  pregnancy  of  expression,  and  carelessness  in 
the  formation  of  sentences,  which  produce  those  numerous  anacolutha  (?).  This  leads  us  to 
the  hermcneutical  question,  which  has  an  important  doctrinal  bearing,  whether  these  pecu- 
liarities of  fonn  are  at  all  detrimental  to  the  clearness  and  definiteness  of  the  thought.  In 
this  respect,  no  commentator  has  uttered  more  severe  complaints  against  the  Apostle  than 
RucKERT  (comp.  his  Christliche  PhilosopMe,  ii.  p.  401,  and  the  introduction  to  the  first 
edition  of  his  Commentary  on  the  Romans)."  t  Tholuck  very  justly  remarks  against  RucK- 
ERT,  that  defects  of  style  do  not  necessarily  arise  from  obscurity  of  thought  on  the  part  of 
the  author,  "  least  of  all  with  intuitive,  and  at  the  same  time  fervid  characters.  The  think- 
ing of  Paul  is  intuitive,  but  coupled  with  acute  penetration,  which  was  refined  and  sharpened 
by  rabbinical  culture  almost  to  the  excess  of  subtlety ;  therefore,  when  there  is  a  want  of 
logical  clearness  in  his  writings,  we  must  seek  the  cause  partly  in  the  overflow  of  his  abun- 
dant ideas,  and  partly  in  the  impatience  of  his  vivacity."  We  must  distinguish,  he  says, 
difficulty  from  obscurity.  But  w'hen  Tholuck  advances  the  opinion,  that  no  writer  of 
later  times  stands  so  near  the  Apostle  in  excellencies  and  defects  as  Hamann,  we  must  hesi- 
tate to  accept  the  conjunction.  Paul's  obscurity  proceeds  from  a  fulness  of  vital  energy,  and 
is  really  only  the  result  of  a  quick  movement,  of  a  clear  profundity,  and  of  a  perfect  origi- 
nality ;  and  must  certainly  be  distinguished  from  the  obscurity  of  a  one-sided  scholastic  taste 
and  defective  and  perverted  style.  Tholuck  maintains  the  perfection  of  the  Pauline  thought, 
while  he  acknowledges  an  imperfection  of  expression. 

Against  this  view,  R.  Rothe,  of  Heidelberg  [died  1867],  has  raised  his  voice  in  his  acute 
essay.  New  attempt  to  elucidate  the  Pauline  passage,  Rom.  v.  12-21.  "  According  to  Rothe,  the 
apparent  irregularity  of  Paul's  style  arises  solely  from  the  depth  and  acuteness  of  hia 
thoughts,  from  the  carefully-wrought  elaboration  of  his  purpose,  and  from  that  preciseness  of 
expression  which,  the  more  studied  it  is,  the  more  easily  it  approaches  abruptness."  Tholuck 
cites  a  similar  expression  of  Baur  (p.  24),  but  endorses,  on  the  contrary,  the  view  of  Calvin: 
Quin  potius  singulari  Dei  providentia  factum  est,  ut  mb  contemptibili  verborum  humilitute  oltissima 
Ticec  mysteria  nobis  traderentur,  ut  non  humance  ehquentice  potentia,  sed  sola  sjnritus  efficacia 
niteretur  nostra  fides.  In  favor  of  this  intei^pretation,  Tholuck  makes  use  of  the  Apostle'a 
own  declaration,  1  Cor.  ii.  1 ;  2  Cor.  xi.  6.  The  second  passage  does  not  belong  here  at 
all,  and  the  first  has  an  ironical  sound,  and  does  not  prove  what  Tholuck  designs  to  estab- 
lish by  it. 

In  the  treatment  of  this  question  the  following  points  must  be  especially  taken  into 
consideration  : 

1.  The  New  Testament  idiom  generally  is  now  no  longer  regarded  merely  as  the  lowly 

*  [The  oriRinal  Piammachiam,  even  In  the  second  edition,  is  ovidpntly  a  double  error  of  the  printer ;  the  one  \* 
borrowed  from  Tholuck,  I.  e.    Pammnchius  was  a  Roman  senator  and  friend  of  Jerome.— P  8  ] 

t  (In  this  presumptuous  disposition  to  criticise  St.  Paul,  HrcKKnT  lias  found  an  Knpl'sh  imitator  in  Frofssaor 
JowTiTT,  who  thinks  it  necessary  to  qiialify  wliat  ho  considers  to  be  a  blind  and  uiidisiriniinatin(f  admiration  of  th« 
apoirtle,  and  who  misrepresents  him  as  a  confused,  though  profound  thinker,  who  uttered  himself  "  in  broken  words  and 
hesitating  forms  of  speech,  with  no  beauty  or  comeliness  of  style."  But  such  paradoxical  views  are  quit*  isolated, 
esperially  in  England  and  America,  and  are  not  likely  to  unsettle  the  established  estimate  which  Christendom,  Qreekt 
Latin,  and  Evangelical,  has  set  upon  the  great  apostle  of  the  Ocntiles  for  these  eighteen  hundred  years.— P.  S.] 


§   4,     THE   CHARACTER   OF   THE   PAULINE   EPISTLES.  19 

"  form  of  a  servant "  (Pliil.  ii.  7),  compared  with  the  classic  language  ;  hence  there  is  no  mor« 
reason  why  the  Pauline  expression  and  style  should  be  regarded  in  this  light  when  comparec 
with  the  classic  method  of  composition  ;  provided  we  do  not  apply  here  the  standard  of  the 
taste  and  judgment  of  the  world.  The  New  Testament  idiom  in  general  is  a  pneumatic 
development  or  transformation  of  the  Grecian  language.  The  apostolic  expression  has  thus 
the  prerogative  of  its  sj^ecial  peculiarity,  conditioned  by  its  new  spiritual  life.  This 
peculiarity  may  be  regarded  in  the  main  as  the  free  commingling  of  Hebrew  directness 
and  Hellenic  accommodation ;  or,  in  other  words,  as  the  primitive  Christian  style,  whose 
characteristics  are  the  highest  simplicity  and  vivacity  in  conjunction  with  the  highest 
penetration  and  consecration  of  soul. 

2.  Down  to  the  present  time  the  comprehension  of  the  Biblical  books  has  been  essentially 
retarded  by  regarding  them  too  little  as  original  creations,  and  by  inquiring  too  little  into 
their  fundamental  thoughts.  Several  critics  have  aj^plied  to  them  the  conception  of  ordinary 
book-making  and  book-writing,  and  even  of  book-patching— a  conception  which  is  utterly 
antagonistic  to  all  understanding  of  the  historical  books  of  the  Old  Testament  and  of  the 
New  Testament  Gospels,  and  which  also  prevents  a  proper  comprehension  of  Biblical  inspira- 
tion. We  should  conclude  thus :  The  fundamental  thought  of  the  book  is  inspired  by  the 
Spirit  of  revelation,  according  to  the  measure  of  the  degree  of  revelation  in  the  Old  Testa- 
ment, and  of  the  link  of  revelation  in  the  New  Testament ;  but  all  the  single  portions  of  the 
book  are  immediately  inspired — that  is,  animated  and  controlled  by  its  fundamental  thought ; 
therefore,  also  mediately  inspired  by  the  Spirit  of  revelation.  But  among  the  prevailing 
conceptions,  the  Rabbinical,  lifeless,  atomistic,  scholastic  view  of  the  book,  is  reflected  in  the 
picture  of  the  book.  The  dead  conception  casts  its  dark,  spiritless  shade  upon  the  living 
object.  So  long,  therefore,  as  we  do  not  here  apply  the  conception  of  single  spiritual  organ- 
isms, we  cannot  distinguish  the  whole  from  the  parts,  nor  the  parts  from  the  whole.  Most  of 
our  definitions,  divisions,  and  anatomical  dissections  of  Biblical  books  furnish  the  proof  that 
our  theology  has  not  yet  reached  the  scientific  stanapoint  which  Cuvier  attained  in  natural 
science  (palaeontology)  ;  for  he  knew  how  to  construct  the  whole  figure  of  the  animal  from  a 
single  fossil  bone.  In  support  of  this  opinion,  we  need  only  to  recall  the  opinions  of  Schlei- 
ERMACHEB  on  the  Epistle  of  James,  De  Wette's  view  of  the  Epistle  to  the  Ephesians,  and 
Batjr's  representation  of  the  Epistle  to  the  Romans,  which  he  made  to  lie  comprehended  in 
chapters  ix.,  x.,  and  xi.  Ruckert  likewise  professes  to  find  in  the  Epistle  to  the  Romans, 
and  in  other  books,  certain  obscurities  and  confused  statements — in  which  charges  Fritzsche 
justly  recognizes  the  obscurities  of  the  critic  himself.  The  acceptance  of  numerous  digres- 
sions on  the  part  of  Paul  is  well  known ;  and  even  Tholuck  does  not  regard  the  Ejjistle  to 
the  Romans  quite  free  from  them. 

As  far  as  the  organic  unity  of  the  Pauline  Epistles  is  concerned,  we  would  make  the  fol- 
lowing statements  as  a  guide  : 

(a.)  Every  Pauline  Epistle  has  a  clearly-defined  fundamental  idea  which  controls  the  entire 
contents  of  the  Epistle. 

(5.)  This  fundamental  thought  shapes  not  only  the  division,  but  also  the  introduction  and 
conclusion,  and  even  pervades  all  the  slender  threads. 

(c.)  The  introduction  is  determined  by  the  Apostle's  method,  which  seizes  the  appropriate 
point  of  connection  with  a  congregation  or  a  jjerson,  in  order  to  develop  the  argument  into 
its  full  proportions. 

(d.)  The  introduction  is  followed  throughout  by  a  fundamental  or  didactic  theme  (propo- 
ei-tion),  which  the  Apostle  proceeds  dogmatically  to  elaborate. 

{e.)  This  elaboration  arrives  at  a  final  theme,  from  which  the  practical  inferences  are  care- 
fully drawn. 

(/.)  The  conclusion  corresponds  so  exactly  to  the  fundamental  thought  of  the  Epistle, 
that  it  is  reflected  in  all  the  single  parts. 

"We  shall  illustrate  these  principles  by  presenting  our  analysis  of  the  Epistle  to  tha 


20  THE   EPISTLE    OF   PAUL   TO   THE   ROMAN'S. 

Romans.  But  we  must  first  be  allowed  to  make  some  observations  on  the  remaining  Pauline 
Epistles.* 

The  fundamental  theme  of  the  First  Epistle  to  the  CoRrNTHiANS  is  a  determination  of 
the  proper  condition  of  a  Christian  congregation,  as  made  one  by  the  name  of  the  Lord  Jesus 
Christ,  in  opposition  to  the  character  and  shades  of  partisanship ;  chap.  i.  9-12.  The  final 
theme  is,  accordingly,  a  recommendation  of  stability  and  of  a  sound  growth  in  conscious 
hope ;  chap.  xv.  58.  In  the  first  jiart  of  the  execution  Paul  sliows  that  he,  with  his  funda- 
mental preaching,  would  yet  not  have  the  church  become  Pauline  in  any  sectarian  or  partisan 
sense ;  chap.  i.  13-iv.  20.  He  furnishes  at  the  same  time,  in  an  apologetic  form,  a  polemical 
argument  against  the  partisan  attachment  to  Ajjollo.  The  second  part  opposes  the  dilferent 
forms  of  antiuomianism  that  arose  mainly  from  a  misconception  of  the  Pauline  doctrine  of 
fireedom,  chap.  v.  1-xi.  1.  (Disorderly  marriages.  Heathen  tribunals.  Whoredom.  Mixed 
marriages.  Meals  made  of  idolatrous  ofierings.  True  and  false  freedom.  Meat  ollered  to 
idols.)  In  the  third  i^art  those  errors  are  discussed  which  jjrevailed  chiefly  among  the  Petrine 
Judaizing  Christians,  chap.  xi.  2-chap.  xiv.  (The  dress  of  the  synagogue  in  the  congrega- 
tion. Separatism  at  the  communion.  Jewish  self-boasting,  especially  with  regard  to  the  gift 
of  tongues.)  The  fourth  part  teaches  the  real  resurrection  in  opposition  to  the  spiritualism  of 
the  "  Christ-Party  "  (oi  roii  Xfjiarov,  1  Cor.  i.  12),  chap.  xv.  1-57.  The  final  theme  is  a  demand 
that  the  sentiment  of  miity  become  practical :  a.  In  the  collections  for  the  Jewish  Christians 
in  Palestine,  b.  In  the  active  sympathy  with  Paul's  labors  among  the  Gentile  Christians. 
c.  In  the  proper  recognition  of  the  friends  of  Paul,  Timothy,  Apollos,  Stephanas,  etc.  The 
point  of  connection  in  the  uitroduction  is  the  rich  charismata  or  spiritual  gifts  of  the  congre- 
gation, placed  in  the  light  of  grace,  and  of  their  necessary  preservation  until  the  coming  of 
Christ.  In  the  conclusion  we  find,  together  with  abundant  greetings  of  brotherly  communion, 
an  admonition  to  salute  one  another  with  a  holy  kiss,  and  an  anathema  ijronounced  against 
declension  from  the  love  of  Christ ;  which,  without  doubt,  applies  to  separatism  or  sectarian- 
ism, especially  that  of  a  spiritualistic  character. 

Having  set  forth,  in  the  First  Epistle  to  the  Corinthians,  the  true  unity  of  a  Christian 
congregation  endowed  with  the  gracious  gifts  of  the  S^jiiit,  he  portrays,  in  the  Second  Epistle 
TO  the  Corinthians,  in  form  of  self-defence,  the  proper  ofiicial  functions  in  relation  to  a  con- 
gregatiim.  The  fundamental  theme,  cliaij.  i.  6,  7.  The  unity  of  the  Apostle  with  the  congre- 
gation in  all  his  official  suff"erings  and  joys  with  reference  to  the  visit  wliich  he  designed  to 
make  to  them.  The  final  theme  is  a  demand  that  the  congregation  should  be  so  built  up  by  the 
Apostle's  word,  that  his  visit  to  them  might  be  a  source  of  joy  and  not  of  sorrow,  chap.  xii. 
19-21.  1.  The  Apostle's  official  suflferings,  chap  i.  8-chap.  ii.  13.  (His  sufferings  in  Ephesus, 
and  their  jirayers  for  him.  His  distress  at  being  jirevcnted  from  Visiting  the  Corinthians 
forthwith  to  do  them  good.  His  affliction  at  the  previous  letter,  an  evidence  of  his  love. 
Removal  of  the  sorrow  by  the  restoration  of  the  penitent.  His  care  for  them.)  2.  The 
Apostle's  official  joys,  chap.  ii.  li-chap.  iv.  6.  (His  triumphs  in  Christ.  His  epistle  of  com- 
mendation, the  Corinthian  Church.  The  splendor  of  the  New  Testament  office,  and  its 
glorious  strength  which  supports  the  official  incumbents  themselves.  The  enjoyment  which 
his  office  afforded.)  3.  Official  sufferings  and  joys  in  close  conjunction,  chap.  iv.  7-chap.  viL 
IG.  (The  life  of  the  apostles  in  its  contrasts.  Their  death  the  life  of  the  Church,  Their  pil- 
grimage below,  their  home  with  the  Lord.  Their  zeal  in  the  love  of  Christ.  Their  condition 
in  the  new  life.  Their  message  of  reconciliation.  The  comluct  of  the  Apostle  in  his  service  of 
God  should  bless  the  Church  by  awakening  and  encouraging  it  to  holiness.  Certainly  this 
should  be  the  case,  after  the  cheering  report  that  the  Apostle  had  received  from  Titus  of  the 
effect  of  his  First  Epistle.)  4.  The  common  sufferings  and  joys  of  the  office  and  the  congre- 
gation, and  their  effect  in  creating  sympathy  and  benevolence,  chap.  viii.  1-chap.  x.  1.  (The 
example  of  the  Church  in  Macedonia.  Ofiicial  tenderness  and  prudence  in  suggesting  and 
encouraging  a  collection,  and  in  the  institution  of  the   diaconate.     Encouragement  and 

*  The  harmonious  fundamental  thoughts  of  the  Epistles  everywhere  result  from  a  combination  of  the  funlameatai 
and  final  themes  in  connection  with  the  introduction  and  conclusion. 


§   i.     THE   CHARACTER   OF   THE   PAULINE   EPISTLES. 


promises.)  5.  The  defence  of  the  office  in  opposition  to  the  charges  made  against  it  phicfc 
threatened  to  sunder  the  office  and  the  congregation,  chap.  x.  2-chap.  xii.  18.  (Prudence  in 
the  official  or  self-defence  of  the  Ajiostle.  The  epistolary  form  is  the  expression  of  forbear- 
ance, but  not  of  cowardice  or  inequality  in  conduct.  Enforced  expression  of  self-reopect  in 
contradistinction  from  vain  self-praise.  The  liability  of  congregations  to  be  misled  by  false 
apostles.  The  unselfishness  of  the  Apostle  in  contrast  with  their  selfishness.  The  isainful 
self-defence  that  was  wrung  from  him.  His  works  and  his  weakness.  His  contemplation 
and  ecstacies,  and  the  thorn  in  his  flesh.  His  signs  and  wonders  in  the  midst  of  them.  Hia 
self-denial  and  readiness  to  be  offered  for  the  Church.  Also  in  the  sending  of  Titus.) — • 
The  final  theme,  chap.  xii.  19,  20.  The  execution :  a  demand  of  the  congregation  that 
they  be  so  equipped  as  not  to  need  the  painful  exercise  of  his  official  discipline,  chap.  xiii. 
1-10.  The  introduction :  the  point  of  connection.  Praise  to  God  for  a  common  comfort 
in  a  common  sorrow.  The  conclusion :  a  reminder  to  reciprocal  consolation  in  harmonious 
action. 

The  fundamental  theme  of  the  Epistle  to  the  GAiiATiANS  is  the  solemn  establishment  of 
the  Pauline  gospel  for  the  Galatian  Church,  in  view  of  its  departure  from  the  same,  by  a 
conditional  anathema  pronounced  against  those  who  preach  a  heterogeneous  gospel,  chap, 
i.  6-9.  The  admonition  made  in  the  final  theme  corresponds  to  this — chap.  v.  1 — to  stand 
fast  in  the  liberty,  and  not  to  be  entangled  again  in  the  yoke  of  legal  justification.  Develop- 
ment of  the  fundamental  theme.  The  Apostle  proves  the  worth  of  his  gospel :  1.  By  his 
divine  apostolic  call  and  independence,  chap.  i.  10-24.  2.  By  the  recognition  of  the  con- 
gregation at  Jerusalem,  and  of  the  "  pillar  "  apostles,  chap.  ii.  1-10.  3.  By  the  yielding  of 
Peter  to  his  evangelical  principle,  chap.  ii.  11-21.  4.  By  the  personal  experience  of  the 
Galatians,  chaj).  iii.  1-5.  5.  By  the  character  of  the  Old  Testament  itself,  namely,  by  the 
relation  between  Abraham  with  the  promise,  and  Moses  with  the  law,  chap.  iii.  6-24.  6.  By 
the  proof  that  the  law,  as  a  schoolmaster,  has  been  abrogated  by  the  coming  of  Christ,  chap, 
iii.  2o-chap.  iv.  7.  Paul  then  makes  an  application  of  these  arguments :  1.  To  the  aberra- 
tion of  the  Galatians,  chap.  iv.  8-16.  2.  To  the  false  teachers,  vers.  17,  18.  3.  To  himself, 
and  his  disturbed  relation  to  them,  vers.  19,  20.  4.  His  address  to  the  sticklers  for  the  law, 
and  his  conviction  of  them  by  the  law,  chap.  iv.  21-27.  5.  His  address  to  the  brethren  in 
the  faith.  Reference  to  the  contradiction  between  the  bond  and  the  free,  vers.  28-31. — »De- 
velopment  of  the  final  theme :  Stand  fast  in  the  liberty  of  Christ,  a.  The  consequences  of 
legal  circumcision  maintained  as  a  doctrinal  principle,  chap.  v.  2-13.  b.  Warning  of  a  mis- 
conception and  abuse  of  freedom.  The  law,  in  its  truth,  is  transformed  into  the  law  of  love 
and  of  the  Spirit,  chap.  v.  14-24.  c.  The  evidence  of  the  life  in  the  Spirit  as  the  law  of 
freedom,  in  the  practice  of  the  virtues  of  love,  humility,  meekness,  etc.,  for  the  restoration 
of  true  conduct  by  all.  The  antagonism  between  sowing  to  the  flesh  and  sowing  to  the 
Spirit,  chap.  v.  25-chap.  vi.  11.  The  conclusion,  vers.  11-18  :  A  reminder  of  his  grief  which 
expressed  itself  also  in  a  repeated  warning,  preaching  of  the  cross,  and  a  conditional  invoca- 
tion of  blessing.  Reference  to  the  last  word,  ver.  17.  Appeal  to  their  spirit,  ver.  18.  There 
is  no  need  of  showing  how  perfectly  the  short  exordium — where  the  point  of  connection 
significantly  disappears  or  is  clothed  in  the  expression  of  surprise,  ver,  6 — corresponds  to  the 
whole  epistle. 

The  Epistles  to  the  Ephesians  and  Coi  ossians  represent  the  absolute  unity  in  Christ,  to 
which  all  the  faithful,  and  with  them  all  humanity  and  the  world,  are  called.  Their  differ- 
ence, however,  consists  in  this  :  the  Epistle  to  the  Colossians  derives  this  unity  from  the  fact 
that  Christ  is  the  principle,  the  dpxv^  of  all  life,  as  well  of  creation  as  of  resurrection ;  and 
this  is  done  in  opposition  to  the  Colossian  errorists  who,  with  Christ,  would  also  honor  the 
angels  as  vital  agents  and  mediators,  and  who  constructed  a  dualistic  antagonism  between 
spirit  and  matter.  The  Epistle  to  the  Ephesians,  on  the  other  hand,  represents  Christ  as  the 
reXos,  the  glorified  head,  in  whom  all  things  are  comprehended  after  the  eternal  purpose  of 
God.  Accordingly,  these  Epistles,  though  possessing  great  external  resemblance,  yet  stand 
in  an  internal  harmonious  contrast,  as   the  Alpha  and  Omega  in  Christ,  which  is  highlj 


22  THE   EPISTLE   OF   PAUL   TO   THE   ROJIANS 

adajitcd  to  explain  the  relation  of  the  elementary  points  of  agreement  and  disagreement 
among  the  synoptical  evangelists. 

The  Epistle  to  the  Colossians  institutes  as  its  fundamental  theme,  the  truth  :  Christ,  as 
the  image  of  God,  is  the  iif)X'')y  the  itpu)t6tukus,  the  author  both  of  the  first  creation  and  of 
the  second — the  resurrection,  chap.  i.  15-18.  To  this  the  final  theme  correspondp  :  Having 
risen  with  Christ,  look  forward  toward  the  heavenly  riches  in  the  glorified  Christ,  chap.  iii. 
1,  2.  Develoijmeut  of  the  fundamental  theme :  In  Christ  there  is  all  fulness.  Absolute 
reconciliation,  even  of  the  heathen,  for  the  evangelization  of  whom  the  Apostle  sutlers  and 
labors,  being  deeply  concerned  that  they  might  become  one  in  Christ.  Consequently,  he 
warns  them  against  false  teachers  who  make  divisions  between  Christ  and  the  angels,  Jewish 
Christians  and  Gentile  Christians,  spirit  and  body,  and  who,  by  a  false  spirituality,  fall  into 
carnal  lusts,  chap.  i.  19-cliap.  ii.  23.  The  final  theme :  Looking  for  the  unity  with  the 
heavenly  Christ  in  expectation  of  the  revelation  of  his  future  glory.  Inferences :  Laying 
aside  of  fleshly  lust.  Unity  in  the  life  of  the  new  man.  The  virtues  of  the  life  in  Christ. 
Sanctification  of  the  domestic  life,  of  a  home  to  the  unity  in  Christ.  Communion  of  prayer, 
also  with  the  Apostle  and  his  work.  The  proper  course  toward  the  world  in  accordance  with 
this  prayer,  chap.  iii.  1-chap.  iv.  6.  Conclusion :  Sending  of  Tychicus.  Recommendation 
of  Onesimus.  Greetings.  Occasion  of  community  of  life  with  the  Ejjhesian  circle,  vers. 
7-18.  The  conclusion  as  well  as  the  introduction  is  also  here  in  full  accordance  with  the 
fundamental  thought.  The  connecting  point  of  the  introduction  lies  in  chap  i.  4,  5,  together 
with  the  praise  of  Epaphras  and  the  invocation  of  blessing,  as  well  as  the  common  thanks- 
giving for  the  redemption  which  has  established  a  new  standpoint. 

The  fundamental  theme  of  the  Epistle  to  the  Epiiesians  represents  the  risen  and  glorified 
Christ  as  the  object  eternally  appointed,  and  openly  declared  such  by  the  calling  of  the 
faitiiful,  and  as  the  head  of  the  congregation  for  the  comprehension  and  unity  of  all  things, 
chap.  i.  20-23  (a  truth  designed  to  console  and  cheer  the  Church  of  Asia  Minor).  To  this 
the  final  theme  corresponds,  chap.  iv.  1-6.  The  unifying  power  of  Christ  declared  in  the 
fundamental  theme  has  shown  itself:  (a.)  In  the  heathen  becoming  with  the  Jews  one  house- 
hold of  God.  (I.)  It  exhibits  itself  in  the  joy  with  which  Paul,  in  conformity  with  the  mani- 
fest ation  of  the  eternal  mystery  of  their  election,  invites  them  to  the  gospel  salvation  and 
suflers  for  them.  It  should,  therefore,  manifest  itself  also  in  the  joy  and  hope  of  the  Ephe- 
sians.  Accordingly,  the  Ephesians,  chap.  iv.  1-6,  should  preserve  the  unity  of  the  Spirit,  (a.) 
The  gracious  gifts  of  the  individual,  as  an  assigned  endowment,  is  a  bond  of  unity  and  not  a 
ground  of  separation,  vers.  7-10.  (b.)  The  oflicial  organism  is  appointed  to  train  up  all  to  the 
perfect  manhood  of  the  body  of  Christ,  vers.  11-16.  (c.)  This  unity  requires  the  separation 
from  the  heathen  sinful  lusts  by  the  renewal  of  the  life,  chap.  iv.  17-chap.  v.  14.  (1.  Proper 
conduct  toward  every  man,  truth,  meekness,  justice,  chastity  of  speech,  spirituality,  free- 
dom from  ])assion,  kindness  and  philanthropy,  love.  2.  Avoiding  of  heathen  vices.)  ((/.)  It 
demands  prudence,  redemption  of  the  time,  caution,  and  a  zeal  which  does  not  come  from 
exciting  stimulants,  but  by  spiritual  songs  and  thanksgiving,  chap.  v.  15-20.  (e.)  It  demands 
reciprocal  submission  and  a  sacred  harmony  of  domestic  life,  chap.  v.  21-<'.hap.  vi.  9.  (,;'.)  It 
demands  watchfulness,  energy,  equipment,  self-defence,  and  war  against  the  kingdom  of 
Satan,  chap.  vi.  10-17.  On  the  other  hand,  the  advancement  of  the  kingdom  of  God  in  all 
saints  and  in  the  work  of  the  Apostle  by  prayer  and  intercession,  vers.  18-20.  The  conclusion 
characterizes  this  sermon  on  Christian  unity  as  a  message  for  solace  and  encouragenunt  by 
'J  ychicus,  in  connection  with  the  sutlerings  of  the  Apostle.  And  in  the  same  sense  must  we 
understand  the  magnificent  doxology  of  the  introduction,  with  its  invocation  of  blessings. 

In  the  Episthi  to  the  Philippians  the  difi'erence  between  the  didactic  and  parenetic  word 
appears  but  slightly,  since  the  entire  Epistle  is  pervaded  by  the  feeling  of  the  personal  com- 
munity of  the  Apostle  with  the  Church  at  Philippi.  Nevertheless,  even  here  it  may  be 
observed.  In  the  words,  chaj).  i.  8-11,  he  speaks  of  his  heart's  desire  that  his  dear  Church 
should  become  perfect  in  every  respect  unto  the  day  of  Christ;  that  it  might  alxiund  more 
and  more,  be  purified,  and  be  filled  unto  the  gloi^  of  God.     To  this  the  final  theme  corre- 


§   4.     THE    CHARACTER   OF   THE   PAULINE   EPISTLES.  23 

Bponds,  chap.  iv.  1.  The  call :  that  they  might  continue  to  be  his  joy  and  crovrn  in  the  Lord, 
The  fundamental  thought,  the  principal  theme,  discloses  itself  first  in  the  communication  of 
his  experience  at  Rome,  and  of  his  state  of  mind  in  consequence  thereof,  because  he  designed 
that  the  Philippians,  by  virtue  of  their  wider  unity  with  him,  should  avail  themselves  of  it  in 
their  own  experience,  chap.  i.  13-30.  Then  he  exhorts  them  to  improve  their  unity  by  meana 
of  the  humility  of  every  individual,  in  imitation  of  the  example  of  the  humble  self-huniiliatioa 
of  Christ — a  passage  which  gives  this  Epistle  a  specifically  christological  character,  though  it 
is  viewed  in  its  ethical  aspect  and  bearing,  chap.  ii.  1-11.  Next  to  humility,  the  Church 
should  increase  its  inner  spiritual  tension  and  efforts,  vers.  12-16,  stimulate  the  members  to 
rejoice  with  him, — for  which  purpose  he  will  also  send  Timothy  to  them,  as  he  sends  Epa- 
phroditus,  chap.  ii.  17-chap.  iii.  1.  But  then,  too,  the  experience  which  he  had  madb  m 
Rome  concerning  the  opposition  of  the  Judaizers  (chap.  i.  15)  causes  him  to  warn  tJtiem 
decidedly, — after  the  intimation  of  chap.  i.  28, — against  their  plots,  with  reference  to  hia  own 
relation  to  them,  chap.  iii.  2-6.  Then  follows  the  declaration  how  far  he  had  left  the  legalism 
of  these  ojjponents  behind  in  his  knowledge  of  Christ,  his  faith  in  justification  by  free  grace, 
and  his  struggle  after  perfection,  unto  the  resurrection  of  the  dead  and  the  life  in  heaven  ;  in 
which  resi^ect  they,  too,  should  be  his  comjjanions  against  the  enemies  of  the  cross  ot  Christ, 
chap.  iii.  7-21.  The  explication  of  the  final  word  indicates  pointedly  to  that  which  the 
Apostle  had  occasion  to  censure.  A  disagreement  between  Evodias  and  Syntyche  must  be 
removed  ;  elements  of  oppression,  bitterness,  anxiety,  and  division  must  disappear  ;  the  mem- 
bers must  be  like  the  Apostle  in  continual  striving  after  what  is  good,  chap.  iv.  2-9.  With 
this  reminder  the  Apostle  also  connects  a  high  recognition  of  the  Church's  Christian  life  of 
love,  which  it  had  shown,  now  as  before,  by  contributing  to  his  support — a  privilege  which 
he,  in  his  keen  sense  of  independence,  granted  to  no  other  congregation,  vers.  10-20.  The 
conclusion  corresponds,  with  his  invocation  of  blessing  (ver.  19),  to  the  fundamental  thought, 
and  with  his  greeting,  to  the  Tcey-note^  of  the  Epistle.    The  connecting  point  is  found  in  ver,  6. 

The  Epistles  to  the  Thessaloniaks.— The  First  Epistle  is  pervaded  by  the  fundamental 
thought :  Th^  Lard  will  come  speedily  ;  the  Second,  by  the  thought :  The  Lord  will  not  yet  come 
speedily.  Both  of  these  are  in  accordance  with  the  truth ;  because,  in  the  first  part,  the 
question  is  concerning  the  coming  of  the  Lord  in  his  dynamic  rule  in  a  religious  sense  ;  and 
in  the  second  part,  concerning  the  coming  of  the  Lord  in  a  definite  historical  and  chronologi- 
cal sense. 

The  theoretical  theme  of  the  First  Epistle  is  contained  in  the  words,  chap.  i.  9,  10 
(comp.  chap.  ii.  12,  16,  19,  etc.).  Accordingly,  the  whole  of  Christianity,  particularly  that  of 
the  Thessalonians,  is  eschatological  :  a  waiting  for  the  coming  of  the  Son  of  Oodfrom  heaven,  as 
the  Saviour  from  future  wrath,  (a.)  The  labors  of  Paul  among  them  have  corresponded  to 
this  waiting,  and  their  conduct  amid  the  persecutions  of  the  times  should  also  correspond  to 
it,  chap.  ii.  1-16.  (p.)  The  Apostle  has  been  careful  of  the  condition  and  steadfastness  of  the 
Church,  as  he  was  so  soon  separated  from  it.  His  propositions  to  visit  them  again.  The 
sending  of  Timothy.  He  has  been  encouraged  by  the  account  of  Timothy,  chajj.  ii.  17-chap. 
iii.  13.  (c.)  Admonition  of  the  true  course  of  conduct  in  that  expectation  (the  trae  "  saints 
of  the  last  day  ").  No  polygamy,  or  lust  of  the  flesh ;  no  separation  ;  no  excited  wandering 
about,  instead  of  quiet  labor,  chap.  iv.  1-12.  (d.)  Instruction  concerning  the  relation  of  those 
who  are  asleep  to  the  coming  of  the  Lord,  chap.  iv.  13-18.  (e.)  The  question  after  the  times 
and  seasons.  Answer :  As  a  thief  in  the  night,  chap.  v.  1-3.  The  practical  theme  :  Watch, 
chap.  V.  4.  Development :  According  to  your  spiritual  nature  ;  your  daily  life  ;  your  calling ; 
your  relation  to  Christ.  Inferences  :  chap.  v.  5-22.  Conclusion  :  The  invocation  of  blessing 
in  harmony  with  the  fundamental  thoughts,  ver.  23.  Connecting  point  of  the  introduction. 
The  Thessalonians  are  successors  of  the  apostles  and  of  the  Lord  by  the  joy  of  their  faith, 
according  to  their  hope  amid  many  tribulations,  chap.  i.  3-6. 

In  the  Second  Epistle  to  the  Thessalonians  the  fundamental  thought  appears :  that 
the  judgment  of  the  Lord  upon  the  world  will  first  be  matured — in  consequence  of  the  per- 
secution of  the  Christians ;   and  the  worthiness  of  the  faithful  must  be  assured  before  th» 


24  THE   EPISTLE   OF   PAUL   TO   THE    ROMANS. 

Lord  will  come  for  the  execution  of  the  final  judgment  and  for  the  redemption  of  his  chil- 
dren, chap.  i.  5-8.  (a.)  Fuller  declaration  as  to  how  the  maturing  of  the  judgment  is  con- 
nected with  the  maturing  of  the  faithful,  chap.  i.  9-12.  (b.)  Warning  against  chiliastic  de- 
lusions, as  if  the  day  of  the  Lord  were  at  hand  in  a  chronological  sense,  chap.  ii.  1,  2.  (c.)  How 
the  whole  development  of  unbelief  and  apostasy  must  jirecede  the  appearance  of  Antichrist 
(comp.  Matt.  xxiv.  24 ;  the  Revelation),  chap,  ii,  3-14.  The  final  word,  chap.  ii.  15  :  Stead- 
fastness, according  to  his  instructions.  Inferences  :  Prayer  lor  the  mission  of  the  gospel ;  love 
and  patience,  discipline,  industry,  beneficence,  and  stability.  The  handwriting  of  Paul  him- 
self as  a  warning  against  chiliastic  delusions.  The  connecting  point  of  the  introduction : 
The  endurance  of  the  Thessalonians  in  their  faith,  in  the  midst  of  the  persecutions,  chap.  i.  4. 

The  Pastouai,  Epistles  constitute  so  far  a  parallel  to  the  Epistles  to  the  Corinthians,  aa 
that  the  First  Epistle  to  Timothy,  and  the  Epistle  to  Titus,  teach,  accorduig  to  the  analogy 
of  the  First  Epistle  to  the  Corinthians,  how  the  congregation  should  be  officially  watched, 
directed,  and  further  develoi^ed.  In  the  Second  Epistle  to  Timothy,  on  the  contrary,  Paul,  in 
anticipation  of  his  martyrdom,  instructs  his  pupil  to  become,  in  his  official  work,  his  spiritual 
successor,  and  thus  to  reproduce  the  life-picture  of  the  apostolic  office  which  is  portrayed  in 
the  Second  Epistle  to  the  Corinthians. 

The  theme  of  the  First  Epistle  to  Timothy  is  the  renewed  scriptural  transmissitw  of  the 
Divine  commission  which  the  Apostle  received  when  he  was  called  to  establish  the  rtal  life 
of  faith  and  of  the  Church,  to  Timothy,  his  substitute  in  Ei)hesus  for  that  special  sphere, 
chap.  i.  18.  According  to  the  measure  of  this  coinmission  he  expresses  a  wish  in  the  greeting 
that  he  might  possess  a  rich  measure  of  grace,  chap.  i.  1,  2.  Accordingly,  he  should  remain 
in  Ephesus  and  watch  over  and  protect  the  i^ure  doctrine  against  Judaistic  errors  and  the 
germs  of  Gnosticism.  The  object  of  the  preservation  of  orthodoxy  was  the  edification  of 
the  Church  in  piety  and  pure  love.  The  pure  doctrine  should  maintain  a  jjure  heart,  a  pure 
conscience,  and  a  jjure  faith,  ver.  5.  The  immediate  occasion  was  chiefly  the  Judaizing 
Christian  zealots  for  the  law.  Therefore  the  Apostle  characterizes  his  relation  to  the  law. 
If  he  lays  great  stress  on  the  fact  that  he,  too,  had  once  been  a  blasphemer  and  a  persecutor, 
he  at  the  same  time  gives  his  true  estimate  of  that  zeal  for  the  latter,  and  declares  how  he  has 
been  led  beyond  it,  by  the  mercy  of  God,  to  become  an  example  of  faith,  whose  defence  he 
now  gives  over  by  letter  to  Timothy.  This  official  call  is  a  call  {a.)  to  conflict,  because  the 
apostates  oppose  the  faithful,  vers.  18,  20.  (6.)  To  the  demand  for  universal  lo>e  and  inter- 
ceesion  for  all  sorts  and  conditions  of  men  {in  opposition  to  Jewish  particularisnt),  chap.  ii.  1-7. 
(c.)  To  the  furtherance  of  universal  custom,  according  to  which  the  women  should  not  dare 
to  announce  themselves  as  (Judaizing)  prophetesses,  vers.  8-15.  ((/.)  To  the  promotion  of 
the  true  organization  of  the  congregation.  1.  The  bishop,  or,  which  is  the  same  thing,  the 
presbyter  and  his  house.  2.  The  deacon  and  the  deaconess.  3.  The  management  of  the 
house  of  God  in  general,  according  to  its  divine  nature,  chap.  iii.  («.)  Jb'or  the  settlement 
and  fighting  of  the  germs  of  error  which  might  ripen  in  the  future.  Gnostic  errors  and 
principles,  chap.  iv.  1-11.  (/.)  For  the  self-guidance  of  the  ecclesiastical  officer,  chap.  iv. 
12-16.  (g.)  For  the  proper  conduct  toward  every  one,  especially  according  to  the  distinction 
of  old  and  young  with  reference  to  the  service  of  the  congregation  (the  men,  women,  and 
widows).  Special  direction  on  the  treatment  of  the  widows  in  general,  especially  on  the 
employment  of  the  old  widows  for  the  good  of  the  congregation.  Special  direction  on  the 
proper  treatment  and  distinction  of  the  elders,  as  well  as  on  the  proper  prudence  at  the 
appointment  and  ordination  for  offices.  Care  over  his  own  deportment  and  health  (chap.  v. 
24,  25,  is  said  with  reference  to  the  trial,  ver.  22).  Care  of  the  servants  in  the  Church,  chap, 
V.  1-vi.  2.  The  final  statement,  chap,  iv,  3-5.  Inferences :  Doctrinal  disputes,  and  theu 
worhlly  motive,  vers.  5-10.  Renewed  inculcation  of  the  command  (commission),  vers.  12; 
16,     Concluding  word,  vers.  17-21, 

The  Epistle  to  Titus.  The  commission  which  the  Apostle  gave  to  Titus  for  Crete,  is 
differently  expressed  from  that  given  to  Timothy  for  Ephesus.  His  chief  task  was  the 
»ppointment  of  presbyters  in  the  single  congregations,  together  with  a  further  development 


§   4.     THE    CHARACTER   OF   THE   PAULINE   EPISTLES.  2» 

of  the  Church  at  Crete,  chap.  i.  5.  Accordingly,  the  Apostle  describes  first  of  all  tha 
requisites  of  elders,  with  reference,  no  doubt,  to  the  new  experiences  at  Crete,  and  also  the 
intrusion  of  Judaizing  seducers,  chap.  i.  6-16.  Then  the  proper  care  of  the  congregation, 
and  pastoral  work  of  Titus,  with  reference  to  special  relations,  ages,  and  classes  of  society, 
chap.  ii.  1-15.  Finally,  the  guidance  of  Christian  Cretans  into  proper  conduct,  especially  in 
regard  to  the  avoiding  of  a  disturbing,  quarrelsome,  and  passionate  spirit  with  reference  to 
the  goodness  of  God  in  Christ,  chap.  iii.  1-7.  The  Ajjostle  confirms  this  direction  by  his 
final  tlieiiie,  chap.  iii.  8.  It  is  in  accordance  with  his  statement  of  the  requisites  of  the  pres- 
byters, chap.  i.  9,  10,  that  he  forbids  him  from  meddling  with  the  scholastic  controversies  of 
the  errorists,  especially  the  legalists ;  and  admonishes  him  first  to  deal  practically  with  secta- 
rian men,  and  then  to  avoid  them,  vers.  9-11.  The  concluding  word  :  The  sending  of  Tychi- 
cus,  special  appointments,  and  greetings.  The  introduction  is  an  expression  of  the  Apostle's 
authority,  and  of  the  authorization  of  Titus, 

The  Second  Epistle  to  Timothy  was  designed,  as  has  been  already  said,  to  conduct 
Timothy  furtlier  into  his  official  life,  so  that  he,  as  the  favorite  spiritual  son  of  the  Apostle, 
might  enter  into  the  footsteps  of  the  latter  after  his  departure  from  this  world.  This  is 
exj)ressed  by  the  fundamental  thought,  chap.  i.  6-8.  The  Apostle  strengthens  this  funda 
mental  thought,  first,  (a.)  By  God's  call  to  be  saved,  vers.  9,  10.  (&.)  By  his  own  call  to  be 
the  Apostle  to  the  Gentiles,  vers.  11,  12.  (c.)  By  Timothy's  relation  as  a  scholar  to  him,  vers. 
13,  14.  (d.)  By  reference  to  the  unfaithful  and  the  true,  vers.  15-18.  He  then  develops  the 
fundamental  thoughts,  (a.)  He  must  be  strengthened  by  faithful  co-workers,  chap.  ii.  1,  2. 
(b.)  His  readiness  to  sufler,  and  his  endurance,  after  the  example  of  Paul  in  imitation  of 
Christ,  vers.  3-13.  (c.)  Shunning  the  spirit  of  controversy.  The  injurious  fruits  of  the  same 
must  be  perceived  (Hymenaeus,  Philetus) ;  and  oppositions  and  distinctions  in  God's  house 
must  be  rightly  understood.  Timothy  must  avoid  impure  persons,  and  all  lusts  and  fruitless 
scholastic  controversies ;  he  must  honor,  instruct,  and  restrain  in  the  proper  spirit,  chap,  il 
14-26.  The  Apostle  exhibits,  finally,  the  fundamental  thought  by  contrasting  the  future 
condition  of  the  errorists  and  that  of  the  apostolic  disciple.  The  latter  shall  stand  fast  in 
the  tradition  of  Paul — that  is,  in  the  New  Testament,  and  in  the  Holy  Scriptures— that  is, 
the  Old  Testament,  chap.  iii.  The  final  proposition,  chap.  iv.  1,  2,  is  a  solemn  transfer  of  his 
commission  to  the  beloved  disciple.  Exposition :  The  future  of  the  errorists  and  of  the 
errors  requires  true  apostolic  men.  Timothy  must  stand  firm  in  the  critical  times,  because  his 
teacher  is  about  to  depart,  vers.  3-9.  But  Timothy  must  soon  come  to  him,  since  he  is  almost 
isolated.  Account  of  his  condition,  vers.  9-18.  Concluding  word,  invocation  of  blessings, 
supplements,  and  greetings.  The  introduction  is  in  harmony  with  the  Epistle  ;  an  expression 
of  intimate  relationship  between  the  teacher  and  the  disciple,  and  of  reliance  on  the  inner 
call  of  the  latter.  As  a  legacy  in  anticipation  of  early  death,  the  Second  Epistle  to  Timothy 
is  related  to  the  Second  Epistle  of  Peter, 

The  single  portions  of  the  Epistle  to  Philemon  group  themselves  about  the  recommenda- 
tion that  Onesimus  be  received  again,  vers.  10-12.  The  preceding  parts  are  chiefly  introduc- 
tory to  this  central  point ;  the  subsequent  verses  are  the  amplification.  The  conclusion,  like 
the  introduction,  refers  to  the  call  of  Paul  and  the  congregation  at  Colosse. 

The  directness  of  the  Apostle,  which  is  peculiar  to  him  as  a  religious  and  also  as  a  truly 
Hebrew  genius,  may  be  regarded  as  resulting  from  an  intuitive  state  of  mind ;  yet,  in  this 
respect,  he  stands  below  the  festive  contemplation  of  John,  for  the  reason  that  he,  being 
endowed  with  greater  energy,  exhibits  a  more  fervent  zeal  and  a  more  practical  turn.  The 
style  of  John  reminds  us,  therefore,  of  the  most  spiritual  poesy ;  that  of  Paul,  on  the  other 
hand,  of  the  most  fiery  eloquence.  The  culture  of  the  latter  conforms  to  this  view.  Already 
in  the  school  of  the  rabbis  he  had  learned  the  rabbinical,  reflective  form  of  thought — a  system 
of  dialectics  which  proceeds  by  questions,  objections,  and  answers,  and  by  deductiones  ad 
absurdum  from  the  history  of  theocracy.  But  by  his  intercourse  with  the  Greeks  he  had  also 
learned  the  Grecian  method  of  reasoning,  which  meets  us,  for  example,  in  1  Cor.  xv.  His 
own  manner  of  expression  was,  however,  modified  by  two  elements,  which  must  be  taken  into 


26  THE   EPISTLE   OF   PAUL   TO   THE   ROMANS. 


proper  account,  if  one  would  get  rid  of  the  unfounded  prejudice  concerning  the  alleged 
burdened  periods  and  obscure  abruptness  of  the  Apostle. 

The  first  element  is  the  liturgical,  which  arose  in  part  from  devotional  reminiscences,  and 
in  part  from  prayerful  attitudes  of  unusual  depth,  and  from  a  lofty,  adoring  condition  of  hia 
heart.  The  lituro'ical  form  frequently  transcends  the  historical  and  dialectical  structure  of 
the  periods,  and  this,  too,  in  consequence  of  that  continuity  of  devotional  feeling  which  moves 
through  a  succession  of  rhythmic  pauses.  "We  may  refer  to  Psalms  cvii.  and  cxxxvi.  as 
Bpeciuicns. 

The  most  important  form  of  this  character  is  the  long  sentence  at  the  beginning  of  the 
Epistle  to  the  Ephesians,  vers.  3-14,  which  has  often  been  misjudged  by  the  Grecian  standard, 
.  and  caused  so  many  glosses.     We  read  it  liturgically  as  follows  : 

Blessed  be  the  God  and  Father  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ : 

Who  bath  blessed  us  with  all  spiritual  blessings  in  heavenly  places  (things)  in  Christ : 
According  as  He  hath  chosen  us  in  him,  before  the  foundation  of  the  world : 
That  we  should  be  holy  and  without  blame  before  Him  in  love : 
Having  predestinated  us  unto  the  adoption  of  children  by  Jesus  Christ  to  Himself: 
According  to  the  good  pleasure  of  his  will — to  the  praise  of  the  glory  of  his  grace — 
Wherein  (in  which  grace)  He  hath  made  us  accepted  (called)  in  the  Beloved  : 
In  whom  (the  Beloved)  we  have  redemption  through  his  blood,  the  forgiveness  of  suis : 
According  to  the  riches  of  his  grace  (—justification — ) ; 

Wherein  (in  which  grace)  He  hath  abounded  toward  us  in  all  wisdom  and  prudence  ( — the  glorifica- 
tion on  the  intellectual  side — ) ; 

Having  made  known  unto  us  the  mystery  of  his  will,  according  to  his  good  pleasure — 

Which  (good  pleasure)  He  hath  purposed  in  himself,  in  the  dispensation  of  the  fulness  of  times  (epochs, 

KCUpoi)  '. 

That  He  might  gather  together  in  one  all  things  in  Christ,  both  which  (all  things)  are  in  heaven,  and 
which  (all  things)  are  on  earth,  even  in  Him  : 

In  whom  also  we  have  obtained  an  inheritance,  being  predestinated  according  to  the  purpose  of  Him 
who  worketh  all  things  after  the  counsel  of  his  own  will : 

That  we  should  be  to  the  praise  of  his  glory,  who  first  trusted  in  Christ : 

In  whom  ye  also  trusted,  after  that  ye  heard  the  word  of  truth,  the  gospel  of  your  salvation : 

In  whom  also,  after  that  ye  believed,  ye  were  sealed  with  that  Holy  Spirit  of  promise  ( — which  was 
effective  also  in  the  Old  Testament  promise — )  : 

Which  is  the  earnest  of  our  inheritance  ( — the  common  inheritance  of  God's  people — )  until  the  re- 
demption (full  liberation)  of  the  purchased  possession  ( — from  among  the  Jews  and  Gentiles — ) : 

Unto  the  praise  of  his  glory  ! 

In  the  exposition  of  the  Epistle  to  the  Komans,  we  shall  make  the  observation  that  the 
difficulty  in  its  concluding  words  can  only  be  solved  by  viewing  them  as  a  liturgical  form 
(already  indicated  in  our  statement  of  its  contents)  ;  just  as  the  difficulty  in  Rom.  ix.  5  can 
only  be  explained  by  the  assumption  of  a  liturgical  reminiscence. 

In  the  place  of  the  burdened  periods,  therefore,  we  substitute  lyrical  expressions  which 
are  liturgically  simple,  and  in  place  of  most  of  the  supposed  anacolutha,  vital  and  vigorous 
brevities.  As  the  former  arose  from  the  religious  school  and  sentiment  of  the  Apostle,  so  the 
latter  came  from  his  fervid  vivacity  and  his  rapid,  ecstatic  feeling  in  the  midst  of  his  daily 
work.  In  the  preceding  doxology  we  must  supply  a  brief  statement  in  place  of  an  apparent 
want  of  connection  (ver.  13).  Such  abridged  sentences  are  especially  noticeable  in  the  second 
chapter  of  the  Epistle  to  the  Romans,  where,  in  vers.  28  and  29,  the  expressions  'lovbuws  and 
irtpiTonii  have  to  be  repeated.  Therefore,  with  Cocceius,  in  Rom.  v.  12,  we  simply  take  the 
(Kafioiifv  from  ver.  11,  and  put  it  into  ver.  12,  in  order  to  explain  the  much-discussed  anaco- 
luthon  (Sia  toCto  f'Xii^o^f j/)  ;  whereby  it  is  to  be  observed  that  Paul  used  the  word  \a)x^avfiv 
emphatically  in  the  sense  of  a  personal,  moral  appropriation,  to  which  the  <0'  <u  Tiuvra  rjiiapTav 
in  ver.  12  corresponds. 

We  can,  in  the  main,  only  repeat  here  the  characteristics  already  referred  to.  As  far  as  the 
Apostle's  method  of  representation  is  concerned,  the  peculiar  feature  of  the  so-called  Pauline 
rhetoric  must  be  found  in  the  union  of  the  strictest  methodical  progress  of  thought  with  the 
richest  concrete  expression ;  the  union  of  a  wonderful,  intuitive  dei)th  with  the  most  vcrsarile 
dialectics,   of  an  exalted  contemplation  with  the  most  mighty  practical  tendency,  of   the 


§   6.     THE  PAULINE   THEOLOGY.  27 

most  comprehensive  view  witli  the  most  minute  observation,  of  a  flight  of  diction  ofteis 
lyrical  and  festive  with  the  severest  didactic  distinctions,  of  the  most  original  power  ot 
creating  language  (vid.  the  ana^  Xeyoneva  of  the  Apostle)  with  the  most  felicitous  use  of 
conventional  expressions. 

On  the  style  of  Paul  much  has  been  written,  from  St,  Jerome  down  to  C.  L.  Baur's 
Bhetorica  Paulina,  1782,  and  later  works.  Comp.  the  literature  in  Guericke,  Isagogih,  p.  289 
[p.  278  of  the  3d  ed.,  1868,— P.  S.] ;  Retjss,  p.  64;  Schaff,  Histary  of  the  Apost.  Church, 
§  153,  p.  611  ff.,  and  Bern.  Alb.  Lasonder,  Disquisitio  de  Linguce  Paulinm  Idiomate,  Trajecti 
ad  Rhenum,  1866. 

§  5.    THE   PAULINE   THEOLOGY. 

The  doctrinal  system  of  the  Pauline  writings,  as  to  its  traditional  or  retrospective  side,  is 
connected  with  the  system  of  James  through  that  of  Peter ;  and,  as  to  its  universal  and 
prospective  side,  with  the  doctrinal  type  of  John  through  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews.  We 
must  maintain  at  the  outset,  on  the  one  hand,  the  essential  identity  of  the  Pauline  doctrine 
with  that  of  all  the  apostles  (against  the  view  of  Baur  and  the  Tubingen  School)  ;  and,  on 
the  other  hand,  the  most  marked  peculiarity  of  the  Pauline  manner  of  contemijlation  and 
form  of  expression.  We  agree  with  Neander  that  Paul  gives  us  a  more  fully  developed 
system  of  theology  than  any  other  apostle ;  but  we  confine  this  to  the  form  merely.  For,  as 
regards  the  matter  of  thought,  John  evidently  represents  the  perfection  of  New  Testament 
theology. 

The  peculiar  character  of  Paulinism  has  been  diversely  construed.  We  find  it  in  the  idea 
that  Christ,  as  the  Son  of  God  and  Saviour  of  the  world,  who  finished  His  historical  work 
by  His  atoning  death  and  glorious  resurrection,  is  the  absolutely  new  man,  and,  as  such,  the 
principle  of  a  new  spiritual  creation  in  man  {Kati/fj  kt'ktu)  ;  that  He  is,  retrospectively,  or  in 
His  relation  to  the  past,  the  principle  of  the  election  of  the  faithful  as  it  began  to  be  actual- 
ized in  the  creation  of  the  world,  in  their  appointment  to  salvation,  and  in  their  holy  calling ; 
and  that  He  is,  prospectively,  or  in  His  relation  to  the  future,  the  principle  of  a  new  justifica- 
tion before  God,  of  a  new  law  of  the  soul,  of  a  new  life,  of  a  new  humanity,  which,  in  and 
with  Him,  died  because  of  the  universal  guilt  of  the  old  race,  but  which,  being  reconciled  to 
God  by  the  atoning  death  of  Christ,  rose  with  Him  to  a  new  and  heavenly  life.* 

Note. — It  is  utterly  foolish  to  assign  to  Paul,  as  some  have  done,  a  middle  position  between 
the  recognition  of  the  Old  Testament — with  the  Jewish  apostles — and  the  Gnostic  Marcion. 
Paul,  in  his  own  way,  is  just  as  much  a  believer  in  the  Old  Testament  as  James  (comp.  Rom. 
iv.,  Gal.  iii.,  and  other  passages).  Only  his  special  calling  was  the  apostleship  to  the  Gentiles, 
with  its  antithesis  to  Pharisseism  and  to  the  letter  of  the  law,  as  well  as  with  its  principle  of 
the  perfect  freedom  of  the  gospel  in  Christ.  Christ  was,  to  the  Apostle,  the  religious  law — 
the  law  of  the  Spirit.  The  external  law  was  to  him,  in  a  religious  relation,  only  a  pedagogic 
or  educational  symbol,  and  was  ethically  limited  by  the  religious  principle — Christ.  For  this 
reason  he  spii-itualized  the  Old  Testament  word  (Gal.  iii.  24),  the  Jewish  theology,  and  even 
the  Jewish  rabbinical  dialectics,  and  converted  them  into  an  instrument  of  Christian  doctrine 
and  instruction.  He  did  the  same  thing  with  the  fundamental  forms  of  Grecian  and  Roman 
culture  (see  Acts  xvii. ;  Rom.  xiii.  1  flf.) 

$   6.    THE  literature   ON    THE   EPISTLES  AND   ON   THE   THEOLOGY   OF   PAUL. 

Comprehensive  lists  of  the  literature  in  question  are  given  at  the  close  of  §  2  (p.  14).  The 
works  on  New  Testament  theology,  and  on  the  doctrines  and  writings  of  the  apostles,  by  Lux- 
TERBECK  {The  New  Testament  Systems),  by  Neander,  Schafp,  Messner,  Lechler,  and  others, 
belong  in  this  place.  [Among  English  works  of  this  class,  Thos.  D.  Bernard,  The  Progress 
rf  Doctrine  in  the  K  T.  (Bampton  Lectures  for  1864),  2d  ed.  Lond.,  1866,  is  especially  deserv- 
ing of  notice. — P.  S.]     Then  come  the  prominent  writings  on  the  Pauline  system  in  particu- 

*  Comp.  my  Apost.  Age,  ii.  p.  586,  and  Lechler's  review  of  the  different  representations  of  the  Pauline  system,  ia 
tliB  work  on  the  Apost.  and  Poat-Apost.  Age,  p.  18, 


28  THE   EPISTLE    OF    PAUL   TO    TECE    ROMANS. 

lar,  by  Meyer,  Usteri,  Hemsen,  Schrader,  Dahne,  and  relatively  Kostlin  {The  System  of 
tfie  Go»]iel,  and  the  Epistles  of  John,  and  kindred  New  Testament  Systems).  Bacr,  The  ApostU 
Paul  [2d  edition,  by  Zeller,  1867].  Also,  Ewald,  The  Epistles  of  the  Apiostle  Paul,  Trans- 
lated and  EjcpJained,  GOttingen,  1857.  Simar,  The  Theology  of  St.  Paul,  Freiburg,  1864 
(Roman  Catholic).  Next  come  the  works  on  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles,  especially  the  Com- 
mentary by  Leciiler  and  Gerock  [translated  for  the  Am.  ed.  of  this  "  Biblework,"  w  ith  addi- 
tions by  Charles  F.  Schaeffer].  The  treatises  on  Paul  and  his  theology,  in  a  broad  and 
narrow  sense,  are  extremely  numerous.  We  may  mention  Scharling,  De  Paulo  Apostolo, 
^usque  adversariis,  commentatio,  Havnise,  1836 ;  Tischendorf,  Doctrina  Pauli  de  vi  mortit 
Christi  satisfactoria.  Lips.,  l-SS?  ;  Rabiger  De  Christologia  Paulina  contra  Buurium,  Vratislav,, 
1846 ;  HoLSTEN,  On  the  Word  a-iip^,  Rostock,  1855 ;  Hebart,  The  Natural  Theology  of  the 
Apostle  Paul,  Nurnberg,  1860 ;  Lipsius,  The  Pauline  Doctrine  of  Justifc<ttion,  etc.,  portrayed 
accarding  to  the  four  chief  Epistles  of  the  Apostle,  Leijizig,  1853  ;  Lamping,  PauU  de  prcBdesti- 
natione  <Z«€rcto,  Leuwarden,  1857;  Beyschlag,  On  the  Christology  of  Paul ;  Bi.kv^k,  Lectures 
on  the  Golossians,  etc.  Berlin,  1865.  [Conybeare  and  Howson,  Life  and  Epistles  of  St.  Paul, 
Lond.  and  New  York,  1853,  etc.,  2  vols,  (three  rival  editions  published  in  America,  two  of 
the  popular  abridgment  in  1  vol.,  1869)  ;  Bungener,  St.  Paul,  sa  vie,  son  ceuvre  et  ses  epitres, 
Paris,  1867 ;  H.  F.  L.  Ernesti,  The  Ethics  of  the  Apostle  Paul,  Braunschweig,  1868  (154  pp.). 
—P.  S.] 

Homiletic  and  Ascetic  Literature  on  the  Epistles  op  Paul. — Bengel,  Periphrasia 
of  tTie  14  Epp.  of  Paul ;  Schalch,  Practical  Exposition  of  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles,  in  Sermons, 
Schaff  hauseu,  1839 ;  Stier,  Discourses  of  the  Apostles,  2  parts,  Leipzig,  1829  and  1830  ;  Thiess, 
The  Journey  from  Jerusalem  to  Danmscus ;  Gallery  of  Pauline  Seiinojis,  Schleswig,  1841 ; 
CocARD,  Sermons  on  the  Conversion  of  the  Apostle  Paul,  Berlin,  1833 ;  Blunt,  The  Life  of  the 
Apostle  Paul,  24  Treatises,  translated  from  the  English,  Meissen,  1861.  Comp.  also  the  serial 
sermons  on  the  pericopes,  or  Scripture  lessons,  many  of  which  are  selected  from  the  Epistlea 
of  Paul.  Among  these  we  may  mention  the  collections  of  Harms,  L.  Hofacker,  Kapp, 
Mynster,  Ranke,  Stier,  Nitzsch,  Deichert,  etc.  Finally,  we  must  remember  the  Reperto- 
ries by  Brandt,  Lisco,  ScHALiiER,  and  others. 


§  1.     ROME,   AND   ITS  SIGNIFICANCE.  29 


II.     SPECIAL  INTRODUCTION.— THE  EPISTLE   OF  PAUL  TO  THE   ROMANS. 

§  1.     ROME,  AND   ITS  SIGNIFICANCE. 

As  the  light  and  darkness  of  Judaism  was  centralized  in  Jerusalem,  the  theocratic  city  of 
G-od  (the  holy  city,  the  murderer  of  the  prophets),  so  was  heathen  Rome,  the  humanitarian 
metropolis  of  the  world,  the  centre  of  all  the  elements  of  light  and  darkness  prevalent  in  the 
heathen  world ;  and  so  did  Christian  Rome  become  the  centre  of  all  the  elements  of  vital 
light,  and  of  all  the  antichristian  darkness  in  the  Christian  Church.  Hence  Rome,  like  Jeru- 
salem, does  not  only  possess  a  unique  historical  siguilicance,  but  is  a  universal  picture 
operative  through  all  ages.  Christian  Rome,  especially,  stands  forth  as  a  shining  ideal  of  the 
nations,  which  is  turned  into  an  idol  of  magical  strength  to  those  who  are  subject  to  its  rule. 

The  old  heathen  Rome,  as  the  residence  and  centre  of  the  universal  Roman  monarchy, 
came,  as  Hegel  says,  like  the  destroying  tragical  Fate  upon  the  glory  of  the  ancient  world. 
But  the  same  Rome  which,  as  the  unconscious  instrument,  executed  the  Divine  judgments 
upon  all  the  centres  of  ancient  civilization,  became  also  the  spiritual  heiress,  the  emporium 
and  centre  of  all  the  secular  culture  of  antiquity,  and  the  preliminary  condition  and  basis  for 
the  universal  development  of  the  congregation  of  Christ  into  the  Catholic  Church. 

Rome  was  the  end  of  the  old  heathen  world,  and  for  this  reason  it  became  the  beginning, 
the  universal  home  and  point  of  departure  of  the  new  Catholic  Christian  world — a  Janus 
temple  on  a  large  scale.  It  was  Rome's  appointed  mission  to  effect  the  union  of  the  Gentile 
and  Jewish  churches,  the  union  of  theocratic  faith  and  humanitarian  culture,  the  union  of  the 
Christian  East  and  West,  the  union  of  the  old  civilized  nations  and  the  wandering  bar- 
barians ;  and  (in  historical  reflection  of  the  pedagogic  Mosaism  of  the  Old  Testament  (Gal. 
iii.)  to  carry  on  the  pedagogic,  legal,  and  symbolical  ofBce  of  training  the  nations  of  young 
Christian  catechumens  into  a  ripe  age  of  faith. 

But  as  the  Roman  genius  was  unable  to  thoroughly  apj)ropriate  and  reproduce  the  ancient 
culture,  especially  in  its  Grecian  glory,  so  was  it  unable  to  comprehend  Christianity  in  all  its 
fundamental  depth,  and  to  give  it  ecclesiastical  shape  and  form.  Its  calling  was,  to  popular- 
ize the  old  literary  treasures,  as  well  as  the  treasures  of  Christian  faith,  according  to  the 
necessity  of  the  barbarians,  and  to  adjust  them  to  their  dawning  intellect.  As  soon  as  Rome 
had  succeeded  in  bringing  its  pupils  to  a  point  of  maturity,  its  status  of  culture  was  sur- 
passed, in  a  secular  sense,  by  the  revival  of  Grecian  letters  [in  the  fifteenth  century],  and  in  a 
spiritual  sense,  by  the  evangelical  confession  [in  the  sixteenth].  Rome,  however,  has  never 
recognized  its  bounds,  nor  the  limits  of  its  endowment  and  mission.  In  the  same  proportion 
in  which  it  has  been  eclipsed,  it  has  resisted  every  progressive  movement  with  the  fanaticism 
of  contracted  egotism,  and  has  thus  incurred  the  judgment  of  history. 

Rome  appears  first  within  the  horizon  of  the  Old  Testament  apocalyptic  prophecies  as  a 
dismal  picture  of  the  future,  in  the  prophet  Daniel,  chap.  vii.  7  S.  The  fourth  beast  of 
Daniel's  vision — notwithstanding  all  modern  objections — can  only  be  the  universal  Roman 
monarchy.  This  is  evident  certainly  from  the  fact,  among  others,  that  the  third  universal 
monarchy,  the  Macedonian  (Daniel,  chaps,  vii.  and  viii.),  is  marked  by  the  same  symbolical 
number  four  ;  apart  from  the  consideration  that  the  portrayed  antichristianity,  chap,  vii.,  is 
eschatological,  while  the  antichristianity  of  chap.  viii.  9  can  only  be  a  typical  prelude — the 
antitheocracy  of  Antiochus  Epiphanes.  And  as  Rome  appears  first  in  the  Bible  in  a  prophetic 
light,  so  does  it  appear  last  in  a  prophetic  light,  in  the  Apocalypse  (chap.  xvii.).  There,  it 
destroys  every  thing  as  the  instrument  of  judgment ;  here,  it  is  destroyed  as  an  object  of 
judgment.  The  first  historical  connection  of  Israel  with  Rome  was  a  friendly  one,  1  Maccab. 
viii.  aud  xii.  In  the  apocryphal  period,  Judea  was  made  a  dependence  of  Rome  by  Pompey ; 
and  the  same  man  laid  the  foimdation  of  the  Jewish  colony  in  Rome,  which,  though  in  a 


80  THE   EPISTLE    OF   PAJL    TO   THE   ROMANS. 

pitiable  condition,  yet  had  the  high  and  universal  mission  to  mediate  the  transition  of  Chris 
tianity  from  Jerusalem  and  Antioch  to  Rome  (see  Acta  xxviii.). 

Comp.  the  article  Itom  in  Winer's  Beat- Lexicon,  in  Zellek's  BibliscJiem  Worterbuch  (^Itomer, 
Ri/merbrief,  Bam),  and  in  Herzog's  Beal-Eiicyclopddie.  Special  works  on  Rome  have  been 
written  by  Piranesi,  Platner,  Bunsen,  Gerhard,  Canina,  Becker,  Fourkier,  Grego- 
Bovius,  etc.  Special  evangelical  essays  :  Chantepie  de  la  Saussaye,  Troi»  Sermons  sur 
Borne,  Leyder,  1855  ;  Schroder,  Aus  14  Tagen  in  Bom,  Elberfeld,  1861.  [Alfred  von  Reu- 
iiONT,  GescMcIite  der  Stadt  Bom,  Berlin,  1867  sqq.,  3  large  vols. ;  a  learned,  able  and  iuterest- 
Vng  work,  by  one  who  resided  many  years  in  Rome,  and  had  every  facility  for  his  task. — P.  S.] 

I  2.     THE  EOMAN  CONGREGATION. 

The  first  beginnings  of  the  congregation  of  Roman  Christians  cannot  be  historical!} 
determined.  The  primitive  Christian  tradition  has  placed  the  first  existence  of  the  Church, 
or,  at  any  rate,  the  first  preaching  of  Christ  in  Rome,  even  as  far  back  as  the  days  of  the 
earthly  life  of  Christ.  It  is  said  that  the  wonderful  career  of  Jesus  in  Judea  was  first  made 
known  by  rumors,  then  by  various  eye-witnesses,  and  then  by  Barnabas  (see  Clemens  Rom., 
Becognit.  i.  6  sqq.)* 

This  old  Christian  legend  is  closely  followed  by  the  Romish  ecclesiastical  tradition,  ac- 
cording to  which  the  Apostle  Peter  founded  the  church  of  Rome.  Peter  is  said  to  have  gone 
to  Rome  in  the  second  year  of  Claudius  (a.  d.  42)  for  the  overthrow  of  Simon  Magus,  and  to 
have  resided  twenty-five  years  in  Rome  as  the  first  bishop  of  the  church  established  there  by 
him.t 

The  grounds  against  this  tradition  are  well  known  :  (1.)  When  Paul  wrote  his  Epistle  to 
the  Romans,  about  the  year  59,  Peter  was  not  yet  in  Rome,  and  had  never  been  there  (comp. 
Acts  xix.  21 ;  Rom.  xv.  20  f. ;  2  Cor.  x.  16).  [For  it  was  the  principle  and  practice  of  Paul 
not  to  interfere  with  the  labors  of  the  Jewish  apostles,  or  to  build  on  another  man's  foundation. 
— P.  S.]  (2.)  When  Paul,  according  to  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles,  came  to  Rome,  about  the 
year  62,  he  found  no  trace  of  Peter  there.  (3.)  There  was  likewise  no  trace  of  Peter  in  Rome 
when  he  wrote  from  that  city  his  Second  Epistle  to  Timothy,  which  we  must  safely  assign  to 
his  second  captivity — about  the  year  66.  On  the  contrary,  we  find  (4.)  Peter  still  in  Jerusalem 
at  the  time  of  the  Apostolic  Council,  about  the  year  53  [50].  We  meet  bim,  (5.)  still  later, 
in  Antioch,  according  to  Gal.  ii. — about  the  year  55.  And  latest,  (6.)  in  Babylon  (in  Assyria), 
wkere  he  wrote  his  First  Epistle  to  the  Christians  of  Asia  Minor.| 

But  the  Second  Epistle  of  Peter,  composed  in  anticipation  of  his  approaching  death, 
seems  to  have  been  written  from  a  prison,  and  that  a  prison  in  Rome  ;  and  the  ecclesiastical 
tradition  of  Dionysius  of  Corinth  (Euseb.,  Hiator.  EccL,  ii.  25),  which  aSirms  that  Peter  died 
a  martyr  in  Rome  simultaneously  with  Paul,  cannot  be  set  aside  by  any  weighty  arguments. 
Yet  Meyer  makes  the  excellent  remark,  that  the  Epistle  to  the  Romans — which  implies  the 
impossibility  of  Peter's  presence  in  Rome  before  it  was  written — is  a  fact  which  destroys  the 
historical  foundation  of  the  Papacy,  so  far  as  it  pretends  to  rest  on  that  Apostle's  establishment 
and  episcopal  government  of  that  rhurch. 

•  [The  Br\mr»bas  spoken  of  by  PfeM^o-Clemcns,  Rtcogn.,  1.  i.  c.  7,  is  called  a  Hebrew  by  birth,  and  one  of  the 
disciples  of  Jc-us,  Bent  by  Him  to  the  Wo."*,  to  announce  the  glad  tIdinRB.  But  this  and  other  pseudo-Clementine  legends 
arc  of  no  historical  value  whatever.  I*  »«  certain,  however,  that  the  Jews  of  Rome  wore  represented  on  the  day  of 
Pentecost  in  .Terusulom  (.Vets  ii.  10),  and  it  is  hiphly  ;)roJ«jWe  that  they  broupht  tlio  firnt  report  of  Cliristirmify  to  Rome, 
possibly  as  converts,  and  in  this  case  foTPiini;  the  nucleus  of  a  Jewish  Christiiin  conprcpation.    See  below. — P.  S..' 

f  On  the  gradual  rise  of  this  l';p^"d,  sec  Wiesklkr,  ChronoJogit  dm  Jposlolitclien  ZtitaUers,  p.  552  S.\  and  Schaff, 
flin'ory  of  l/it  Ajiusl.  Church,  §  93.  p  302  ff.  The  historical  value  of  this  tradition  has  been  given  up,  even  by  somo 
Roman  Catholic  writers  [e.  g.,  llva  Weii.morf.r,  Ki.f.e,  and  others  mentioned  by  TnoLf  ck  in  liis  Comm.  on  the  Romans, 
p.  1,  who  do  not,  like  Baur,  deny  ♦bat  Peter  was  ever  at  Rome,  but  only  that  he  founded  the  church  of  Rome. — P.  8.1 
But,  on  the  other  hand,  there  i>rr  T'rotestant  divines,  such  as  Bkrthoijjt,  Mysster,  and  Thieusch  (The  Church  in  Iht 
Apntt.  Age,  '.8.'i2,  p.  !»7),  who  have  endeavored  to  sustain  it,  and  it  Is  easy  to  see  why  the  Romanists  of  the  present  day 
return  to  the  auppor*.  o'  tV.e  'eecnd  (see  IIaoemann,  Die  rOmischr  Kirche,  Freib.,  p.  fi58  ff.). 

I  On  tlic  untonabili'y  of  the  hypothesis  that  Babylon  means  Rome,  sec  my  Ai>osl.  Zeilalttr,  ii.  p.  380. 


§   2.     THE   ROMAN   CONGREGATION.  31 

The  tradition  which  transfers  the  Roman  church  back  to  the  days  of  Jesus,  has  been 
carried  out  to  an  extreme  in  several  fictions.* 

Yet  there  is  an  element  of  truth  at  its  root,  viz.,  the  fact  that  the  Messianic  hope  of  the 
Jews  in  Rome  was  early  excited,  perhaps  during  the  earthly  life  of  Jesus,  by  a  historical 
knowledge  of  His  appearance  ;  for  among  any  considerable  number  of  Jews  there  were  pious 
individuals  waiting  for  the  Messiah's  coming.  "  It  is  now  admitted  on  all  hands,"  says 
Tholuck,  "  that  the  seeds  of  the  gospel  could  be  brought  to  Rome  by  the  Jews  who  were 
present  at  the  feast  of  Pentecost  (Acts  ii.  10),  and  by  the  Jewish  Christians  who  were  scattered 
in  different  directions  after  the  martyrdom  of  Stephen  (Acts  viii.  1).  Such  an  early  period  ia 
substantiated  by  the  mention  of  such  Christian  teachers  in  Rome  as  had  been  converted  before 
Paul  (chap.  xvi.  7)  ;  by  what  the  Apostle  says  of  the  wide-spread  renown  of  the  Church  (chap. 
i.  8),  and  its  wide  extent,  since  they  met  together  in  various  places  of  the  metropolis,  chap, 
xvi.  5 ;  xiv.  15  ;  and  finally  by  the  probability  that,  in  consequence  of  the  great  influx  of 
foreigners  to  Rome,  Christians  from  a  distance  were  early  found  among  the  number." 

The  Jewish  population  in  Rome  was  one  of  the  larger  colonies,  like  those  in  Assyria, 
Babylon,  Alexandria,  etc.  Its  parent  stock  were  the  Jewish  slaves  that  had  been  brought  by 
Pompey  to  Rome.  It  increased  from  the  beginning  by  Jewish  travellers,  and  afterwards  by 
numerous  proselytes.     The  enslaved  Jews  had,  for  the  most  part,  received  theii-  freedom  under 

AuGtJSTtJS.t 

The  Emperor  Tiberius  (Sueton.,  Tib.  36 ;  Joseph.,  Antiq.  xviii.  3,  5),  and  subsequently 
Claudius,  drove  them  from  the  city  (Acts  xviii.  2 ;  Sueton.,  Claicd.  25) ;  but  they  soon 
returned  in  great  numbers,  and  dwelt  under  the  rule  of  later  emperors,  although  severely 
oppressed  by  taxes  (Sueton.,  Domit.  12),  and,  in  part,  miserably  poor  (Juvenal,  iii.  14 ;  vi. 
642).  "  Under  the  reigns  of  Augustus,  Tiberius,  and  Nero,  there  were  Jews  even  in  the  im- 
perial household ;  and  Popp^ea,  Nero's  wife,  was  herself  attached  to  the  Jewish  faith.  So  great 
was  the  number  of  Jews  in  Rome,  tliat  the  Jewish  embassy  sent  to  Augustus  after  the  death 
of  Herod,  was  joined  by  eight  thousand  Jews  in  Rome  (Joseph.,  Antiq.  xvii.  11,  1)."  (Tho- 
LUCK.)  On  the  celebrated  mysterious  word  of  Suetonius  concerning  a  decree  of  the  Emperor 
Claudius  in  the  year  52 :  "  JudcBos  impuUore  Chresto  assidue  tumuUuantes  Boma  expulit,''^ 
comp.  Neander,  Kirchenyesch.  i.  p.  52.^ 

*  See  JTeandee,  KirchengeschicMe,  i.  p.  51.  Tertullian's  legend  of  the  Emperor  Tiberius.  [Teht.,  Apolog.  c.  5  : 
Tiberiiis,  cuius  tempore  nomen  Christianum  in  sseciihim  introMt,  adnunciata  sihi  ex  Syria  Palestina,  qiix  illic  veritatem 
ipsius  divinilatis  revelaverant,  detuHt  ad  Senalum  cum prserogativa  suffragii  sui.  Senatus,  quia  non  ipse probaveral,  respuit, 
Cxsar  in  senlenlia  mansit,  comminatus periculum  accusatoribus  Chrislianorum.  In  ch.  21,  Teetullian  traces  the  knowl- 
edge of  Tiberius  to  a  report  of  Pontius  Pilate,  and  adds  that  even  the  emperors  would  have  believed  in  Christ,  if  either 
emperors  were  not  necessary  for  the  world,  or  if  Christians  could  be  emperors.  Etjsebius,  H.  E.  ii.  2,  translates  the 
former  passage  of  Tertullian.  Before  him,  Justin  Maetyr,  Apol.  i.  c.  35  and  48,  spoke  of  acts  of  Pilate  on  the  last 
days  of  Christ.    Comp.  the  Gospel  of  Nicodcmus,  and  Epiphan.  Hxr.  L.  c.  1.— P.  S.] 

t  Philo,  Leg.  ad  Caj.    On  their  dwelling-place  in  the  Regio  transliberina,  comp.  Winer,  art.  Rom. 

t  [The  edict  of  Claudius  depellendis  Judseis,  mentioned  by  Suetonius,  Claud,  c.  25,  and  in  Acts  xviii.  2  (comp.  Dios 
CASsrns,  Bist.  Rom.  Ix.  6),  is  usually  understood  to  embrace  the  (Jewish)  Christians  as  well  as  the  .Tews,  on  the  ground  that 
Chreslus  is  a  corrupt  spelling  for  Christus,  and  that  himuUuant-es  refers  to  the  controversies  excited  by  the  introduction  of 
Christianity.  To  this  may  be  objected,  (1.)  that  Suetonius  (whom  Pliny,  Episf.  x.  95,  calls  virnm  erudilissimum)  must  have 
known  the  name  of  Christ  as  well  as  Tacitus  {Annal.  xv.  44),  and  Pliny  (x.  96) ;  for  he  called  His  disciples  Christiani 
(^Xero,  c.  16) ;  (2.)  that  an  internal  religious  controversy  of  the  Jews  would  require  inter  se  after  tumtilluanles ;  and  (3.)  that 
Buch  a  controversy  would  hardly  have  justified  an  edict  of  expulsion.  Hence  Meyer  (ad  Act.  xviii.  2)  and  Wieseler  (Chro- 
nology of  the  Apost.  Age,  p.  122,  and  art.  Romerbrief  in  Herzog's  Encyclop.,  vol.  xx.  p.  5S5)  understand  by  Chre.'<tusa.Jcw 
who  stirred  up  a  political  rebellion  in  Rome  during  the  reign  of  Claudius.  But  I  prefer  the  usual  opinion,  for  the  follow- 
ing reasons  :  (1.)  There  is  no  trace  of  such  a  character,  who  must  have  been  a  false  Messiah,  and  could  hardly  have 
remained  unknown  ;  (2.)  the  use  of  the  vulgar  misnomer  Chrestm  (Xprjords),  for  Christus,  is  established  by  the  testimony 
Bf  Tertullian  {Ad  nat.  i.  3 ;  Apol.  c.  3  :  "  Sed  el  cum  perperam  Chrestianus  pronunciatur  a  vobis—nam  nee  nominit 
terta  est  notitia  penes  vos — de  suavilate  rel  bevignitate  compositum  esf'),  and  Lactantius  (Inst.  div.  iv.  7  :  .  .  .  "projiter 
ignoranlium  errorem,  qui  eutn  immulata  litera  Cheespcm  golent  dicere  ").  But  it  seems  that  the  law  of  Claudius  was  no 
rigorously  executed,  from  apprehension  of  bad  effects  in  view  of  the  large  number  of  the  Jews  ;  and  that  only  the  publio 
assemblies  were  closed.  This  is  stated  by  Dion  Cassius,  Ix.  6,  who  probably  refers  to  the  same  edict,  as  Lehmann  and 
Wieseler  assume  (jov^  re  'lovSoi'ov?  irKfovaa-avras  avflii,  wore  x"^^^'^^  ""  "''*''  Tapox^?  vnb  toO  oxAou  <t<j>S)v  t^s 
troAeu;  elpx^rivai,  ovk  efijAao-e  ixiv,  T<p  Si  Sr)  narpiia  vd/iiw  ploi  XP"/^*'''"'*  iKtKtva-e  firi  crvva6poiie<T8ai),  unless  W« 
assign  this  decree  (with  Meyer  and  Lechler,  ad  Act.  xviii.  2)  to  an  earlier  date.  At  all  events,  the  edict,  if  it  applied  to 
the  Christians  at  all,  caa  only  have  had  a  temporary  effect ;  for  we  find,  a  few  years  afterwards,  a  large  Christian  congrega- 


THE   EPISTLE    OF   PAUL   TO   THE   ROMANS. 


At  the  time  when  the  Apostle  wrote  his  Epistle  to  the  Romans,  there  were  in  Rome  many 
converts  who  openly  professed  Christ  (chap,  i.),  and  met  for  worship  in  several  houses  (chap, 
xvi.).  [The  congregation,  moreover,  must  have  already  existed  several  years  lefore  58,  since 
Paul  "  these  many  years"  (dn-o  noWiiv  tVoji',  Rom.  xv.  23,  comp.  ver.  22  aifd  i.  13)  had  a  desire 
to  visit  them,  and  since  he  mentions,  among  the  Christian  teachers  in  Rome,  such  as  had  been 
converted  betore  him,  xvi.  7. — P.  S.]  The  stock  of  this  Christian  community  was  no  doubt 
of  Jewish  descent  (iv.  1)  ;  but  the  Gentile  Christian  element  also  was  considerable  (Rom.  xi 
13  ff.,  25),  as  we  may  expect  in  view  of  the  large  number  of  Jewish  proselytes  in  Rome.  W 
may  safely  assume  that  the  Church  was  just  as  much  founded  by  Gentile  Christians  from 
Antioch,  as  by  Jewish  Christians  who  witnessed  the  first  Pentecost  at  Jerusalem.  We  learn, 
moreover,  from  chap,  xvi.,  that  the  most  prominent  members  of  the  Church  were  adherents 
of  Paul.  And  there  is  every  probability  that  Paul,  in  a  comprehensive  cliurch  policy,  had 
prejiared  the  way  for  the  projjer  founding  and  organization  of  a  united  congregation  in 
Rome,  as  in  Ej^hesus,  by  previously  sending  out  faithful  disciples — Aquila  and  his  wife  Pris- 
cilla.  As  these  were  his  pioneers  in  Ephesus,  so  were  they  in  Rome.  Says  Meyer  [on  Rom.y 
p.  21,  4th  ed.]  :  "  As  Paul  had  been  so  eminently  successful  in  Greece,  it  was  very  natural 
that  apostolic  men  from  his  school  should  bear  evangelic  truth  further  westward,  to  the 
metroi^olis  of  heathendom.  The  banishment  of  the  Jews  from  Rome  under  Claudius 
(SuETON.,  Clmid.  25 ;  Acts  xviii.  2)  was  a  special  occasion  made  use  of  by  Providence  for 
that  end.  Fugitives  to  neighboring  Greece  became  Christians,  and  disciples  of  Paul ;  and, 
after  their  return  to  Rome,  were  heralds  of  Christianity,  and  took  part  in  organizing  a  con- 
gregation. This  is  historically  proved  by  the  example  of  Aquila  and  Priscilla,  who,  when 
Jews,  emigrated  to  Corinth,  lived  there  over  a  year  and  a  half  in  the  company  of  Paul,  and 
subsequently  appeared  as  teachers  in  Rome  and  occupants  of  a  house  where  the  Roman  congre- 
gation assembled  (Rom.  xvi.  8).  Probably  other  individuals  mentioned  in  chap.  xvi.  were  led 
by  God  in  a  similar  way  ;  but  it  is  certain  that  Aquila  auG  Priscilla  occujjied  a  most  impor- 
tant position  among  the  founders  of  the  congregation  ;  for  among  the  many  teachers  whom 
Paul  greets  in  cha}).  xvi.,  he  presents  his  first  greeting  to  them,  and  this,  too,  with  such 
flattering  commendation  as  he  bestows  upon  none  of  the  rest." 

The  much-disputed  question  concerning  the  national  and  religious  constituents  of  the 
Roman  Church  is  intimately  connected  with  the  question  as  to  the  occasion  and  aim  of  the 
Epistle  to  the  Romans. 

In  discussing  this  point,  we  must  start  with  certain  clear  distinctions.  The  diflerence 
between  Jewish  Christians  and  Gentile  Christians  must  not  be  confounded  with  the  difference 
between  non-Pauline  and  Pauline  Christians.  Aquila  and  Priscilla,  for  examjjle,  were  Jewish 
Christians,  but  they  belonged  decidedly  to  the  school  of  Paul.  On  the  contrary,  there  were 
in  the  Galatian  congregation  Gentile  Christians  who  permitted  themselves  to  be  estranged 
from  the  Apostle  Paul  by  the  Judaizing  party  spirit.  Likewise,  those  weak  brethren  or 
Jewish  Christians  who  were  entangled  in  legalistic  anxiety  {aabfvt'n)^  must  be  distinguished 
from  the  false  brethren,  or  heretical  Ebionites,  who  gradually  come  into  view ;  and  so  must 
we  distinguish,  among  the  Gentile  Christians,  those  who  were  genuine  disciples  of  Paul  from 
those  who  proudly  advocated  an  antinoniian  freedom  of  conscience.  Even  among  the  rigidly 
legalistic  Christians  there  arose  very  early  an  antagonism  between  the  adherents  of  Pharisaic 
legality  and  Essenic  holiness. 

It  is  clear,  not  only  from  historical  relations,  but  also  from  the  present  Epistle,  that  tht 
national  Jewish  element  in  the  Roman  Church  must  have  been  very  important,  and  that  it 
constituted  the  first  basis  of  the  Church  ;  see  chap.  ii.  17  ff. ;  iv.  1  flf. ;  vii.  4  £f. 

Hon  at  Home,  composed  of  converts  from  tlio  Jews  and  Oontilcs,  aa  is  ovidcnt  from  the  Episllo  to  the  Romans,  from  th« 
return  of  Aquila  and  Pbiscilla  (Uom.  xvi.  3),  from  Acts  xviii.  17  ff.,  and  from  Tacitvb's  account  of  the  Neronian 
persecution  in  July,  64.  Clavdics  issued  several  edicts  conceminp;  the  Jews,  flr»t  favorublo  onoa  in  the  year  42,  men- 
tioned by  JosKrnus,  Antiq.  xix,  5,  2,  3  ;  then  the  edict  of  expulsion,  x.  n.  52  (Sceton.,  Claud.  25 ;  Acts  rriii.  2),  with 
which  probably  the  one  mentioned  by  Dion  Cassivs,  Ix.  G,  is  identical.  The  silence  of  Josephus  concerning  the  latter 
edl:t  is  the  more  easily  explained  from  the  fact  that,  like  the  contemporary  edict  de  maUiematicit  Jtalia  ptlUndii  (notioed 
ty  Tacitus,  Annul,  xii.  52),  it  was  Dever  fully  executed,  or  else  speedily  recalled.— P.  S.] 


THE   ROMAN   CONGREGATION.  35 


At  the  same  time,  however,  the  Gentile  Christian  element  in  the  Roman  Church  had 
become  very  strong,  and  was  perhaps  predominant.  This  we  must  infer  from  the  historical 
relation.  "  Christianity,  which  took  root  first  among  the  Jews,  found  an  easier  entrance  in 
Rome  among  the  heathen,  because,  in  Rome,  the  popular  heathen  religion  had  already 
incurred  the  contempt  of  both  the  cultivated  and  ignorant  classes  (see  Gieseler,  Ch.  Hist., 
i.  §  11-14)  ;  therefore  the  inclination  to  Monotheism  was  very  common,  and  the  multitude  of 
those  who  came  over  to  the  Jewish  faith  was  very  large  (Juvenal,  Satyr,  x.  96  flf. ;  Tacit., 
Atm.  XV.  44  ;  Hist.  v.  5  ;  Seneca  in  Augustine,  De  Civ.  Dei,  vii.  11 ;  Joseph.,  Antiq.  xviii.  3, 
5).  But  how  much  more  must  this  liberal  religion,  so  elevated  above  all  the  bonds  of  a 
repulsive  legal  rigorism,  as  it  was  preached  by  Aquilas  and  other  Pauline  teachers,  receive 
attention  and  support  at  the  hands  of  those  Romans  who  were  discontented  with  heathen- 
dom." (Meter.)  That  this  was  really  the  fact  in  the  Roman  church,  is  evinced  by  the  many 
appeals  addressed  to  the  Gentile  Christian  portion,  chap.  i.  5,  6,  13 ;  chap.  xi.  13  flf. 

Both  elements  in  the  Church  must  have  been  strong,  as  appears  from  the  fact  that  the 
Apostle  places  together,  throughout  the  Epistle,  Jews  and  Gentiles,  Jewish  Christians  and 
Gentile  Christians,  in  order  to  bring  them  into  union  and  harmony,  as,  from  a  diflferent  funda- 
mental thought,  he  did  in  the  Epistle  to  the  Ephesians.  In  the  greetings  and  introduction 
we  find  Jewish  and  Gentile  Christians  spoken  of  with  equal  regard.  The  theme  of  the 
Epistle,  chap.  i.  14-17,  expressly  applies  the  gospel  alike  to  Jews  and  Greeks.  In  the  ex- 
position of  the  unrighteousness  of  the  human  race,  the  Gentiles  and  Jews  are  placed  together 
in  the  light  of  searching  truth,  chap.  i.  18  ;  iii.  20.  Likewise,  justification  by  faith  is  aj)plied 
in  the  most  positive  manner  to  Jews  as  well  as  Gentiles,  chap.  iii.  21-v.  11.  Also  the  partici- 
pation in  the  death  of  Adam  and  in  the  new  life  in  Christ,  chap.  v.  13-viii.  89.  So,  likewise, 
the  two  economies  of  judgment  and  mercy  in  the  history  of  tlie  world,  chaps,  ix.-xi.  Even 
in  the  exhortation  the  distinction  again  appears ;  the  weak  in  faith  and  the  fi'ee ;  the  severe 
and  the  scornful ;  the  weak  and  the  stong,  chaps,  xiv.-xv.  7  ;  yet  here  the  other  opposition 
between  the  non-Pauline  and  the  Pauline  Christians  is  also  taken  into  account. 

Though  we  cannot  say  with  absolute  certainty  that  the  Gentile  Christian  portion  of  the 
Roman  church  was  predominant,  yet  it  is  plain  that  the  Pauline  type  did  i^redominate  in 
such  a  measure  that  the  Apostle  looked  upon  the  church,  in  spirit,  as  Ms  church.  If  we  look 
at  the  single  congregations  in  private  houses,  which  the  Apostle  greets  in  chap,  xvi.,  we  find 
Aquila  and  Priscilla  at  the  head  of  the  first  mentioned,  which  was  probably  the  most  promi- 
nent ;  and  these  were  Jewish  Christians,  and  yet  decidedly  Pauline.  Likewise  the  warm  and 
friendly  terms  with  which  he  greets  the  most  of  the  others,  prove  that  he  could  regard  them 
as  his  spiritual  companions  in  the  strictest  sense  of  the  word.  This  can  be  seen  here  and 
there  from  the  contents  of  the  Epistle.  As  the  Apostle  regarded  himself,  with  justice,  in 
the  most  specific  sense,  as  the  chosen  Apostle  to  the  Gentiles  (chap.  i.  5 — a  consciousness 
which,  according  to  Gal.  ii.,  involved  neither  a  conflict  with  the  apostles  of  the  Jews,  nor 
a  neglect  by  Paul  of  the  Jewish  synagogues),  he  must  have  looked  very  early  to  the  Roman 
metropolis  as  a  sphere  of  labor  designed  for  him.  Accordingly,  he  designed  at  a  very  early 
period  to  establish  a  mission  in  Rome  (Acts  xix.  21 ;  Rom.  i".  13).  He  also  made  timely 
preparations  for  the  execution  of  this  design  by  sending  in  advance  his  friends  Aquila  and 
Priscilla,  and  many  other  companions — among  them  the  deaconess  Phoebe,  of  Corinth — to 
Rome.  For  this  very  reason  he  could  depart,  with  regard  to  the  Romans,  firom  his  usual 
practice  of  making  his  personal  apostolic  labor  precede  a  written  communication.  This  time 
he  could  send  an  epistle  first,  and  write  to  the  Roman  Christians  roX/xT^porepwr  dno  ixepovs 
(chap.  XV.  15)  without  being  embarassed  by  the  thought  that  he  was  entering  upon  a  foreign 
field  of  labor  (chap.  xv.  20).  Nevertheless,  that  delicacy  with  which  he  regarded  the  rights 
and  independence  of  others,  especially  of  believers,  induced  him  to  characterize  his  visit  to 
Rome  merely  as  a  journey  through  that  city  to  Spain.  He  could  expect,  with  tolerable 
certainty,  that  Rome  would  be  his  principal  station  ;  but  in  case  the  prevailing  peculiarities 
of  the  church  should  prevent  this,  he  could  not  be  denied  in  Rome  the  rights  of  Christian 
hospitality,  by  the  aid  of  which  he  could  proceed  further.     But  the  Judaizing  element  in 

3 


84  THE   EPISTLE    OF   PAUL   TO    THE    ROMANS. 

the  church  was  not  important  nor  far  advanced,  as  appears  from  the  fact  that  he  found  it 
necessary  only  to  oppose  legalistic  anxiety  in  reference  to  fast-days  and  the  eating  of  food — 
not  arrogant  Judaistic  dogmas. 

The  congregation  being  composed  of  Jewish  and  Gentile  Christians,  it  could  easily  occut 
that  the  theological  opinions  at  one  time  leaned  to  one  side,  and  then  to  another. 

According  to  Paley,  Henke,  Koppe,  Krehl,  Baumgakten-Ckusius,  and  Thiersch,  the 
Jewish  Christian  element  i^redominated  in  the  church ;  and  Baur,  favoring  his  well-known 
Ebionitic  hypothesis,  has  attributed  to  the  church  a  mild  form  of  Ebionism.*  For  an 
txtended  refutation  of  this  view,  which  is  sustained  by  a  distortion  of  different  passages,  sea 
Tholuck's  Romans,  p.  3  ff.  Meyer,  in  his  introduction,  passes  lightly  over  the  attacks  of 
Baur.  "We  have  no  right  to  judge  the  character  of  the  congregation  at  the  time  of  Paul 
by  the  Judaizing  tendencies  which  subsequently  gained  the  ascendency  there  in  conformity 
with  the  constitutional  proclivity  of  the  Roman  nationality.  And  even  in  the  second 
century  the  Roman  church,  as  such,  cannot  be  charged  with  Ebionism  (see  Tholuck,  p.  7). 

According  to  Neander,  Rlckert,  De  Wette,  Olshausen,  and  Meyer,  the  Gentile 
Christian  element  was  predominant.  But  even  Meyer  confounds  this  view  with  the  j^repon- 
derance  of  Pauline  Christianity  in  Rome.  We  must  discriminate  thus  :  The  Gentile  Christian 
element  was  strong,  but  the  Pauline  element  was  evidently  preponderant.  This  was  also  the 
case  still  later,  when  Paul  wrote  his  Epistle  to  the  Philippians  during  his  captivity  in  Rome, 
although  here,  as  elsewhere  in  the  churches  after  the  year  60,  the  Jewish  element  increased  in 
strength  (Phil.  i).  Subsequently,  the  short  stay  of  Peter  in  Rome,  as  well  as  the  larger 
elective  affinity  between  Jewish  Christianity  and  the  Roman  nationality,  gradually  weakened 
the  Pauline  type,  and,  in  fine,  obscured  it. 

If  there  had  been  already  a  large  number  of  Jewish  Christians  in  Rome,  how  could  the 
chiefs  of  the  Jews  speak  to  the  Apostle  when  he  came  to  Rome  just  as  they  did,  according 
to  Acts  xxviii.  21,  22  ?  Their  answer  was  plainly  evasive,  in  which  they  adhere  to  two 
points :  that  no  writing  of  complaint  against  Paul  had  been  sent  to  them  from  Jerusalem  ; 
and  that  the  Christians  were  everywhere  opposed  by  the  Jews  as  a  sect.  Baur  and  Zeller 
have  endeavored  to  derive  from  this  apparent  "  contradiction "  between  the  Acts  of  the 
Apostles  and  the  Eijistle  to  the  Romans,  a  decisive  proof  of  the  unhistorical  character  of  the 
Acts.  For  a  refutation  of  this  argument,  see  Kling,  Studien  und  Kritilcen  for  1837,  p.  301  fi".  ? 
Tholuck,  Comment.,  p.  10  ff. ;  Meyer,  p.  20 ;  my  Apost.  Zeitalter,  i.  p.  106,  and  others. 

[The  argument  of  the  late  Dr.  Baur,  and  Zeller  (his  son-in-law),  is  this  :  The  flourishing 
•condition  of  the  Christian  Church  at  Rome,  as  described  in  the  Epistle  to  the  Romans  (i.  8, 
11,  12 ;  XV.  1,  14,  15 ;  xvi.  18),  is  irreconcilable  with  the  tone  used  by  the  leading  Roman 
Jews  (ol  Trpuroi  rui'  'loDfiai'iov)  in  their  answer  to  Paul,  Acts  xxviii.  21,  22,  where  they  plead 
ignorance  of  the  antecedents  of  the  Apostle,  and  contemptuously  characterize  the  Christian 
religion  as  a  sect  (dipeo-u)  which  met  everywhere  with  contradiction  (jrnvraxnv  avTiKtytrai)  ; 
■consequently  the  author  of  the  Acts  must  have  misrepresented  the  real  state  of  things  in  the 
interest  of  his  doctrinal  design,  which  was  to  effect  a  compromise  between  the  Jewish  Christian 
or  Petrine,  and  the  Gentile  Christian  or  Pauline  sections  of  the  Church,  by  bringing  Paul  down 
to  the  Petrine  or  Jewish  Christian  standpoint,  and  by  liberalizing  Peter,  and  making  both 
meet  halfway.  But,  in  the  first  place,  the  author  of  the  Acts  (which  were  certainly  not 
written  before  63  or  64— i.  e,  six  or  seven  years  after  the  Romans)  must  have  known  the 
Epistle  to  the  Romans,  and  felt  the  contradiction,  if  there  was  any,  as  well  as  we,  the  more 

•  [Tlic  same  view  as  to  the  preponderance  of  the  Jewish  element  has  been  aWy  defended  since  hjT  W.  Mangold, 
Der  Wmrrhrt^f  und  die  Anfangt  der  Ritm.  Oemeinde,  1860,  p.  35  ff.  ;  but  he  justly  denies  the  hypofbeels  of  Baub,  that 
the  Jewish  ChristianH  in  Rome  were  Ehionilet.  Sciiorr,  on  the  contrnrj',  differs  from  llAra  and  MANeoLO  in  assuming 
that  the  EpiHtlc  to  the  Romans  was  mainly  intended  foi^  Gentile  Cliristiuns.  All  three  agree  as  to  the  aim  and  ohjed 
at  the  Epistle,  which  was  to  justify  Paul's  apostolato  to  the  Gentiles,  by  expIninlnR  the  peculiar  features  of  his  doctrino 
and  removinR  the  objections  t"  it,  and  thus  to  prepare  the  way  not  only  for  a  personal  visit  to  Rome,  but  also  for  a 
new  missionary  activity  In  the  West,  with  Rome  as  the  centre  (comp.  SIanooi-d,  /.  c.  p.  141).  Rut  Masoold  object! 
to  S<  iioTT  that  such  a  Justification  was  unnecessary  for  Gentilo  Christians,  and  hence  bo  presupposes  Jewish  Chriai 
\tkaiJB.-V.  8,1 


§   3.     THE    CERTIFICATION   OF   THE   EPISTLE   TO   THE   ROMANS.  85 


BO  as  he  himself  had  previously  mentioned  the  existence  of  the  Christian  congregation  it 
Rome  (xxviii.  15).  Hence,  the  apparent  contradiction,  far  from  exposing  a  wilful  perversion 
of  history,  only  proves  the  simplicity  and  veracity  of  the  narrative,  and  tends,  like  so  many 
similar  instances,  to  confirm  rather  than  to  weaken  our  faith.  (2.)  The  very  m.anner  in  which 
the  Jews  speak  of  Christianity  as  a  sect  everywhere  spoken  against,  implies  its  general  sjjread 
at  that  time,  and  so  far  corroborates  the  statement  of  Paul.  (3.)  The  Jews  did  not  say  that 
they  had  never  heard  of  Paul  at  all  (which  would  be  inconsistent  with  their  own  statement 
concerning  the  contradiction  raised  everywhere  against  Christianity),  but  only  that  they  had 
received  no  (official)  information  from  Palestine  which  affected  his  moral  character,  or  waa 
unfavorable  to  him  personally  (rt  nepl  aov  novr]p6v).  And  this  was  no  doubt  true ;  for  the 
Sanhedrin  of  Jerusalem  could  have  no  reason  to  send  official  communication  to  the  Jewish 
community  in  Rome  concerning  the  case  of  Paul,  before  he  had  appealed  to<the  tribunal  of 
Caesar,  and  after  this  appeal  they  could  not  well  anticipate  the  arrival  of  the  Apostle  in 
Rome,  as  he  left  Cfesarea  soon  after  the  appeal,  at  an  advanced  season  of  the  year,  shortly 
before  the  mare  dausum  (comp.  Acts  xxv.  13,  13 ;  xxvii.  1,  9),  and,  in  all  probability,  before 
his  enemies  could  even  make  out  the  necessary  official  papers.  (4.)  We  must  not  forget  the 
diplomatic  and  evasive  character  of  the  answer  of  the  Jews,  who,  as  prudent  men,  were 
reluctant  to  commit  themselves  unnecessarily  before  the  trial,  in  view  of  the  imperial  court 
and  authority,  and  the  complicated  difficulties  of  the  case.  The  leaders  of  the  Jews 
appeared  on  this  occasion  in  an  official  capacity,  and  very  properly  (from  their  own  stand- 
point) observed  an  official  reserve. — P.  S.] 

5   3.      THE    CEETIFICATION    OF    THE    EPISTLE    TO    THE    ROMAICS.     ITS    AUTHENTICITY    AND 

INTEGRITY. 

The  Epistle  of  Paul  to  the  Romans  belongs  to  the  most  indisputable  books  of  the  New 
Testament. 

Its  authenticity  is  certified  in  the  strongest  manner  by  the  unanimous  testimony  of  the 
ancient  Church,  by  the  harmony  of  its  contents  with  the  historical  character  of  Paul,  by  its 
internal  weight,  and  its  great  influence  ujjon  the  Church.  Even  the  criticism  of  Baur,  which 
rejects  the  most  of  the  New  Testament  books,  acknowledges  the  authenticity  of  this  E^Distle 
(with  the  exception  of  the  last  two  chapters),  besides  the  Epistles  to  the  Corinthians  and 
that  to  the  Galatians.  But  here,  as  elsewhere,  the  testimony  of  this  criticism  is  not  of  much 
account.  Significant  allusions  to  the  Epistle  can  be  found  in  the  (first)  epistle  of  Clement 
of  Rome ;  in  Ignatius,  Poltcarp,  Justin  Martyr,  etc.  Marcion,  the  Gnostic,  acknowl- 
edged it.  A  decided  testimony  in  favor  of  this  Epistle  is  rendered  by  the  three  great 
witnesses  of  the  Church  and  of  the  New  Testament  in  its  principal  parts — Iren^us, 
Tertullian,  and  Clement  of  Alexandria.  Origen  wrote  a  commentary  on  this  Ejiistle. 
Even  the  fact  that  the  Judaizing  sects  rejected  it,  speaks  indirectly  in  its  favor ;  they  hated 
the  Pauline  doctrine  contained  in  it.* 

On  the  other  hand,  the  integrity  of  the  Epistle  has  been  variously  opposed.  Marcion 
rejected  chaps,  xv.  and  xvi.  on  doctrinal  grounds.  Heumann,  in  his  exposition  of  the  New 
Testament,  maintains  that  the  Epistle  closed,  as  a  first  epistle,  with  chap,  xi.,  and  that  the 
subsequent  part  is  a  new  work  of  Paul.  Semler  wrote  :  De  duplici  adpendice  Epistolce  Pauli 
ad  Romanos.  According  to  Paulus  of  Heidelberg,  chap.  xv.  is  a  special  epistle  to  the 
enlightened  Christians  in  Rome ;  chap.  xvi.  is  a  special  writing  to  the  officers.  Diverse,  and, 
in  fact,  very  strange  conjectures  have  been  advanced  by  Schulz  and  Schott  on  chap.  xvi. 
J.  C.  Chr.  Schmidt  denied  the  genuineness  of  the  doxology,  chap.  xvi.  25-27,  because  it  is 
wanting  in  Codex  F.  etc. ;  because  it  is  erased  in  other  codices ;  and  because,  in  Codex  J., 
and  in  almost  all  the  Minuscule  MSS.,  it  stands  after  chap.  xiv.  23.     Reiche  supposes  that  the 

♦  More  recently,  the  Englishman  Evanson,  in  his  book  on  the  Viscrepancies  of  the  Four  Gospels,  has  incidentally 
attacked  the  genuineness  of  the  Epistle  to  the  Romans,  with  trifling  remarks  unworthy  of  refutation ;  besides  him, 
Bruno  Bauer  [a  half-cracked  pseudo-critic  of  Berlin,  not  to  be  confounded  with  the  fax  superior  Dr.  Ferdinand  Ohbi» 
riAN  Baur  of  Tubingen.— P.  S.] 


36  THE   EPISTLE    OF   PAUL    TO    THE   ROMANS. 

public,  reading  of  the  Epistle  should  only  extend  to  chap.  xiv.  23,  because  what  follows  is  of  ' 
less  practical  importance,  and  for  this  reason  the  former  part  has  been  concluded  by  the  dox- 
ology,  which  subsequently  was  made  to  conclude  the  whole  Epistle.  It  would  have  been  more 
appropriate  to  reason  :  Since  the  public  reading  was  often  concluded  with  chap,  xiv,  23,  the 
doxology  was  transferred  from  the  end  of  the  whole  Epistle  to  this  place.  This  would 
explain  the  fact  that  it  is  to  be  found,  in  later  codices,  after  cliap.  xiv.  23.  Back,  in  hia 
treatise  on  the  Purpose  and  Occasion  of  the  Epistle  to  the  Romans,  declares  chaps,  xv.  and  xvi, 
of  the  Epistle  to  be  ungenuiue.  Certainly  these  chapters  interfere  with  the  application 
of  his  Ebionitic  hypothesis  to  the  condition  of  the  Roman  church.  He  was  refuted  by 
Klino  in  the  Studien  und  Kritihen  (1837,  No.  2),  and  by  Oi-shausen  (1838,  No.  4).  Even 
the  circumstance  that  the  pseudo-Clementine  Homilies  seem  to  present  a  different  picture 
of  the  Roman  Church  was  made  by  Baur  a  decisive  argument  against  the  authenticity  of  the 
last  two  chapters  of  the  Epistle  ! 

As  far  as  the  language  of  the  Epistle  is  concerned,  many  Roman  Catholic  theologians 
have  made  use  of  the  note  of  the  Syrian  scholiast  on  the  Peshito  :  Paul  wrote  his  epistle  in 
Roman,  in  order  to  assert  that  it  was  originally  written  in  Latin.  Grotius,  and  others,  with 
good  reason,  have  understood  the  word  Roman  in  the  wider  sense,  as  applied  to  the  Greek 
language.  "  The  Greek  composition,"  says  Meyer,  "  corresponds  perfectly  not  only  to  the 
Hellenic  culture  of  the  Apostle  himself,  but  also  to  the  linguistic  relations  of  Rome  (see 
Credner,  Einl.  ii.,  p.  383  ff.),  and  to  the  analogy  of  the  remaining  early  Christian  literature 
directed  to  Rome  (Ignatius,  Jtjstin,  Iren^eus,  Hippolytus,  and  others)."  Bolten  and 
Berthold  assert  that  the  Ejiistle  was  originally  written  in  the  Aramaean  language.  For 
further  information,  see  ^Ieyer,  Reiche,  and  others,  especially  also  the  Introductions  to  the 
New  Testament.* 

§  4.    OCCASIOX,   purpose,   AND   CONTENTS  OF  THE  EPISTLE. 

Tlie  origin  of  the  Epistle  to  the  Romans  must  be  traced  to  the  close  connection  between 
the  call  and  consciousness  of  Paul  as  the  Apostle  to  the  Gentiles,  and  Rome  as  the  great 
metropolis  of  the  Gentile  world.  But  the  contents  of  the  Epistle  are  determined  by  the 
fact  that  a  church  made  up  of  both  Jewish  and  Gentile  Christians  already  existed  in  Rome, 
and  that  he  had  long  ago  prepared  the  way  for  his  personal  labors  in  Rome,  and  further  west, 
by  sending  out  his  missionary  assistants  and  companions.  His  Epistle  starts  with  this 
preparation  as  a  preliminary  reflexion  of  his  personal  labors ;  that  is,  as  the  promulgation 
of  the  gospel  both  in  its  theocratic  purpose  and  in  its  universal  constitution.  In  other 
words,  he  exhibits  the  gospel  in  its  eminent  fitness  to  comprehend  Jews  and  Gentiles  in  a 
common  necessity  of  salvation,  and  to  build  them  up,  on  the  common  ground  of  salvation, 
into  a  community  of  faith  which  would  combine  in  perfect  harmony  both  a  theocratic  purpose 
and  a  universal  spirit. 

It  was  natural  that  Paul,  in  view  of  his  call  to  the  Gentile  world,  should,  very  early  in 
his  career,  look  to  the  metropolis  of  Rome  as  his  great  aim.  He  longed  and  strove  to  go  to 
Rome,  ch.  xv.  23 ;  L  11.  The  order  of  his  apostolic  labors  required  him  first  to  exercise  his 
apostolic  office  in  the  East,  chap.  xv.  19;  Acts  xix.  21.  Accordingly,  his  three  Oriental 
missionary  journeys  had  to  be  uiKlertaken  first,  though  in  them  he  gradually  approached  the 
West ;  and  besides,  after  each  of  these  missionary  tours,  he  had  to  secure  the  connection  of 
his  work  with  the  metropolis  at  Jerusalem  by  a  return  to  this  city ;  but,  in  addition  to  all 
this,  he  experienced  many  vexatious  annoyances,  and  therefore  he  could  well  speak  of  the 
great  hindrances  to  the  execution  of  his  design  (chap.  i.  13 ;  xv.  22).     Since  it  was  his  pur- 

*  [On  the  general  use  of  the  Orcck  lanfning'c  in  the  age  of  the  npostlcs,  within  the  limits  of  the  Roman  Empire, 
comp.  especially  the  learned  work  of  Dr.  Alexander  Robebth,  Disatssiont  on  the  Oospels,  Cambridge  and  London,  2d 
ed.  1861,  pp.  1-".16.  Dr.  Robebtb  endeavors  to  prove,  from  the  undeniable  facts  of  the  New  Testament,  that  even  in 
Pnlostino,  at  the  time  of  Christ,  Grcik  was  the  common  Innpuajje  of  public  intercourse,  and  that  Christ  and  the  apoatlei 
■poke  for  the  most  part  in  Greek,  and  only  now  and  then  in  Aramaic.  If  this  bo  so,  we  have.  In  the  Gospels,  n«t  a 
translation,  but  the  original  words  of  our  Sa\-lour  as  He  spoke  them  to  the  people  and  to  the  Twelve.— P.  8.J 


§   4.      OCCASION,   PURPOSE,   AND    CONTENTS   OF   THE   EPISTLE.  31 

pose,  after  his  third  missiouary  journey,  to  proceed  from  Jerusalem  to  Rome,  his  arrest  in 
Jerusalem  and  imprisonment  in  Caesarea  contributed  to  carry  out  this  design,  although  it  waa 
for  a  time  a  new  obstacle  in  his  -way  ;  and  his  appeal  to  Csesar  (Acts  xxv.  10)  was  not  only  a 
requirement  of  necessity,  but  a  great  step  toward  the  consummation  of  his  wishes.  But  in 
Rome,  too,  there  had  arisen  a  hindrance  in  the  establishment  of  an  important  society  of 
Christians  without  his  cooperation.  He  removed  this  hindrance  in  a  threefold  way.  First, 
by  sending  his  spiritual  friends,  Aquila  and  Priscilla,  in  advance  to  Rome,  in  order  to  prepare 
a  place  of  abode  for  him  ;  secondly,  by  his  letter ;  thirdly,  by  the  extension  of  his  missionary 
purpose  to  Spain ;  so  that,  at  all  events,  he  might  visit  the  congregation  in  Rome  without 
doing  violence  to  his  apostolic  principle  (chap,  xv,  20).  His  imprisonment  set  aside  the  last 
difficulty,  since  it  even  compelled  him  to  stay  two  years  in  Rome ;  although  he  did  not  give 
up  his  plan  of  going  further  to  Spain. 

The  occasion  and  purpose  of  the  Epistle  to  the  Romans  has  been  very  much  and  very 
differently  discussed  both  by  commentators  and  in  special  treatises.* 

"  The  dogmatic  exposition  of  earlier  times,"  says  Tholuck,  "  which  was  not  at  all 
interested  in  inquiring  after  the  real  historical  purijoses,  mostly  identilied  the  aim  and  the 
argument  of  the  Biblical  books ;  in  that  which  the  Divine  Spirit  directed  the  writer  to 
record,  there  lay  the  purpose  for  Christendom  in  all  ages.  The  historical  exposition  of  mod- 
ern times  seeks,  by  comparing  the  contents  with  the  historical  situation  from  which  the  writ- 
ings arose,  to  disclose  the  nearest  purpose  to  the  original  I'eaders,  although  some  writers  of  the 
rationalistic  school  put  external  cause  in  the  place  of  the  internal,  and  contented  themselvea 
with  merely  accidental  causes,  such  as  the  good  opportunity  to  send  a  letter  to  Rome  by  the 
dejjarture  of  Phoebe,  the  Corinthian  deaconess ;  the  sight  of  the  Adriatic  sea  from  the  high 
coast  of  Illyria,  and  the  desire  thereby  awakened  to  go  to  Rome  (Paulus  of  Heidelberg)." 

The  further  account  by  Tholuck,  however,  does  not  fully  harmonize  with  the  assumption 
that  earlier  writers  had  in  view  only  a  doctrinal  occasion,  while  the  more  recent  commenta- 
tion start  from  an  historical  one.f 

*  Among  the  essays  on  this  subject  are  those  by  Christ.  Feied.  Schmid  d'uhi'nger  Weinachlsprngramm,  1834,  De 
Paulinx  ad  Jiomanos  Epi<slolx  consilio  et  orgumenlo)  ;  by  Baur  {Zweck  und  Veranlassung  des  Romerbriefs,  in  the 
Tubinger  Zeitschrift,  1S36,  No.  3),  and  his  followers  (see  Tholuck,  p.  16)  ;  by  Olshausen  (in  the  Studien  und  Kriliken, 
1838,  p.  953);  by  Huther  (Zweclc  und  Inhalt  der  zwolf  erslen  Kapitel  des  Romerbriefs,  1846);  and  Theod.  Schott  (Dcr 
Romerbrief,  seinem  Endzweck  und  Gedankengang  noclt  ausgelegt,  Erlangen,  1858).— [Since  then  appeared  D.  Wilhelm 
Mangold,  The  Epislle  to  the  Romans,  and  the  Beginnings  of  the  Roman  Congregation :  A  critical  Investigation,  Marbiu-g, 
1866,  pp.  liS  ;  and  W.  Beyschlag,  The  Historical  Problem  of  the  Epislle  to  the  Romans,  in  the  Studien  und  Kriliken 
for  1867,  pp.  627-665.  The  views  of  the  late  Dr.  Baur  on  the  Aim  and  Occasion  of  the  Epistle  to  the  Komans,  were  first 
published  at  Tubingen,  1836,  and  substautially  reproduced  in  his  work  on  Paul,  1845,  p.  332  ff.,  as  well  as  in  his  Church 
History  of  the  first  three  Centuries,  2d  ed.,  1860,  p.  62  if. ;  but  in  this  last  work,  and  in  the  second  edition  of  the  mouo- 
graph  on  St.  Paul  (1867),  he  moderates  the  alleged  antagonism  of  the  Je■^^sh  Christians  at  Rome  against  Paul,  and 
no  more  insists  on  the  opinion  that  chapters  ix.-xi.  constitute  the  doctrinal  essence  of  the  whole  Epistle,  to  which  the 
rest  was  made  to  serve  merely  as  an  introduction  and  an  application.  It  must  be  admitted  that  Dr.  Baur,  by  striking 
critical  combinations,  broke  a  new  field  of  investigation  concerning  the  character  and  condilion  of  the  primitive  Chris- 
tians in  Rome,  and  the  aim  and  occasion  of  the  Epi^tle  to  the  Romans.  Theodor  Schott,  of  Erhingcn,  agreeing  with 
Baur  as  to  the  central  significance  of  chaps,  ix.,  x.,  and  xi.,  but  difi'ering  from  his  untenable  assumption  of  the  pre- 
ponderance of  the  Jewish  element  in  the  Roman  congregation,  represents  the  Epistle  as  an  apology  of  the  Gentile  apog- 
tolate  of  Paul  before  Gentile  Christians  of  the  Pauline  school.  But  these  did  not  need  any  such  apology.  Mangold,  in 
the  able  treatise  just  referred  to,  substantially  renews  the  view  of  Baur  as  to  the  essentially  Jewish  Christian  character 
of  the  Church  of  Rome,  and  the  importance  of  chaps,  ix.-xi.,  but  he  moderates  its  supposed  antagonism  to  Paul.  Baub, 
Schott,  and  Mangold  agree  in  giving  the  Epistle  an  apologetic  aim,  viz.,  the  defence  of  Paul's  apostolate  of  the  Gen- 
tiles (Die  Rechlfertigung  des  paulinischen  Heidenapostolats).  In  this,  Beyschlag  difiers  from  them,  and,  without  denying 
this  apologetic  aim,  he  yet  subordinates  it  (^-ith  Tholuck,  Olshausen,  De  Wette,  and  others)  to  the  general  dogmatic 
aim  of  a  systematic  exhibition  of  the  gospel  salvation  to  a  prevailingly  Gentile  Christian  congregation  in  the  m<?t-iopolis 
of  the  world.  In  doing  this,  however,  the  Apostle  had  evidently  his  eye  mainly  upon  the  settlement  of  the  (iifficult 
problem  touching  the  relation  of  God's  ancient  people  to  the  recently-engrafted  Gentile  world  on  the  broad  basis  of  God's 
Infinite  wisdom  and  mercy  in  the  unfolding  of  His  plan  of  redemption.  Thus,  chaps.  ix.-xi.  receive  their  proper  position 
as  an  outline  of  a  philosophy  of  church  history,  instead  of  being  merely  regarded  as  a  parenthetical  section.  Compare 
Dr.  Iiange's  views  in  the  text.  The  English  eommentatora  do  not  trouble  themselves  much  with  this  introductory 
question. — P.  S.] 

t  [There  were  attempts  at  historical  exegesis  among  the  Greek  fathers  of  the  Antiochian  school,  Theodore  of 
Mopsueitia,  Chrysostom,  Theodoeet,  and  among  a  few  Latin  fathers  such  as  Jerome,  Pseudo-Ambeosius,  and  Pelaqius  , 
on  the  other  hand,  with  some  of  the  modern  commentators  the  doctrinal  and  practical  element  predominates. — P.  S.J 


38  THE   EPISTLE   OF   PAUL   TO    THE    ROMANS. 


As  far  as  the  historical  (more  properly  defined,  special  dogmatico-historical)  occasions  art 
concerned,  Ambuosiaster,  Augustine,  Bullinoer,  and  Bucer  have  ascribed  to  the  Epistle 
a  polemical  attitude  against  the  Jewish  Christians  (Pellican  likewise,  though  only  in  the 
way  of  caution)  ;  and  in  modern  times,  Eichhorn,  Scumid,  Baur,  Schweqler,  Zeller, 
K08TLIN,  Lutterbkck,  Dietlein,  and  Tuiersch  have,  with  many  modifications,  regarded 
the  Epistle  chiefly  as  a  rectification  of  Jewish  and  Judaistic  principles. 

Chrysosto.m  and  TnEODORET  would  find,  on  the  contrary,  in  the  Epistle  decided  polemic 
references  to  Gentile  Christian  Antinomian  errors  such  as  we  find  among  the  Marcionites, 
Valentiuians,  and  Manichajaus. 

But  those  are  nearer  right  who  suppose  that  the  Epistle  was  designed  for  the  conciliatory 
counteraction  both  of  Jewish  Christian  and  Gentile  Chiistian  perversions.  This  view  has  been 
defended  especially  by  Melahchthon,  Du  Pin,  Hug,  and  Bertuoldt.  Melakchthon  says: 
'•  It  can  be  seen  that  Paul  wrote  this  Epistle  from  this  cause  :  that  the  Jews  would  appropriate  to 
themselves  redemption  and  eternal  life  by  their  own  righteousness  through  the  works  of  the 
law  ;  and  again,  the  heathen  insisted  that  the  Jews  were  cast  off  for  having  rejected  Christ." 

In  opposition  to  the  historical  (or  better,  the  special  dogmatico-historical)  view  concern- 
ing the  occasion  of  the  Epistle,  we  find  the  theory  of  a  dogmatic,  or,  more  properly,  a  uni- 
versal dogmatico-historical  occasion.  When  the  Apostle  Paul,  in  this  view,  without  special 
references  to  particular  embarrassments  in  the  Roman  church,  would  give  to  this  church  an 
outline  of  the  first  elements  of  the  whole  gospel — according  to  his  conception  of  it — he  did 
it  under  the  steady  conviction  of  his  universal  calling  as  the  special  Apostle  to  the  Gentiles, 
who  must  extend  his  labors  to  the  specific  city  of  the  Gentiles.  On  this  side  belong 
Luther's  Preiace  to  his  Commentary  on  the  Romans,  Heidegger's  Enchiridion,  p.  535,  Tho- 
LUCK,  in  the  earlier  editions  of  his  Commentary,  Olshausen,  Ruckert,  Reiche,  Kollner, 
Glockleb,  and  Philippi.  On  the  difl'erent  modification,  of  this  view,  see  Schott,  p.  17. 
That  of  Olshausen  is  the  most  clearly  defined.  "  "We  can  affirm,"  says  he  [Commentary  on 
the  Romans,  Introduction,  §  5,  p.  58,  Germ,  ed.],  "  that  the  Epistle  to  the  Romans  contains,  so 
to  say,  a  Pauline  system  of  divinity,  since  all  the  essential  topics  to  which  the  Apostle  Paul, 
in  his  treatment  of  the  gospel,  is  accustomed  to  give  special  prominence,  are  here  developed 
at  length."  Philippi  :  "  The  Epistle  was  designed  to  take  the  place  of  the  personal  preach- 
ing of  Paul  in  Rome  ;  therefore  it  contains  a  connected  doctrinal  statement  of  the  specifically 
Pauline  gospel,  such  as  no  other  contains." 

Schott  declares  :  "  I  must  oppose  decidedly,  with  Baur,  all  these  views."  Yet  his  pro- 
test dilfers  from  that  of  Baur.  By  his  supposition  concerning  the  Ebionitism  of  the  Roman 
church,  Baur  was  misled  to  the  monstrous  conclusion,  that  the  theme  of  the  Epistle  to  the 
Romans  first  appears  positively  in  the  section  from  chaps,  i.x.  to  xi.  (in  direct  opposition  to 
Thoi.uck,  who,  in  his  former  editions,  would  find  in  the  same  part  only  a  historical  corol- 
lary). "  The  ever-increasing  number  of  the  Gentile  Christians  received  by  Paul  must  have  so 
far  e.xcited  the  pretensions  of  the  Judaists,  that  even  the  reception  of  the  heathen,  on  con- 
dition of  circumcision,  was  no  more  acceptable  to  them,  and  the  reception  of  the  heathen 
was  regarded  by  them  as  an  usurpation,  so  long  as  Israel  was  not  converted."  Schott  contro- 
verts the  oi)inion  that  "  the  cause  and  object  of  the  Epistle  must  be  determined  from  its 
entire  contents,"  and  confines  himself  to  the  introductory  remarks  of  the  Apostle  concerning 
the  purjjose  and  cause  of  his  Epistle.  The  result  of  his  inquiry  into  the  Prooemium  is  the  fol- 
lowing :  "  As  Paul  sets  out  to  proclaim  his  gospel  for  the  Gentiles  to  the  nations  of  the  West, 
he  designs  to  visit  the  Christian  congregation  at  Rome,  and  to  enter  into  a  closer  personal 
relation  to  it  by  reciprocal  acquaintance,  with  a  view  to  make  this  congregation  of  the 
metropolis  of  the  West  a  solid  base  of  operation  for  his  Gentile  mission  work,  which  was 
now  to  begin  in  the  West."  But  that  understanding  with  the  Roman  church  could  be 
reached  in  no  other  way  than  by  "  a  full  exposition  of  the  nature  and  character  of  his  apos 
tolic  office,  and  the  principles  by  which  he  was  governed  in  his  conduct."  Schott  timls, 
therefore,  in  the  Epistle,  "  not  an  exposition  of  the  Pauline  thcofy  of  Christianity,  but  a 
description  and  vindication  of  the  Pauline  system  of  missionary  labors. 


§    6.      PLACE   AND    TIME    OF   THE    COMPOSITION    OF   THE   EPISTLE.  3y 

We  object  to  this  view,  on  the  whole,  that  it  puts  the  historical  motive  and  the  doctrinal 
in  a  strong  contrast  which  is  untenable.     Then  in  particular  : 

1.  The  distinction  between  the  East  and  the  West,  by  which  the  former  is  described  as 
the  sphere  of  Jewish  Christianity,  and  the  latter,  on  the  other  hand,  is  the  sphere  iu  which 
the  Apostle's  purely  Gentile  Christian  labors  began  (p.  102  flf.). 

2.  The  sujDposition  that  the  Apostle  desired,  in  his  Epistle,  to  lay  before  the  church  ia 
Rome  a  comjjlete  apologetic  programme  of  his  missionary  policy,  in  order  to  gain  their  recog- 
nition, and  thereby  find  in  them  a  point  of  support ;  but  not  to  proclaim  to  the  church  in 
Rome  the  gospel  as  he  understood  it. 

3.  He  would  place  the  church  in  Rome,  by  means  of  his  admonitions,  in  such  a  condition 
that  it  could  become  a  basis  for  his  Western  missionary  labors ;  but  he  did  not  intend  that 
Rome  itself  should  be  his  final  object,  but  merely  serve  as  a  point  of  support  for  his  labors  in 
the  West,  above  all  in  Spain. 

It  is  above  all  things  improper  to  separate  the  historical  and  the  doctrinal  cause,  or  to  bring 
them  into  opposition.  The  Apostle  to  the  Gentiles  was  under  no  obligation  to  legitimatize 
himself  before  the  Roman  church  concerning  his  missionary  labors  in  the  West ;  yet,  accord- 
ing to  the  principle  of  Apostolic  order,  he  had  to  justify  himself  when  he  wrote  to  the 
Romans  ro\fj.rjpoTepos  (which  certainly  does  not  mean  by  way  of  defence,  but,  with  more  than 
usual  boldness),  and  proclaimed  to  them  the  gospel.  Plainly,  the  first  fundamental 
thought  of  the  Epistle  is  this  :  The  call  of  the  Apostle  to  the  Gentiles  is  a  call  for  Rome,  and 
therefore  the  Apostle  had  long  made  the  city  of  Rome  his  object.  But  the  second  fundamen- 
tal thought,  which  limits  the  first,  is  the  idea  of  apostolic  regulation.  The  Apostle  cannot 
lay  claim  to  the  church  as  exclusively  his  own,  since  it  had  already  long  existed  without  hia 
cooperation.  Therefore  he  describes  his  anticipated  journey  as  one  to  the  heathen  West — to 
Spain,  the  limit  of  the  Western  pagan  world — in  which  he  designs  that  Rome  should  furnish 
him  a  hospitable  stay.  Nevertheless,  the  Apostle  was  filled  with  the  confidence  that  he  could 
venture  to  address  Rome  as  his  church,  and  assuredly  as  the  church  in  which  he  had  to  per- 
fect the  universal  union  of  Jewish  Christianity  and  Gentile  Christianity,  of  Jerusalem  and 
Antioch.  Accordingly,  he  unfolds  the  religious  and  moral  strength  of  his  gospel,  as  fully 
adapted  to  save  Jews  and  Greeks,  and  therefore  to  unite  them,  since,  with  the  same  evidence, 
it  (a.)  makes  Jews  and  Gentiles  sinners  alike ;  (&.)  presents  salvation  in  Christ  with  equal 
certainty  to  both ;  (c.)  leads  both  from  the  same  death  to  the  new  life,  as  the  elect ;  (d.) 
makes  plain  their  mutual  dependence  in  the  same  divine  economy  of  salvation  (chaps, 
ix.-xi.)  ;  (e.)  the  gospel  proves  itself  to  be  a  power  of  sanctification  for  Jews  and  Gentiles, 
which  can  make  both  capable  of  being  reciprocally  sympathetic,  and  of  setting  them  free 
from  their  Jewish  and  pagan  prejudices  (chap.  xii.  S.).  By  these  combined  considerations 
the  Apostle  furnishes  to  the  Christians  in  Rome  a  real  and  practical  proof  that  he,  as  the 
universal  Apostle  to  the  Gentiles,  was  also  called  to  be  indirectly  the  Apostle  of  Israel 
(chap.  xi.  13,  14),  and  of  the  unity  of  the  Jewish  and  Gentile  Christians ;  and  that  Rome,  the 
universal  church  of  Gentile  Christians,  was  called,  as  such,  to  become  the  union  church  of 
Jewish  and  Gentile  Christians.  And  this  is  to  be  brought  about  by  the  strength  of  the  uni- 
versal gospel,  which  unites  all  the  elect,  and  which,  after  first  announcing  it  by  letter,  he 
hopes  soon  to  present  orally,  so  as  to  make  Rome  the  point  of  departure  for  this  universal. 
Christian  Church. 

The  matter  stands,  therefore,  thus  :  The  Apostle,  who  began  his  labors  as  the  Apostle  to 
the  Jews  (Acts  ix.  22,  28),  and  who  was  afterwards  in  a  special  sense  the  Apostle  to  the  Gen- 
tiles (Acts  xxii.  21 ;  Gal.  ii.),  now  enters  upon  the  third  stage  of  his  activity  as  the  Apostle 
to  all  nations,  and  devotes  his  attention  to  the  development  of  a  union  Church,  which  should, 
embrace  in  one  Jewish  Christians  and  Gentile  Christians. 


§   5.     PliAOE  AND  TIME   OF   THE   COMPOSITION  OE   THE   EPISTLE. 

It  is  a  very  general  opinion,  and  cue  sustained  by  various  indications,  that  the  Apostlt 


40  THE    EPISTLE   OF   PAUL    TO   THE    EOilAXS. 

wrote  the  Epistle  to  the  Romans  from  Corinth,  during  his  stay  there,  while  on  his  third  mis- 
fiiouary  journey. 

According  to  Rom.  xv,  25  ff.,  the  Apostle,  when  he  wrote  this  Epistle,  was  about  to  depart 
for  Jerusalem  in  charge  of  the  collection  from  Macedonia  and  Achaia.  But  he  brought  this 
collection  to  an  end  iu  Corinth,  when  on  his  third  missionary  tour,  according  to  1  Cor.  xvi. 
1--3 ;  2  Cor.  ix.  This  combination  refers  to  the  last  three  months'  stay  of  the  Apostle  in 
Achaia  (Acts  .\.v.  2),  and  especially  in  Corinth ;  since  this  city  was  the  metropolis  of  the 
church  of  Achaia,  and  the  Apostle  desired  to  tarry  here,  according  to  1  Cor.  xvi.  1-7  ;  2  Cor. 
ix.  4  ;  xii.  20 ;  .\iii.  2.  It  is  also  in  favor  of  Corinth,  that  the  Apostle  sent  the  Epistle  by  the 
deaconess  Phiebe  from  the  Corinthian  sea2)ort  Cenchreae  (chap.  xvi.  1,  2) ;  that  he  greets  the 
Roman  Christians  for  his  host.  Gains  (chap.  xvi.  23),  whom  we  may  identify  with  the  Corin- 
thian Gaius  (1  Cor.  i.  14) ;  and  also  for  Erastus,  the  treasurer  of  the  city,  who,  according  to 
2  Tim.  iv.  20  (comp.  Acts  xix.  22),  had  his  home  in  Corinth.  Dr.  Paulus  has  no  ground 
whatever  for  arguing  from  chap.  xv.  19,  that  the  Epistle  was  written  in  a  city  of  Illyria. 
Meyer  justly  supposes  that  the  Epistle  was  written  before  the  Apostle — who  first  had  the 
purpose  of  travelling  directly  from  Achaia  to  SjTia  and  Jerusalem — was  compelled  by  Jewish 
persecution  to  return  through  Macedonia  (see  Acts  xx.  3)  ;  for  he  mentions,  chap  xv.  25-31, 
nothing  of  this  important  matter. 

The  TIME  of  the  composition  of  the  Epistle  was  therefore  about  the  year  59  after  Christ. 
The  notice.  Acts  xxviii.  21,  which  seems  to  imply  that  the  Roman  Jews  knew  nothing  of  an 
Epistle  of  Paul  to  Rome,  by  no  means  justifies  the  inference  (drawn  by  Tobler)  that  the 
Epistle  was  written  at  a  later  time  ;  comp.  against  this  Flatt  and  Meyer. 

The  Epistle  was  dictated  by  Paul  to  Tertius,  an  assistant  (chap.  xvi.  22).  "  The  cause 
why  Paul  did  not  write  his  Epistles  with  his  own  hand,  is  not  to  be  found  in  his  want  of 
practice  in  writing  Greek, — which  has  no  support  whatever, — but  in  the  apostolic  condition, 
when  others  were  ready  to  aid  him."  Meyer.  See  Gal.  vi.  11,  and  the  note  of  the  Bible- 
Work  in  he. 

§  6.     TTie  Meaning  and  Import  of  the  Epistle  to  tTie  Somana. 

Olshaijsen  divides  the  Pauline  Epistles  into  three  classes :  First,  dogmatical  didactic 
Epistles,  then  practical  didactic  Epistles,  and  finally, /77Vn<7Zy  expressions  of  his  heart.  This 
division  is  untenable,  as  ajjpears  from  the  fact  that  he  includes  the  profound  christological 
Epistles  to  the  Ephesians  and  Colossians,  together  with  the  Epistles  to  the  Pliilippians  and 
to  Philemon,  in  the  class  of  "  letters  of  friendship."  It  is  also  very  insufficient  to  say  that  the 
E])istlc  to  the  Romans  belongs  to  the  dogmatic  didactic  class.  OLSUArsEN  remarks  correctly, 
that  the  Epistle  to  the  Romans  is  most  nearly  related  to  that  to  the  Galatians ;  yet  he  does 
not  go  quite  to  the  point,  when  he  says :  "  Both  Epistles  treat  of  the  relation  of  law  and 
gospel ;  but  while,  in  Romans,  this  relation  is  viewed  altogether  ohjcctivcli/,  the  Epistle  to  the 
Galatians,  on  the  contrary,  is  ii\tngcthcr  polemical  against  the  Judaizing  Christians.  Besides, 
the  Epistle  to  the  Galatians  is  liniited  solely  to  this  relation,  and  treats  of  the  same  more 
briefly  than  is  the  case  in  the  Epistle  to  the  Romans.  In  the  Epistle  to  the  Romans,  on  the 
otlKT  hand,  the  relation  of  the  law  and  gospel  is  developed  didactically,  and  scientific  illy  in 
the  strict  sense  of  the  word,"  etc. 

We  have  idready  remarked  that  the  two  Epistles  are  to  be  distinguished  as  specifically 
soteriological  in  the  narrower  sense  of  the  word  ;  but  as  the  Ei)istle  to  the  Romans  describes 
justifuation  by  faith  in  Christ  in  antagonism  with  universal  human  depravity,  the  Epistle  to 
the  Galatians,  on  the  contrary,  is  directed  against  false  justification  from  the  works  of  the 
law.  At  the  same  time,  the  Epistle  to  the  Romans  is  constructed  on  a  broader  basis  than  that 
to  the  Galatians,  since  it  deals  both  with  heathenism  and  Judaism.  The  Epistle  purposes  to 
show,  that  neither  the  Gentiles  were  saved  by  God's  revelation  in  nature  and  in  the  con- 
sdencc,  nor  the  Jews  by  the  written  law  of  the  Old  Testament ;  and  he  extends  human 
depravity  and  the  counteracting  redemption  through  three  stages  of  development  in  the  most 


§    6.     THE  MEANING  AND  IMPORT  OF  THE  EPISTLE  TO  THE  ROMANS.  4 

universal  and  exhaustive  contemplation,  to  which  an  equally  comprehensive  practical  appli 
cation  must  correspond. 

Although  the  Epistle  to  the  Komans  belongs,  in  the  chronological  order,  in  the  middle  of 
the  Pauline  Epistles,  yet  its  primacy  has  been  recoguized  in  mauil'est  opposition  to  the  alleged 
primacy  of  the  Koman  Bishoi^.  The  Eijistle  to  the  Romans,  in  its  Pauline  type,  opposes,  by 
its  doctrine  of  justification  by  faith  without  the  works  of  the  law,  the  system  of  Rome ;  so 
that  even  to-day  it  can  be  regarded  as  an  Ejiistle  especially  directed  "  to  the  Romans." 

The  early  Church,  in  its  disposition  of  the  New  Testament  canon,  especially  the  so-called 
"  Apostolos  [as  distinct  from  the  "  Oospel "],  placed  the  Epistle  to  the  Romans,  because  of  its 
importance,  and  with  regard,  at  the  same  time,  to  the  high  standing  of  the  Roman  congrega- 
tion, at  the  head  of  the  Pauline  Epistles.  Still  more  did  the  Reformation  bring  it  into  its 
proper  light.  "  It  was,"  says  Tholuck,  "  from  the  fundamental  truth  developed  in  the 
Epistles  to  the  Romans  and  Galatians,  that  the  Reformation  took  its  start  in  its  opposition  to 
the  Judaism  which  had  crept  into  the  Christian  Church.  Thus  the  doctrine  of  justification 
by  faith  became  its  dogmatic  centre.  Hence  the  importance  attached  to  this  Epistle  by  the 
Protestant  Church.  The  exposition  of  this  Epistle  was  Melanchthon's  favorite  course  of 
lectures,  which  he  repeated  again  and  again  almost  without  interruption ;  and,  as  Demosthenes 
did  with  Thucydides,  he  twice  transcribed  this  Epistle  with  his  own  hand,  in  order  to  impresa 
it  more  deeply  on  his  memory  (Strobel,  LiteraturgescMchte  der  Loci  Melanchthon's^  p.  13). 
Since  he  here  found  a  development  of  the  chief  articles  of  the  Christian  faith,  he  based  on 
the  Epistle  to  the  Romans  the  first  doctrinal  system  of  the  renovated  Church,  Melajs^chthon's 
Loci  Communes,  1521.  Henceforth  the  Ejiistle  was  regarded  as  a  compendium  of  Biblical 
dogmatics,  and  under  this  point  of  view,  Olshausen  also  advises  to  begin  exegetical  studies 
with  the  same.  But  following  the  succession  of  thought  from  chap.  i.  11,  we  would  rather 
find  in  it  a  Christian  Philosophy  of  Vnimrsal  History  (comp.  Baur,  Paulus,  p.  657)."  By  the 
latter  construction,  however,  the  christological  apx"?)  ^^  "^^^^  ^^  t^^  eschatological  rfXos,  would 
receive  too  little  attention.  The  soteriology  is  certainly  pictured  forth  with  its  opposite, 
ponerology,  in  the  most  comprehensive  way ;  and  both  heathendom  and  Judaism  are  described 
under  a  point  of  view  which  comprehends  them  both.  Olshausen  is  of  the  opinion  that 
Luther  commanted  only  on  the  Epistle  to  the  Galatians,  because  the  relation  between  the  law 
and  the  gospel  are  treated  exclusively  in  it,  and  because  he  would  avoid  discussion  on  the 
mysterious  doctrine  of  predestination  (Rom.  ix.  flf.).  But  Luther  certainly  expressed  himself 
pointedly  enough  elsewhere  on  predestination.  [Be  servo  arbitrio,  against  Erasmus.]  The 
Epistle  to  the  Galatians  lay  nearer  to  his  purjDOse,  because  this  Epistle  brings  out  the  doctrine 
of  justificatiop.  by  faith  in  the  strongest  and  clearest  contrast  to  the  false  justification  by 
works.  From  Luther's  own  preface  to  the  Epistle  to  the  Romans  we  learn  how  highly  he 
appreciated  that  Epistle.  On  the  importance  of  the  Epistle  for  the  Church  in  its  inclination 
to  legalism,  and  in  its  relation  to  the  personal  experience  of  Paul,  and  on  its  difficulties,  see 
Olshauskn,  p.  54  flf. 

[S.  T  Coleridge,  in  his  Table-Talk  (June  15,  1833),  calls  St.  Paul's  Epistle  to  the  Romans 
*'  the  moat  profound  work  in  existence,"  and  says  :  "  The  only  fit  commentator  on  Paul  was 
Luthkb. — not  by  any  means  such  a  gentleman  as  the  Apostle,  but  almost  as  great  a  genius." — 

p  a] 

S    7.     THE   CONTENTS   AND   DIVISION. 

A.     The  Contents. 

The  Epistle  to  the  Romans — in  its  sixteen  chapters  the  most  comprehensive  of  the  Pauline 
Epistles — unites  most  intimately  the  character  of  a  dogmatic  epistle  of  instruction  with  the 
character  of  an  ecclesiastical  address  in  a  specific,  personal  relation.  Proceeding  from  the 
ptandi3oint  of  his  apostleship  to  the  Gentiles,  and  after  a  satisfactory  conclusion  of  his 
apostolic  labors  in  the  East,  the  Apostle  designs  to  prepare  the  Christian  church  in  Rome  to 


42  THE   EPISTLE    OF    PAUL   TO   THE   ROMANS. 

be  the  centre  and  starting-point  of  labors  reaching  to  the  farthest  West  (Spain).  His  work  in 
the  West  should  be  universal,  not  merely  as  it  united  the  West  and  East  in  Christ,  but  also  aa 
it  constituted  in  Rome  the  peculiar  type  for  the  united  church  of  Jewish  Christiana  and 
Gentile  Christians.  The  Apostle  to  the  heathen  is,  in  his  consciousness,  perfectly  ripened  into 
the  apostle  for  the  nations  ;  and  in  this  sense  he  intends  to  clothe  the  church  at  Rome  with 
the  prestige  of  a  church  of  the  nations,  which  he  might  regard  as  of  his  own  institution,  and 
make  use  of  as  the  home  of  his  universal  activity. 

To  this  purpose,  the  change  of  the  Roman  church  from  uncertain  authority  into  a  fixed 
institution  of  Pauline  authority,  corresponds  the  universal  soteriological  doctrine  of  the 
Epistle,  as  related  to  the  universal  ecclesiastical  call  of  Paul.  All  men,  viewed  under  the 
antagonism  of  Jews  and  heathen,  are,  in  consequence  of  the  prostitution  of  the  living  Divine 
glory,  regarded  as  sinners,  destitute  of  righteousness  and  merit  before  God  ;  and  all  men  have 
a  common  mercy-seat  for  pardon  in  Christ ;  all  should  pass  from  the  old  life  of  death  in  sin, 
or  in  the  flesh  and  under  the  law,  to  the  new  life  in  Christ,  in  the  spirit  and  in  liberty  ;  all 
were  included  under  the  judgment  of  unbelief,  and  all  should  experience  Divine  comi^assion. 
On  this  dogmatic  foundation  the  church  at  Rome  should  be  completely  based ;  and  in  accord- 
ance therewith,  it  should  regulate  its  internal  relation  between  Jewish  Christians  and  Gentile 
Christians,  as  well  as  its  external  relation  to  the  world ;  but  it  must  also,  in  accordance  with 
this  priucii)le,  j^erceive  that  its  call  as  the  central  city  of  the  Western  Church  can  only  be 
actualized  by  first  acknowledging  the  call  of  Paul,  and  committing  itself  to  him,  as  a  point 
of  departure  in  his  universal  work. 

This  Epistle  has  a  unique  character  in  relation  to  the  Apostle,  since  he  wrote  it  to  a 
church  which  he  had  not  established,  and  had  not  even  once  visited.  But  the  anomalous  char- 
acter of  tliis  fact  may  be  thus  explained  :  The  church  was,  on  one  hand,  still  perfectly  vacant 
from  all  apostolical  authority,  and  it  was  thus  far  not  yet  fully  organized  as  a  church  ;  and, 
on  the  other  hand,  it  was  not  only  naturally  related  to  the  Apostle  to  the  Gentiles  as  the 
church  of  the  world's  metropolis,  but  had  been  long  previously  visited  by  him  in  spirit,  and 
was  accordingly  taken  possession  of  by  his  pupils  and  assistants  as  his  sphere  of  labor  (see 
chap.  xvi.).  The  case  was  similar  with  the  Epistle  to  the  Colossians,  though  the  Apostle 
may  be  regarded  as  the  indirect  founder  of  this  church  (by  Epaphras). 

In  its  dogmatic  aspect,  the  Epistle  to  the  Romans  possesses  a  decidedly  soterioloyical  char- 
acter. As  to  its  form,  it  resembles,  in  its  cautious  tone,  the  Epistle  to  the  Galatians ;  for  the 
Apostle  probes  the  former  church,  and  asks  whether  it  be  already  his  chxirch  ?  and  of  the 
latter,  he  asks  whether  it  still  be  his  church  ?  (Rom.  xv.  15,  16  ;  Gal.  iv.  19,  20). 

[The  Epistle  to  the  Romans,  and  that  to  the  Galatians,  treat  of  the  same  theme,  viz., 
justification  by  free  grace  through  faith  in  Christ,  or  rather,  the  deeper  and  broader  doctrine 
of  a  personal  life-union  of  the  believer  with  Christ  ;  but  the  latter  is  apologetic  and  polemic 
against  the  Judaizing  pseudo-apostles,  who  labored  to  undermine  Paul's  authority,  and  to 
enforce  the  yoke  of  legalism  upon  a  church  of  his  own  planting ;  while  the  former,  written  to 
strangers,  opposes  no  particular  class  of  men,  but  only  the  corrupt  tendencies  of  the  human 
heart.  Both  supplement  each  other,  and  constitute  the  grand  charter  of  evangelical  freedom 
in  Christ.— P.  S.] 

The  Epistle  to  the  Romans  has  this  in  common  with  the  Epistle  to  the  Ephesians,  that  it 
shows  how  salvation  in  Christ  transforms  Gentiles  and  Jews  into  one  Church  of  God  ;  but  in 
the  Epistle  to  the  Ephesians  he  establishes  this  unity  on  the  christological  principle,  while  in 
the  Epistle  to  the  Romans,  it  is  eflfccted  by  the  soteriology.  The  relation  of  the  Romans  to 
the  Colossians  is  similar  to  the  one  just  described.  [But  with  this  diflVrence,  that  the  christo- 
logical element  prevails  in  the  Epistle  to  the  Colossians,  the  ecclesiological  in  that  to  the 
Ephesians. — P.  8.] 

In  its  ecclesiastical  and  practical  character  the  Epistle  to  the  Romans  resembles  those  to 
the  Corinthians.  But  in  the  foraier  case  the  Apostle  has  yet  to  establish  an  authority  and 
institution,  while  in  the  latter  he  has  to  maintain  them. 

In  the  section  from  chap.  ix.  to  xi.,  this  Epistle  approaches  the  eschatological  contents  of 


§    Y.     THE  CONTENTS  AND   DIVISION.  43 

the  Epistles  to  the  Thessalouians.     The  greetings  in  chap.  xvi.  remind  us  of  the  Epistle  to  thft 
Philippians ;  the  practical  portion  reminds  us  of  the  Pastoral  Epistles. 

In  this  Epistle  the  idea  of  piety  or  of  righteousness,  as  a  living  worship  of  God,  is  peculiarly 
prominent ;  perhaps  produced  by  the  decided  predominance  of  the  practical  element  in  the 
Roman  conception  of  cultus.  The  fall  of  man  commenced  with  the  great  peccatum  omissimis : 
Men,  regardless  of  the  natural  revelation  of  God,  forsook  the  living  worship  and  praise  of  Gof 
chap.  i.  21).  Therefore  the  development  of  corruption  among  the  heathen  is  shown  in  an 
external  symbolism,  which  more  and  more  sinks  into  a  mythical  idolatry,  and  results  in  a 
growing  perversion  and  decay  of  morals  (chap.  i.  22-32) ;  but  among  the  Jews,  in  the  fearful 
caricature  into  which  even  its  religious  zeal  is  turned  by  its  fleshly  fanaticism  (chap.  ii. 
17-24).  Therefore  is  salvation  for  faith  represented  by  the  mercy-seat  in  the  Holy  of  Holies 
(chap.  iii.  25),  and  faith  is  a  priestly  free  access  to  grace  (chap.  v.  2),  which  converts  the 
whole  subsequent  life  of  the  Christian  into  a  song  of  praise  (vers.  3-11).  Therefore  the  crown 
of  the  new  life  is  a  revelation  of  the  glory  of  the  children  of  God,  which  is  guaranteed  by  the 
spirit  of  prayer  on  the  part  of  the  faithful  (chap.  viii.).  Therefore,  finally,  must  the  economi- 
cally limited  judgment  of  God  on  Israel,  and  the  whole  economy  of  salvation  in  reference  to 
the  dark  history  of  the  world,  contribute  to  the  glory  of  God  (chap.  xi.  36).  The  new  life  is 
consequently  represented  as  the  direct  contrast  to  the  fall  of  man.  As  the  living  service  of 
God  ceased  with  the  latter,  so  now  is  the  true  spiritual  service  of  God  restored  in  the  lives  of 
Christians,  since  they  dedicate  their  bodies  as  living  sacrifices  to  God  (chap.  xii.  1  ff".).  The 
temporal  authority  (chap.  xiii.  1  flf.)  stands  in  a  subservient  (ver.  4)  and  liturgical  (ver.  6) 
relation  to  the  living  divine  service  of  Christians.  In  its  great  moral  significance,  which  also 
requires  a  moral  and  free  recognition  (ver.  5),  it  is  unconsciously  subject  to  the  highest  aim 
and  goal  of  human  history — the  glory  of  God  through  Christ.  The  Church  must  be  con- 
formed to  this  glory  ;  it  must  be  an  instrument  for  the  object  that  all  nations  should  praise 
God  (chap.  xv.  11).  The  Epistle  is  directed  to  this  end :  it  is  a  priestly  work  to  make  the 
heathen  an  acceptable  offering  of  God  (chap.  xv.  16).  It  finally  corresponds  to  this  concep- 
tion of  the  kingdom  of  God  as  a  restored  and  real  worship,  that  the  Apostle  concludes  with  a 
liturgical  doxology,  in  which  faith  in  the  promises  and  announcements  of  the  gospel  responds 
to  the  living  God  of  revelation  with  an  eternal  Amen  (chap.  xvi.  25-27) — a  passage  which 
may  be  explained  by  a  comparison  with  1  Cor.  xiv.  16 ;  2  Cor.  i.  20 ;  Heb.  xii.  22 ;  xiii.  15 ; 
Rev.  iv.  10. 

The  church  at  Rome  must,  therefore,  in  accordance  with  its  call,  become  a  focus  for  the 
restoration  of  the  living,  real,  and  universal  worship  of  God  by  the  nations,  as  the  institution 
of  Paul,  the  universal  Apostle  of  the  nations.  It  must  become  the  point  of  departure  of  the 
Church  of  the  Western  nations,  in  the  sense  in  which  the  word  catholic  had  been  originally 
used ;  that  is,  in  hannony  with  the  religious  and  moral  necessities  of  humanity,  in  harmony 
with  the  moral  significance  and  mission  of  the  state,  in  harmony  with  the  free  as  well  as  with 
the  anxious  consciences  of  the  faithful  on  the  basis  of  justification  by  faith  without  the  works 
of  the  law. 

B.     The  Arrangement. 

THE    INTRODUCTION    AND    FUNDAMENTAL    THEME. 

The  apostolate  of  Paul  appointed  for  the  glory  of  the  name  of  God  by  means  of  the 
gospel  of  Christ,  and  of  the  revelation  of  the  justice  of  God  for  faith  throughout  the  vyhole 
world,  among  Jews  and  Gentiles,  chap.  i.  1-17. 

st  Section. — The  inscription  and  greeting.     The  Apostle ;  his  call ;  his  apostolic  office ;  hia 

greeting  of  the  saints  in  Rome,  vers.  1-7. 
2d  Section. — The  point  of  connection.     The  fame  of  the  faith  of  the  Christians  at  Rome  in  all 
the  world  ;  and  his  desire  and  purpose  to  come  to  them  to  announce  the  gospel  to  them, 
vers.  8-15. 


44  THE   EPISTLE    OF   PAUL   TO    THE   ROMANS. 


id  Sectimi. — The  fundamental  theme.  The  joyful  readiness  of  the  Apostle  to  proclaiia  th# 
gospel  of  Christ,  since  it  is  the  power  of  God  to  save  Jews  and  Gentiles— as  a  revelation  0/ 
the  justice  of  God  by  and  for  faith,  vers.  16,  17. 

Part  First. 

The  doctrine  of  righteousness  by  faith,  as  the  restoration  of  the  true  worship  of  God,  chap. 
i.  18- chap.  xi. 

FIRST   DIVISION. 

Sin  and  grace  in  their  first  antagonism.  The  real  appearance  of  corruption  and  salvation. 
Righteousness  by  faith.  The  wrath  of  God  on  all  injustice  of  men ;  that  is,  the  actual  cor- 
ruption of  the  world  in  its  growth  for  death  hastened  by  the  judgment  of  God ;  and  the 
antagonistic  justification  of  sinners  by  the  propitiation  or  pardon  in  Christ,  through  faith, 
chap.  i.  18-v.  11. 

Ut  Section.— The  beginning  of  all  real  corruption  in  the  world,  and  of  the  Gentiles  in  par- 
ticular, and  God's  judgment  on  the  same  ;  the  neglect  of  the  general  revelation  of  God  by 
the  creation,  in  the  omission  of  the  real  worship  of  God  by  praise  and  thanksgiving,  chap, 
i.  18-21. 

2d  Section.— ThQ  development  of  heathen  corruption  under  the  judicial  abandonment  on 
God's  side  (the  withdrawal  of  His  Spirit).  From  symbolism  to  the  worship  of  images 
and  beasts ;  from  theoretical  to  practical  corruption  ;  from  natural  sins  to  unnatural  and 
abominable  ones,  to  the  development  of  all  vices  and  crimes,  to  the  demoniacal  lust  for 
sin,  and  to  evil  maxims  themselves,  chap.  i.  22-32. 

M  Section. — Transition  from  the  corruption  of  the  Gentiles  to  the  corruption  of  the  Jews. 
The  genuine  Jeus.  The  higher  wiiversal  antagonism  alove  the  antagonism  of  heathendom  and 
Judaism :  striving  and  opposing  men.  The  universality  of  corruption,  and,  with  the  uni- 
versality of  guilt,  the  worst  corruption  :  judging  the  neighbor.  The  guilt  of  this  uncharita- 
ble judgment  is  intensified  by  the  continuance  of  a  general  antagonism  of  pious,  striving 
men,  and  of  stiff-necked  enemies  of  the  truth  throughout  the  worid,  wnthin  the  general 
corruption,  over  against  the  righteous  and  impartial  government  of  God  ;  this,  too,  by 
virtue  of  the  continuance  of  God's  general  legislation  in  the  conscience.  The  revelation 
of  the  antagonism  of  Gentiles  true  to  the  law,  and  of  Jews  who  despised  the  law  on  the 
day  of  the  jn'odamation  of  the  gospel,  chap.  ii.  1-16. 

ith  Section. —  The  real  Jews.  The  increased  corruption  of  the  Jew  in  his  false  zeal  for  the  law 
(a  counterpart  of  the  corruption  of  the  heathen  in  his  symbolism).  The  fanatical  and 
wicked  method  of  the  Jews  in  handling  the  law  with  legal  pride,  and  of  corrupting  it  by 
false  application  and  unfaithfulness,  an  occasion  for  defaming  the  name  of  God  among  the 
heathen,  chap.  ii.  17-24. 

ith  Section.— The  use  of  circumcision  :  an  adjustment  of  the  need  of  salvation  ])y  the  knowl- 
edge of  sin.  The  circumcision  which  becomes  the  foreskin,  and  the  foreskin  which  be- 
comes circumcision ;  or,  the  external  Jew  can  possibly  become  an  internal  Gentile,  while  the 
external  Gentile  can  become  an  internal  Jew.  It  is  not  the  dead  possession  of  the  law,  but 
fidelity  to  the  law,  that  is  of  use.  It  does  not  produce  a  pride  of  the  law,  but  knowledge 
of  sin — that  is,  of  the  necessity  of  salvation.  The  advantage  of  circumcision  consists 
herein  :  that  to  the  Jews  are  committed  those  declarations  of  God,  that  law,  by  wliich  all 
men  are  represented  under  the  penalty  of  sin.  Sin  represented  as  acknowledged  guilt  over 
against  the  law,  chap.  ii.  25-iii.  20. 

6fA  Section. — The  revelation  of  God's  righteousness  without  the  law  by  faith  in  Christ,  for  all 
sinners  without  distinction,  by  the  representation  of  Christ  as  the  Mediator  (Propitiator) ; 
the  righteousness  of  God  as  justifying  righteousness,  chap.  iii.  21-26. 

1th  Section.— The  abrogation  of  the  vain  glory  (or  self-praise)  of  man  by  the  law  of  faith. 


§    7.     THE  CONTENTS  AND  DIVISION.  45 

Justification  by  faith  without  tTie  woris  of  the  law.  First  proof  from  experieoce  :  God  is 
the  God  of  the  heathen  as  well  as  of  the  Jews ;  which  fact  is  shown  by  the  faith  of  the 
Gentiles,  as  well  as  by  the  true  renewal  of  the  law  by  faith,  vers.  37-31. 

6th  Section. — Second  proof  of  the  righteousness  by  faith  :  from  the  Scriptures,  and  this  from 
the  history  of  the  faith  of  Abraham,  the  ancestor  of  the  Jews  themselves.  Abraham  is  the 
father  of  faith  to  the  Gentiles  as  well  as  to  the  Jews,  because  he  had  been  justified  in  the 
foreskin  as  a  heathen,  and  because  he  had  received  circumcision  as  a  seal  of  justification  by 
faith.  David  is  also  a  witness  of  righteousness  by  faith.  Abraham  in  his  faith  in  the 
word  of  the  personal  God  of  revelation,  and  especially  in  the  promise  of  Isaac,  a  type  of 
all  believers  in  the  miracle  of  the  resurrection  of  Christ,  chap.  iv. 

9th  Section. — The  fruit  of  justification.  Peace  with  God  and  the  development  of  new  life  to 
the  fulfilment  of  Christian  hope.  The  new  worshiij  of  God  by  the  Christians.  They  have 
free  access  to  grace  in  the  Most  Holy.  Therefore  they  boast  of  their  hope  in  the  glory  of 
God  ;  and  glory  even  in  the  afflictions  they  suffer,  by  which  this  hope  is  perfected.  The 
love  of  God  in  Christ  as  the  guaranty  of  the  realization  of  Christian  hope.  Christ's  death 
our  reconciliation  :  Christ's  life  our  blessedness.  Its  bloom  :  the  joyous  glorying  that  God 
is  our  God,  chap  v.  1-11. 

BECOND  DrVISION. 

Sin  and  grace  in  their  second  antagonism  (as  in  their  second  power),  according  to  their 
operations  in  human  nature  and  in  nature  generally.  The  sinful  corruption  of  the  world 
proceeding  from  Adam  and  made  the  common  inheritance  of  man  ;  and  the  life  of  Christ  as 
the  internal  vital  principle  of  the  new  birth  for  new  life  in  single  believers,  in  all  humanity, 
and  in  the  whole  created  world.  The  principle  of  death  in  sin,  and  the  principle  of  the  new 
life ;  as  well  as  the  glorification  of  all  nature  in  righteousness,  chap.  v.  12-viii.  39. 

Ut  Section. — The  sin  of  Adam  as  the  mighty  principle  of  death,  and  the  grace  of  God  in 
Christ  as  the  mightier  principle  of  the  new  life  in  individual  human  nature,  and  in  whole 
humanity.  The  law  as  the  medium  of  the  completed  consciousness  of  sin  and  giiilt,  chap. 
V.  12-31. 

2d  Section. — Call  to  the  new  life  in  grace.  The  contradiction  between  sin  and  grace.  The 
vocation  of  the  Christians  to  new  life,  since  they,  by  baptism  in  the  death  of  Christ,  are 
changed  from  the  sphere  of  sin  and  death  into  the  sphere  of  righteousness  and  life,  chap, 
vi.  1-11. 

3^  Section. — The  essential  emancipation  and  actual  departure  of  Christians  from  the  service 
of  sin  unto  death  into  the  service  of  righteousness  unto  life,  by  virtue  of  the  death  of 
Christ.     Believers  should  live  in  the  consciousness  that  they  are  dead  to  sin,  vers.  12-28. 

ith  Section. — The  essential  transfer  and  actual  transition  of  Christians  from  the  service  of  the 
letter  imder  the  law  to  the  service  of  the  Spirit  under  grace,  by  virtue  of  the  death  of 
Christ.  Believers  should  live  in  the  consciousness  that  they  (by  the  law)  are  dead  to  the 
law,  chap.  vii.  1-6. 

5th  Section. — The  law  in  its  holy  appointment  to  lead  over,  by  the  feeling  of  death,  to  new  life 
in  grace.  The  development  of  the  law  from  the  exterior  to  the  internal.  The  experience 
of  Paul  a  life-picture  of  the  battle  under  the  law  as  the  transition  from  the  old  life  in  the 
law  to  the  new  life  in  faith,  vers.  7-25. 

ith  Section. — The  Christian  life,  or  life  in  Christ  as  the  new  life  according  to  the  law  of  the 
Spirit,  as  walking  in  the  Spirit.  The  fulfilment  and  exaltation  of  the  law  to  be  the  law  of 
the  Spirit  in  Christ.  The  law  of  the  Spirit  as  principle  of  the  new  life  of  adoption,  and 
of  the  exaltation  of  the  faithful  and  of  humanity  to  the  liberation  and  glorification  of  the 
creature,  to  the  new  world  of  life  in  love,  chap.  viii. 

a.  The  Spirit  as  the  Mediator  of  the  atonement  and  witness  of  adoption,  vers.  1-16. 
I.  The  Spirit  a  surety  of  the  inheritance  of  future  glory.    (1.)  The  subjective  certaintj 


46  THE    EPISTLE    OF   PAUL   TO   THE   ROMAXS. 

of  future  perfection,  or  the  spiritualizaticn  and  glorification  of  Christian  life,  vers, 
17-27.     (2.)  The  objective  certainty  of  future  perfection  in  glory,  vers.  28-89. 


THIRD   DIVISION. 

Sin  and  grace  in  their  third  antagonism  (in  their  third  power).  The  hardness  of  heart  and 
the  economical  judgment  on  hardness  of  heart  (the  historical  curse  on  sin),  and  the  turning 
of  the  judgment  to  the  rescue  by  the  power  of  Divine  sympathy  at  the  progress  of  universal 
history.  The  historical  development  of  sin  to  the  execution  of  the  judgment,  and  the  revela- 
tion of  salvation  in  demonstration  of  mercy.  The  intimate  connection  of  God's  acts  of 
judgment  and  rescue ;  the  latter  being  conditioned  by  the  former,  chaps,  ix.-xi. 

let  Section. — The  dark  mystery  of  the  judgment  of  God  in  Israel,  and  its  solution,  chap.  ix. 

a.  The  painful  contrast  of  the  misery  of  the  Jews  in  opposition  to  the  portrayed  hap- 
piness of  the  Christians,  who,  for  the  most  part,  came  from  the  Gentiles.  The  sorrow 
of  the  Apostle  at  the  evident  failure  of  the  destiny  of  his  people,  chap.  ix.  1-5. 

b.  The  ecstasy  of  the  Apostle  in  the  thought  that  the  promise  of  God  would  neverthe- 
less hold  good  for  Israel.     The  proofs  therefor,  chap.  ix.  6-33. 

2d  Section. — More  decided  explanation  of  the  mysterious  fact :  The  unbelief  of  Israel.     The 
faith  of  the  Gentiles,  already  foretold  in  the  Old  Testament,  chap.  x. 
a.  The  fact  is  no  fatalistic  destiny,  vers.  1,  2. 

&.  It  rests  rather  on  the  antagonism  between  the  self-righteousness  as  the  supposed 
righteousness  from  the  law,  and  the  righteousness  which  is  by  faith,  vers.  3-5. 

c.  The  righteousness  by  faith,  although  proceeding  from  Israel,  is  nevertheless,  accord- 
ing to  Old  Testament  prophecy,  accessible  to  all  men  because  of  its  nature.  Proof: 
The  unbelief  of  the  Jews  as  well  as  the  faith  of  the  heathen  is  foretold  already  in 
the  Old  Testament,  vers.  6-21. 

3<Z  Section. — Tlie  concluding  gracious  solution  of  the  mystery,  or  the  turning  of  judgment  to 
the  rescue  of  Israel.  The  judgment  of  God  on  Israel  is  not  a  judgment  of  reprobation. 
God's  economy  of  salvation  in  His  Providence  over  the  chosen  of  Israel  and  of  the  multi- 
tude— Jews  and  Gentiles— over  the  intertwining  of  judgment  and  rescue,  by  which  all 
Israel  should  come,  through  the  fulness  of  the  Gentiles,  to  faith  and  happiness.  The 
universality  of  judgment  and  compassion.     Doxology,  chap  xxi. 

a,  Israel  is  not  rejected  ;  the  elect  (the  kernel)  are  saved,  vers.  1-6. 
i.  The  hardening  of  the  hearts  of  the  remainder  becomes  a  condition  for  the  conversion 
of  the  Gentiles,  vers.  7-11. 

c.  On  the  other  hand,  the  conversion  of  the  Gentiles  became  also  a  means  for  the  con- 
version of  Israel,  vers.  11-18. 

d.  The  fact  itself  is  a  conditional  one.  The  Gentiles  can  yet  individually  become 
unbelieving,  and  the  Jews,  on  the  other  hand,  believing,  vers.  19-24. 

e.  The  last  word,  or  the  mystery  of  Divine  Providence  in  its  economy  of  salvation. 
All  will  contribute  to  the  glory  of  God,  vers.  25-36. 

Part  Second. 

Tlie  practical  theme :  The  vocation  of  the  Roman  Christiflns,  on  the  ground  of  their 
accomplished  salvation  or  of  the  mercy  of  God  (which  will  be  extended  to  all)  to  represent 
the  living  worship  of  God  in  the  consummation  of  the  real  burnt  offering,  and  to  constitute  a 
universal  Christian  churcli-life  for  the  realization  of  the  call  of  all  nations  to  praise  and 
glorify  God  ;  so  that  they  may  also  acknowledge  and  maintain  the  universal  call  of  the 
Apostle.  Tlie  recommendation  of  his  companions,  assistants,  and  friends,  in  the  sending  of 
his  greetings  to  them  for  the  purpose  of  the  true  develoiiment  of  the  Church,  and  as  a  coun- 


§    1.     THE  CONTENTS  AND  DIVISION'.  4'7 

terpart,  his  warning   against  Judaizing  or    paganizing  errorists.     Greetings,  invocation  of 
blessings,  chap.  xii.  1-xvi.  37. 

FIRST   DIVISION. 

The  call  of  the  Roman  Christians  to  a  universal  Christian  deportment,  chap.  xii.  1-xv.  13. 

1st  Section. — The  practical  theme,  vers.  1,  3.  The  proper  conduct  of  the  Christians  toward 
the  community  of  the  brethren  for  the  establishment  of  a  harmonious  church  life,  chap, 
xii.  1-8. 

2d  Section. — The  true  conduct  of  the  Christians  in  all  personal  relations.  For  their  own  life, 
toward  the  brethren,  toward  everybody,  and  even  toward  enemies,  chap.  xii.  9-31. 

Zd  Section. — Christian  universalism  (Roman  Catholicism  in  Paul's  sense)  in  the  proper  conduct 
toward  those  in  authority  (the  lieathen  state),  which  also  possesses  an  official  and  liturgical 
service  in  the  household  of  God.     The  object  and  aim  of  government,  chap.  xiii.  1-6. 

^th  Section. — Proper  conduct  toward  the  world  in  general.  Legal  fellowship  with  the  world. 
The  recognition  of  the  rights  of  the  world  in  the  justice  and  also  in  the  strength  of  the 
love  of  our  neighbor.  The  separation  from  the  ungodly  nature  of  the  old  world  (the  dark 
character  of  heathendom).  The  universality  and  its  sanctification  by  the  true  separation, 
vers.  7-14. 

^th  Section. — The  true  practice  of  the  living  worship  of  God  in  the  management  and  adjust- 
ment of  the  differences  between  the  weak  or  perplexed  (the  slaves  of  the  law)  and  the 
strong  (inclined  to  disregard,  and  Antinomian  transgression  in  freedom).  The  Christian 
universality  of  social  life  (to  take  and  give  no  offence),  chap.  xiv.  1-xv.  4. 

a.  Reciprocal  regard,  forbearance,  and  recognition  between  the  weak  and  the  strong. 

Special  warning  against  giving  offence  to  the  weak,  chap.  xiv.  1-13. 
&.  Of  gi\4ng  offence,  and  despising  forbearance  to  the  weak,  chap.  xiv.  13-xvi. 
c.  Reciprocal  edification  in  self-denial  after  the  example  of  Christ,  chap.  xv.  3-4. 

^th  Section. — Admonition  to  the  harmony  of  all  the  members  of  the  congregation  to  the  praise 
of  God  on  the  ground  of  the  grace  of  God,  in  which  Christ  has  accepted  Jews  and  Gentiles. 
Reference  to  the  vocation  of  all  nations  to  praise  God  even  according  to  the  Old  Testa- 
ment, and  encouragement  of  the  Roman  Christians  to  an  unbounded  hope  in  this  relation, 
in  agreement  with  their  call,  chap.  xv.  5-13. 

SECOND  DIVISION. 

The  call  of  the  Apostle  to  a  universal  apostleship,  and  his  consequent  relation  to  the 
Roman  church,  as  the  point  of  departure  for  the  universal  apostleship  in  the  West,  chap.  xv. 
14-33. 

a.  The  Apostle  declares,  almost  apologizingly,  that  his  writing  to  the  Romans  was  the 
result  of  his  call  to  make  the  heathen  in  priestly  operation  an  acceptable  offering  to 
God ;  and  he  gives  information  on  the  general  completion  of  his  work  in  the  East 
(to  niyria),  and  the  results  of  the  same,  vers.  14-19. 

&.  His  principle  not  to  invade  the  sphere  of  others  (a  conduct  opposite  to  that  of  all 
sect-makers).  The  consequent  impediment  to  come  directly  to  Rome,  where  Chris- 
tian congregations  already  existed.  Nevertheless,  his  desire  to  labor  for  them,  which 
was  in  harmony  with  his  call.  His  hesitation  not  being  completely  removed,  he 
describes  his  anticipated  visit  to  Rome  as  a  temporary  stay  for  the  better  prosecu- 
tion of  his  journey  through  Rome  to  Spain ;  that  is,  to  the  limits  of  the  West, 
without  doubt  in  expectation  that  the  church  will  welcome  him  and  commit  itself 
to  his  direction,  vers.  30-34. 

c.  His  last  hindrance  from  his  journey  to  Rome.  The  mention  of  the  collections,  a 
proof  of  his  love  to  the  believing  Israelites,  an  exjiression  of  the  proper  conduct  of 
Gentile  Christians  to  Jewish  Christians.     Another  announcement  of  his  journey 


48 


THE   EPISTLE    OF   PAUL   TO   THE   ROMANS. 


through  Rome  and  of  his  visit  in  the  spirit  of  apostolical  refinement.  Foreboding 
reference  to  the  animosity  of  the  unfaithful  in  Judaea,  and  a  request  for  prayer  that 
he  might  be  permitted  to  accomi^lish  his  purpose  of  coming  to  them,  vers.  23-33. 

THIRD   DIVISION, 

The  recommendation  of  his  predecessors,  companions,  and  assistants,  in  a  succession  ol 
greetings,  united  with  a  warning  against  separatistic  heretics  (Jews  and  Gentiles),  who  could 
hinder  and  even  destroy  Rome's  destiny  and  his  apostolic  mission.  Tet  the  Ood  of  peace  will 
ehortly  hruise  Satan  under  their  feet.     Invocation  of  blessing,  chap.  xvi.  1-20, 

a.  Tlie  deaconess  Phojbe,  vers,  1,  2, 

&.  The  greetings,  vers,  3-16.    The  warning,  and  the  inyocation  of  blessing,  vers,  17-20. 

CONCLU8ION, 

The  greetings  of  the  Pauline  circle  to  the  church  at  Rome,  and  the  invocation  of  blessings 
by  Paul  himself.     Ilis  doxological  sealing  of  the  gospel  of  the  justifying  grace  of  God  in 
Christ  for  all  nations,  vers.  21-27, 
a.  The  greetings. 

ft.  The  doxological  sealing  of  the  gospel  for  eternity  in  accordance  with  the  funda- 
mental devotional  thought  of  his  Epistle.     The  Amen  of  the  Church  through  Christ, 
as  the  response  to  the  gospel  of  Christ,  vers.  25-27, 
Now  to  Him  that  is  of  power  (in  the  gospel)  to  stablish  you 
According  to  my  gospel,  etc. 
According  to  the  revelation  of  the  mystery,  etc. 
According  to  the  commandment  of  the  everlasting  God, 
To  God  only  wise. 
Be  glory  through  Jesus  Christ 
For  ever  !     Amen  1 

APPENDIX. — Table  of  Pericopes,  or  Scripture  Lessons  for  the  Tear,  in  the  Epistle  to  th» 

Romans. 


1,  Adrent Rom.  xiii.  11-14. 

2.  "       Eom.  XV.  4-13. 

lat  Sunday  after  Eiiipbany. . .  Bom.  xii.  1-6, 

2d        «'  •'  "      Eom.  xii.  7-16, 

8d        "  "  "      . . . .  Bom.  xii.  17-21. 

4th      "  "  "      . . . .  Bom.  xiii.  8-10. 

Trinity Bom.  xi.  33-36. 


4th  Sunday  after  Trinity Rom.  viii.  18-23. 

(Visitation  of  Mary.)  Bom.  xii.  9-16. 

6th  Sunday  after  Trinity Bom.  vi.  3-11. 

7th      "  "  "         ....  Eom.  vi.  19-23. 

8th       "  "  "        ...,  Rom.  viii.  12-17. 

27th     "  "  "         ....   Kom.  ui.  21-25. 


J  8.     lilTEBATUEE   ON   THE  EPISTLE   OF  PAUL  TO   THE   ROMANS* 

See  the  foregoing  catalogues  of  Pauline  literature  in  general.  Also  the  catalogues  in 
Ln.iENTHAL'8  Bill.  Avchivanus,  p.  247  flf.,  where  there  is  a  rich  catalogue  of  the  older  works 
on  single  passages  of  the  Epistle ;  Fuhrmann's  Hmulhuch  der  theol.  Literatur,  ii.  jj.  326 ; 
Winer,  Handfrnch  der  thcol.  Literatur,  vol.  i.  p.  255  ff. ;  ii.  p.  121 ;  Supplement,  p.  39 ;  Danz, 
in  his  Universahrdrterbach  der  theol.  Literatur^  p.  346,  and  in  the  supplementary  number,  p. 
93,  who  gives  an  extensive  catalogue  of  literature,  not  only  to  the  entire  Epistle,  but  on 
single  divisions  and  chapters;  Guericke,  Ncu-testamentliche  Isngogik  [3d  ed,,  1868,  pp.  270 
and  809] ;  Reuss  [Ilistory  of  the  Holy  Scriptures  of  the  Neio  Testament^  4th  ed.,  1864,  p.  t3] ; 
Reiche  [Commentary  on  the  Iiomans,  1833,  vol.  i.]  p.  95  ff.  [Comp,  the  catalogue  of  English 
works  on  all  the  Epistles,  and  on  the  separate  portions  of  the  same,  in  Daulino,  Cyclopctdia 
Bihliographica  (subject :  Holy  Scriptures),  London,  1859.] 


(In  tho  original,  this  seotion  i«  |  7,  and  precedes  the  one  on  the  Contents  and  Diyision.— F.  8.] 


§   8.     LITERATURE   ON   THE   EPISTLE   OF   PAUL   TO   THE   ROMANS.  49 

Commentaries, — Tholtjck  enumerates,  p.  26  flf.,  as  expositors  :  * 

1.  Among  the  Churcli  fathers :  Origen  [t251,  only  in  the  mutilated  Latin  version  ot 
RuFiNUS,  Orig.  Opera,  ed.  Delarue,  torn.  iv. — P.  S.],  Chrysostom  [t405,  Homil.  xxxii.  in  ep. 
ad  Bom.  Opera,  ed.  Bened.  tom.  ix.,  an  English  translation  in  the  Ouford  Library  of  the 
Fathers,  vols,  vii.,  1841],  Theodoret  [t457,  Comment,  in  ep.  ad  Horn.],  Theodore  ob" 
MopsvESTiA  [t439,  Fragments,  collected  by  Fried.  Fritzsche,  in  Theod.  Mops,  in  N.  T. 
Com,m.,  1847],  Theophylact  [eleventh  century],  (Ekumenius  [tenth  century],  Greek  scholi 
ast  of  the  Moskow  Godd.  in  Matthmi  [and  in  J.  A.  Cramer's  Catenm  in  8.  Pauli  ep.  ad  Rom., 
Oxon,  1844].  Among  the  Latin  fathers :  Augustine  [t430],t  Pelagius,J  Hilarius  (the 
Ambrosiaster).§  , 

3.  Expositors  of  the  Middle  Ages :  Herveus  [middle  of  the  twelfth  century],  Hugo  op 
St.  Victor  [tll41],  AsiELARD  [tll42],  Thomas  Aquinas  [tl274,  ignorant  of  Greek,  but  very 
profound  and  acute]. 

3.  Roman  Catholic  expositors  since  the  Reformation  :  Erasmus  [tl536],  W.  Este  [tl613], 
a  number  of  Jesuit  expositors,  among  whom  Ben.  Justinian  [1612],  Cornelius  a  Lapidh 
[1614,  14th  ed.,  Lugd.  1683],  Calmet  [tl757],  are  prominent.     For  later  ones,  see  below. 

4.  Protestant  expositors  down  to  the  beginning  of  the  seventeenth  century  : 

a.  Reformed  (Calviuistic)  commentators :  Calvin  [new  ed.,  Halle,  1831],  "  a  model  of 
simple  and  precise  exposition  "  (German  translation  by  E.  W.  Krummacher  and  L.  Ben- 
der, Frankfurt-am-Main,  1837), ||  Beza  [4th  ed.,  1598],  Zwingli  {Opera,  tom.  iii.],  Pelli- 
CANUS,  BuLLiNGER  [1537],  BucER  [1536],  Aretius  [1603],  Pareus  [1608],  Piscator 
[1601]. 

&.  Lutherans :  Luther  (his  celebrated  Preface  to  the  Epistle  to  the  Romans),  Melanch- 
THON  (Annotationes,  1522 ;  Commentarii,  1532), 1"  Bugenhagen,  Brenz,  Camerarius,  Hun- 
Nius,  Balduin. 

5.  Protestant  expositors  to  the  middle  of  the  eighteenth  century : 

Reformed:  Drusius  [tl612],  De  Dieu  [tl642],  Heinsius  [11655],  the  two  Capellus, 
Hammond  [1653],  Clericus  [1698],  Cocceius  [tl669],  (very  prominent). 

*  [The  dates  and  editions  are  added  by  the  American  editor.] 

t  [St.  AtTGUSTiNE  has  only  commented  on  the  first  seven  verses  of  the  Epistle  to  the  Romans,  in  his  Inchoala  eirpositio 
ep.  ad  Rom.  Opera,  ed.  Bened.,  tom.  iii.  p.  9J6  sqq.,  and  on  some  select  passages,  in  expos,  quariindam  proposifionum  ex  ep. 
ad  Rom.,  I.  c,  p.  903  sqq.  It  is  a  remarkable  fact  that  Augcstins,  who,  of  all  the  fathers,  came  nearest  the  Protes- 
tant evangelical  doctrines  of  sin  and  grace  as  taught  by  St.  Paul,  held  essentially  the  Roman  Catholic  view  of  justifica- 
tion as  being  identical  with  sanctification,  while  his  antagonist,  Pelagius,  like  the  Reformers,  explained  Paul's  justi- 
fication as  a  forensic  act  that  consists  in  the  remission  of  sins.  Comp.  my  History  of  Ike  Chrislitn  Church,  vol.  iii.  p. 
812,  845.  In  his  anti-Pelagian  writings,  Augustine  makes  frequent  use  of  the  Epistle  to  the  Romans,  and  the  other 
Pauline  Epi&tles,  which  contributed  much  to  his  conversion.  But  he  was  a  profound  theologian  rather  than  a  learned 
commentator,  and  had  a  very  imperfect  knowledge  of  the  Greek,  and  no  knowledge  whatever  of  the  Hebrew.  Upon  the 
whole,  the  Epistles  to  the  Romans  and  to  the  Galatians  in  their  true  genius  and  imjiort  remained  a  sealed  book  to  the 
Church  at  large  till  the  Reformation  of  the  sixteenth  century.  The  sense  of  the  Scriptures  unfolds  itself  gradually  to 
the  mind  of  the  Church,  and  every  book  has  its  age  in  which  its  peculiar  power  is  felt  in  the  life,  and  brought  out  in 
the  knowledge  and  exposition  of  congenial  divines  more  clearly  and  forcibly  than  ever  before. — P.  S.} 

I  [The  commentary  of  the  hei'etioal  Pelaoius  on  the  Pauline  Epistles  is  brief  and  superficial,  but  betrays  no  mean 
talent  for  plain,  popular,  and  practical  common-sense  exposition  of  the  Scriptures.  By  a  singular  irony  of  history,  the 
commentaries,  together  with  some  other  wiitings  of  Pelagius  in  which  he  develops  his  heretical  system  (.the  Epislola  ad 
Demelriadem,  and  his  libcVus  fidei  addressed  to  Pope  Innocent  I.),  have  been  preserved  as  supposed  works  of  his  bitter 
antagonist,  St.  Jerome  (in  the  eleventh  tome  of  Vallarsi's  edition  ;  comp.  my  Church  His/.,  iii.  p.  791  and  p.  985).  The 
commeiiiaries,  however,  have  undergone  some  emendations  by  the  hand  of  Cassiodorus  (comp.  Cass.,  De  institut.  divin. 
Kler.,  c.  8).— P.  S.] 

§  [The  commentary  of  Ambrosiastee,  so  called,  or  Pseudo-Ambrosius,  on  the  Pauline  Epistles,  is  incorporated  in 
the  works  of  Ambrose,  and  is  generally  ascribed  to  a  Roman  deacon,  Hilary,  of  the  fourth  century  (about  380).  Augus- 
tine refers  to  it  twice  under  this  name.  Contra  duas  Epp.  Pelat/.  iv.  7,  Opera,  x.  p.  472.  Ambrosiaster  exhibits  some 
talent  for  historical  exposition  (like  Pelagius),  but  is  obsciu-e  and  inconsistent.  Upon  the  whole  the  patristic  exegesis 
was  not  grammatical  and  historical,  but  dogmatical  and  practical.— P.  S.] 

l|  [English  translation  of  Calvin  on  the  Romans,  by  Christopeee.  Eosdell,  F.  Sibson,  and  John  Owen.  Edinb. 
Calvin  Tiansl.  Soc,  1844  and  1849.— P.  S.] 

H  [Meter  (Preface  to  the  4th  ed.  of  his  Com.)  calls  Melanchthon's  "  Enarratio"  of  1556,  "his  ripest  exsgetical 
fruit."  The  "  Commentaries"  of  Melanchthon  appeared  also  in  1540,  and  in  a  new  edition  by  Nickel  in  1861.  Lanob, 
following  Tholuck,  refers  to  older  editions.— P.  S.] 

4 


50  THE   EPISTLE   OF   PAUL   TO    THE   ROMANS. 

Lutherans  of  the  seventeenth  century  :  Erasmus  Schmid  [tl637],  Calixtus  [Posthumous 
Lectures,  1G64],  Calovius  [tl688,  author  of  the  Bifdia  lUustratn,  1672,  against  Grotius] 
Spener  [tl705J,  Christ.  Wolf  [Curm  P/nUloyica  et  Critka;  1732],  Bengel's  Gnomon  N.  T. 
(1742) ;  "  on  account  of  its  great  worth,  lately  edited  several  times,  both  in  the  original  Latin, 
and  in  German  and  English  translations."  )* 

Arminians :  Grotius  {^Annotntimvei  in  Nov.  Test.,  1645],  Limborch  [tl712],  Tub- 
BETiNE  [tl737],  (numbered  by  Tholuck  in  this  school,  though  j^erhaps  unjustly),  Wetstein 
(in  his  edition  of  the  Greek  Testament,  with  parallel  passagess  from  the  classical  authors. 
1751). 

Socinians:  Crell  [tl633],  Scin,icnTiNG  [11661],  Przip:;ov. 

6.  Evangelical  expositors,  from  the  middle  of  the  eighteenth  century  down  to  the  present 
time : 

Period  of  transition :  Heumann  [tl764],  Mosheim  [tl770],  Joh.  Benj.  Carpzov  ("  the 
fourth  of  this  name,"  1758),  Morus  [tl794],  Christian  Schmid  [tl774] ;  above  all,  Semler 
[1791].     Koi'pe  [3d  ed.,  1824]  also  belongs  here. 

Latest  period  :  Tholuck  (1st  ed.,  1824),t  Flatt  [1825],  Stenersen  (Danish,  1829),  Klee 
[Roman  Catholic,  1830],  Benecke  [1831],  Ruckert  [2d  ed.,  1839],  Paulus,  Moses  Stuart 
[Andover,  Mass.,  1832],  Charles  Hodge  [Princeton,  New  Jersey,  1835],  Retche  [1834], 
Kollner  [1834],  GlGckler  [1834],  Olshausen  [2d  ed.,  1840,  English  translation,  Edinburgh 
and  New  York,  1860],  De  Wette  [4th  ed.,  1847],  Stengel  [Roman  Catholic,  1836], 
Fritzsche  [3  vols.,  in  Latin,  1836-43,  very  thorough  and  critical],  H.  A.  W.  Meyer,  J 
Oltramare  (French),  Nielsen  (Danish,  in  German  by  Michelsen),  [1843],  Baumgarten- 
Crusius  [1844],  Reithsiayer  [Roman  Catholic,  Regensli.,  1845],  A.  L.  G.  Krehl  [Leipzig, 
1849],  Adalb.  Maier  (Roman  Catholic),  Philippi  [a  strict  Lutheran,  1848,  2d  ed.,  revised, 
1856  ;  3d  ed.,  1867]. 

On  the  merits  of  the  most  important  later  commentators,  see  Tholuck,  pp.  32,  33. — 
[Fritzsche  and  Meyer  are  the  best  philological  commentators ;  De  Wette  excels  in  power 
of  condensation  and  good  taste ;  Tholuck,  Olshausen,  Philippi,  and  Hodge  in  doctrinal 
exposition.— P.  S.] 

This  catalogue  may  be  enlarged,  among  others,  by  the  following  commentaries  :  Bisping 
(Rom.  Cath.),  Der  Brief  an  die  Bomer,  2d  ed.,  Miinster ;  Beelen  (Rom.  Cath.),  Commenta/rius 
in  Ep.  St.  PuuU  ad  Bomanos,  Lovani,  1854  ;  Vinke,  Be  Brief  van  den  Apostel  Paulus  an  den 
Romainen,  2d  ed.,  Utrecht,  1860 ;  Mehring,  Ber  Brief  Pauli  an  die  Burner,  Stettin,  1859 
Schott,  Ber  RiJmerhrief  seinem  Endzweck  und  Oedanlengang  nach  ausgelegt,  Erlangen,  1858 
Van  Hengel,  Literfiretatio  Epistolm  Pauli  ad  Bomanos,  Leyden  und  Leipzig,  1  vol.  1854 
2d  vol.,  1859  ;  Haldane,  Auskgung  des  Brkfes  an  dk  Bomer,  mit  Bemerkungen  ilher  die  Com- 
mentare  Macknighfs,  Stuarfs,  urul  TholucFs,  from  the  English,  Hamburg,  1839-'43;  Umbreit, 
Der  Brief  an  die  Bomer,  avf  dem  Grunde  des  Alien  Testaments  ausgelegt,  Gotha,  1856.     [H. 
Ewald,  Dk  SendscJireihen  des  Ap.  Paulus  iihers.  nnd  erkl.,  Giitt.  1857. — P.  S.] 

Theologicai,-Exegetical  Monographs  on  the  Epistle  to  the  Romans. — See  Reuss, 
p.  95  ;  Jager,  Der  Lehrgehalt  des  Bijmerhriefs,  Till).  1834  ;  Winzer,  Adnotatt.  ad  loea  qumlam 
Epist.  P.  ad  Bom.,  Leipzig,  1835 ;  E.  G.  Bengel,  Bom.  ii.  11-16,  Tub. ;  Michelsen,  De 
Pauli  ad  Bom.  Ep.  duobus  primis  capitibus,  Li'ibeck,  1835 ;  Matthias,  The  Third  Cluxpter  of 

•  [Thohjck  (p.  31)  pays  of  Benokl's  Onomon,  that  It  was  prepared  with  the  devotion  of  an  enthusiastic  lover,  whoae 
searching  eye  noticed  and  admired  even  the  most  unseemly  feature  of  the  beloved,  and  carried  out  with  a  precision  which 
weighed  even  the  smallest  ]>article. — P.  S.] 

t  [The  first  edition  of  Tholvck's  Commentary  on  the  Epistle  to  the  Romans,  which  appeared  in  1824,  when  the 
ftuthor  was  but  twenty-five  years  of  age,  created  quite  an  epoch  in  the  exegetical  literature  of  Germany,  by  breaking  the 
way  for  a  return  to  a  reverent  treatment  of  the  New  Testament  as  the  revealed  word  of  God,  and  by  reopening  the 
exegotical  treasures  of  the  fathers  and  reformers.  In  the  subsequent  editions  it  has  been  repeatedly  rewritten  and 
pained  in  ripe  scholarship.  The  last  edition  is  the  fifth,  Ilalle,  18.56.  Between  the  first  and  the  fifth  edition,  about  forty 
Bommentaries  on  the  same  Epistle  have  made  their  appearance.  An  English  translation  of  Tuolcck  by  the  Rev.  Robkut 
MEKnrs  was  published  in  London,  1842,  2  vols. ;  but  this  is  superseded  by  the  later  editions  of  the  original.— P.  8.] 

t  [Fourth  edition,  1805,  improved  and  enlarged  (by  thirty  pages).  Dr.  Lasoe  ha«  used  the  third,  which  appeared 
kn  1859.    The  American  editor  has  throughout  compared  the  last  edition  of  this  important  work.— P.  S.J 


§    8.      LITERATURE    ON   THE   EPISTLE    OF  PAUL   TO  THE   ROMANS.  51 

Bomans,  Cassel,  1857  ;  Seyxek,  Dissert.  Exeg.  in  Ep.  P.  ad  Bom.,  c.  IV.,  Halle,  1834  ;  Greeb 
ou  Chap.  V.  1-11,  Amsterd.,  1855  ;  K.  Rothe,  Neuer  Versuch  einer  Auslegung  der  paulinischen 
Stelle,  Rom.  V.  12-21,  Wittenberg,  1836 ;  Mangold,  Exeget.  Versuch  uber  Mm.  V.  11-21, 
Erfurt,  1841 ;  KHirFPEB,  Examinatur  novissiTna  Bretschnsideri  de  loco  Bom.  V.  12  sententia, 
Dresden,  1834 ;  Hugenholtz,  Bisp.  de  Cap.  VI.  Ep.  P.  ad  Bom.,  Utreclit,  1821 ;  Kohl- 
BRiJGGE,  Das  siebente  Kap.,  etc.,  Leyden,  1840 ;  Fischer,  Ad  loc.  Bom.  VIII.  18-34,  Wit- 
tenberg, 1806  ;  Grimm,  De  vocdbulo  Kricm  Bom.  VIII.  19  commentatio,  Leipzig,  1812  ;  Reiche, 
De  natura  gemebunda.  Bom.  VIII.  19,  Gottingen,  1830-32 ;  Gadolln,  Bom.  VIII.  28-30, 
Helsingfors,  1834;  Beck,  Versuch  eijier  pneumatisch-herTneneutischen  Entwichelung  des  IX.  Kap., 
Stuttgart,  1839 ;  Ranfpt,  Deutliche  Erkldrung  des  IX.-XI.  Kap.  der  Epistel  Pauli  an  die 
BiJmer,  Leipzig,  1750  ;  E.  Krummacher,  Das  Dogma  von  der  Gnadenwahl  (nebst  Auslegung  des 
IX.-XI.  Kap.),  Duisburg,  1856  ;  on  the  same  chapters,  Steudel,  in  the  TuMnger  Zeitschrift, 
1836,  i. ;  Batjr,  in  the  same,  iii. ;  Haijssert,  in  Pelt's  Mitarleiteyi,  1838,  iii. ;  Meter,  in  the 
same ;  Hofmajtn,  Schriftbeweis,  i.  p.  212  [in  the  2d  edition,  vol.  i.  p.  238  S. — P.  S.] ;  Borgek, 
De  parte  Epist.  ad  Bomanos  parcenetica,  Leyden,  1840;  Phil.  Schaff,  Das  neiinte  Kapitel  dea 
Bomerbriefs  ilbersetst  und  erMdrt,  Mercersburg,  1852  fin  Schaff's  Kirchenfreund,  vol.  v.  p. 
378  flF.,  and  p.  414  flf.)  ;  Wangemanic,  Der  Brief  an  die  Bdm,er  nach  Wortlaut  und  Qedanken- 
gang,  Berlin,  1866  ;  [W.  Mangold,  Der  Bomerbrief,  und  die  Anfdnge  der  Bdmischen  Oemeinde, 
Marbui'g,  1866.  A  valuable  critical  essay.  For  a  very  large  number  of  English  essays  and 
sermons  on  special  chapters  and  verses  of  the  Epistle  to  the  Romans,  see  James  Darling's 
Cyclopedia  BibliograpMca,  Lond.  1859,  pp.  1263-1313. — P.  S.] 

Practical  Com:mentaries  and  Homiletical  Literature.* — Among  these  we  mention 
the  "works  on  the  Romans  by  Anton  (1746),  Speneb  (new  ed.,  by  Schott,  1839),  Storb 
(1823),  Kbaussold  (1830),  Geissler  (1831),  Lossius  (1836),  Kohlbrugge  (1839),  Rocs 
(new  ed.,  1860),  Winkel  (1850),  Diedrich  (1856),  Besser  (Bibelstunden,  vol.  vii.,  1861) ; 
the  Bibk-WorJcs  of  Gerlach,  Lisco,  Calw.,  and  Bttnsen  (vol.  viii.,  1863)  ;  Heubner's  Py-ac- 
tical  Exposition  of  the  N.  T.  ;  Ortloph,  Epistle  to  tlie  Bomans,  Erlangen,  1865-'66. 

[This  list  of  commentaries  on  the  Romans,  by  Drs.  Tholuck  and  Lange,  is  almost  exclu- 
sively Continental,  and  must  be  supplied  by  Anglo-Aioerican  works,  of  which  only  three  are 
mentioned  by  Dr.  Tholuck — the  commentaries  of  Hammond,  Stuart,  and  Hodge.  Comp. 
Darling's  Cyclopedia  Btbliographica,  London,  1859,  p.  1236  flf.  We  notice  the  most  impor- 
tant : 

I.  General  English  commentaries  on  the  whole  Bible :  Matthew  Poole  {Synopsis  Critico- 
rum,  etc.,  4  vols,  in  5  fol.,  Lond.  1669-76,  and  Francof,  ad  M.  1712,  5  vols.  f. ;  Annotations 
upon  the  Holy  Bible,  4th  ed.,  1700,  new  ed.,  Lond.  1840,  reprinted  by  R.  Carter  in  N.  T.)  ; 
Patrick,  Lowth,  Arnold,  Whitby,  and  Lowman  {Critical  Commentary  and  Pa/raphrase  en 
the  Old  and  New  Testaments,  and  the  Apocrypha,  a  new  ed.,  Philad.  1844,  in  4  vols.)  ;  M. 
Henry  (in  many  editions  of  3,  4,  and  6  vols.,  the  most  original,  interesting,  and  edifying 
among  the  popular  and  practical  commentators)  ;  John  Gill  (first  ed.,  Lond.  1763,  in  9  vols., 
full  of  rabbinical  learning  and  ultra-Calvinism) ;  Thos.  Scott  (several  editions,  in  6  vols,  or 
less) ;  A.  Clarke  (new  ed.,  Lond.  1844,  in  6  vols.) ;  D'Oyly  and  R.  Mant  (Lond.  1845 ; 
gives  the  comments  of  the  Anglican  bishops  and  divines)  ;  Comprehensive  Commentary  (com' 
piled  from  Henry  and  Scott,  and  other  sources,  by  W.  Jenks,  Philad,  1855,  in  5  vols.). 

n.  Commentaries  on  the  New  Testament,  including  the  Epistle  to  the  Romans :  H.  Ham- 
mond (4th  ed.,  Lond.  1675)  ;  D.  Whitby  (4th  ed.,  Lond.  1718,  and  often  since)  ;  W.  Burkitt 
(Lond.  1704,  and  often  since ;  very  good  for  practical  and  homiletical  use) ;  P.  Doddridge 
{Family  Expositor,  Lond.  1 739,  in  7  vols.,  and  often) ;  Albert  Barnes  (Not-es  Explanatory 
and  Practical,  New  York  and  Lond.  1850,  and  often,  11  vols.,  prepared  for  Sunday-school 
teachers,  and  circulated  in  many  thousands  of  copies)  ;  S.  T.  Bloomfield  (T7ie  Greek  Testae 
ment,  with  Notes  Critical,  Philological,  and  Exegetical,  first  published  in  1829,  9th  ed.,  Lond 

*  [We  have  omitted  or  abridged  the  German  titles  of  these  books.— P.  S. 


52  THE   EPISTLE    OF   PAUL   TO    THE   ROMANS. 

1855)  ;  H.  Alford  {Oreeh  Testament,  with  a  critically  revised  text,  a  digest  of  various  read- 
ings, marginal  references  to  verbal  and  idiomatic  usage,  prolegomena,  and  a  critical  and  exe- 
getical  commentary ;  first  published  in  1849,  5th  ed.,  Lond.  1865,  in  4  vols. ;  in  the  5th 
edition,  the  Codex  Sinaiticus  has  been  collated.  Dean  Alford  follows  in  the  track  of  Tisch- 
■ENDORF  as  to  the  text,  and  De  Wette  and  Meter  in  the  exposition,  yet  with  independent 
judgment,  good  taste,  and  reverent  spirit) ;  Webster  and  Wilkinson  {N.  Test.  Gh:,  with 
brief  grammatical  and  exegetical  Notes,  Oxon.,  1851,  in  2  vols.)  ;  Chr.  Wordsworth 
(canon  of  Westminster,  high-Anglican,  patristic,  devout,  and  genial,  but  given  to  excessive 
typologizing  and  allegorizing,  and  avoiding  critical  difficulties  :  Greek  Testament,  with  Kotes^ 
1st  ed.,  Lond.  1856  ;  4th  ed.,  Lond.  1866,  in  2  large  vols.).  Of  these  English  commentators 
the  American  editor  has  especially  compared  the  latest  editions  of  Alford  and  Words- 
"WORTH.    Ellicott,  who  is  more  critical  than  either,  has  not  yet  reached  the  Romans. 

lU.  Commentaries  on  the  E2Jistles  of  St.  Paul :  W.  Paley  (Horm  PauUruB,  or  the  truth 
of  the  Scripture  history  of  St.  Paul  evinced  by  a  comparison  of  the  Epistles  which  bear  hia 
name  with  the  Acta  of  the  Apostles,  and  with  one  another,  in  many  editions)  ;  John  Fell 
(A  Paraphrase  and  Annotations  upon  all  the  Epistles  of  St.  Paul,  3d  ed.,  Lond.  1703)  ;  John 
Locke  {A  Paraphrase  and  Notes  on  the  Oalatians,  Corinthians,  Romans,  and  Ephesiajis,  Lond. 
1742,  and  in  Locke's  Works) ;  G.  Benson  (Lond.  1752-'56,  2  vols.)  ;  James  Macknight 
(A  new  literal  translation,  from  the  original  Greek  of  all  the  apostolical  Ejjistles,  with  a  com- 
mentary, etc.,  Lond.  1795,  and  other  editions  of  1,  4,  or  6  vols.)  ;  T.  W.  Peile  {Annotations 
on  the  Apostolical  Epistles,  Lond.  1848-'52,  4  vols.)  ;  Abp.  Sumner  {Apostolical  Preaching  con- 
sidered in  an  Examination  of  St.  PauVs  Epistles,  9th  ed.,  Lond.  1845);  Conybeare  and 
HowsoN  (Life  and  Epistles  of  St.  Paul,  liOnd.  1852,  reprinted  in  New  York  in  several 
editions)  ;  B.  Jowett  {The  Epistles  of  St.  Paul  to  the  Thessalonians,  Oalatians,  Romans,  with 
critical  notes  and  dissertations,  Lond.  1855)  ;  Vaughan  {The  Epistles  of  St.  Paul,  for  English 
Readers,  Lond.  1864). 

rV.  Special  commentaries  on  the  Epistle  to  the  Romans:  A.  Willet  {Hexapla :  that  is,  a 
sixfold  commentarie  upon  the  most  divine  epistle  of  the  holy  Apostle  St.  Paul  to  the  Romans, 
etc.,  Lond.  1620) ;  Bp.  Terrot  (Lond.  1828) ;  R.  Anderson  (3d  ed ,  Lond.  1837) ;  Bp. 
Parry  (Lond.  1832) ;  Moses  Stuart  (Congregationalist,  1st  ed.,  Andover,  1832 ;  2d  ed., 
1835,  6th  ed.,  Lond.  1857)  ;  Charles  Hodge  (O.  S.  Presbyterian,  1st  ed.,  Philad.  1835,  new 
edition,  enlarged  and  revised,  1866) ;  Thomas  CnALirsRS  {Lectures  on  the  Epistle  to  the 
Romans,  Glasgow,  1837,  4  vols.  12mo.)  ;  R.  Haldane  (new  ed.,  Lond.  1842,  in  3  vols.) ;  Abp. 
Sumner  {A  Practical  Exposition  of  the  Epistle  to  the  Romans  and  1  Corinthians,  Lond.  1843)  ; 
W.  Walford  {CuroB  Romance,  Lond.  1846)  ;  W.  W.  Ewbank  {Commentary,  etc.,  Lond.  1850- 
'51,  2  vols.)  ;  8.  H.  Turner  (Episcopalian,  The  Epistle  to  the  Romans,  in  Greek  and  English  ; 
with  an  analysis  and  exegetical  commentary,  New  York,  1853)  ;  Robt.  Knight  {A  Critical 
Commentary/,  etc.,  Lond.  1854)  ;  E.  Purdue  (Dublin,  1855) ;  A.  A.  Livermore  (Boston,  1855) ; 
John  Gumming  {Salibath  Evening  Readings  on  the  Romans,  Lond.  1857)  ;  John  Brown  {Ana- 
lytical Exposition  of  the  Epistle  of  Paul  to  the  Romans,  Edinb.  1857)  ;  James  Ford  {St.  PanVi 
Epistle  to  tJte  Romans,  illustrated  from  Divines  of  the  Church  of  England,  Lond.  1862)  ;  John 
Forbes,  LL.D.  {Analytical  Commentary  on  the  Epistle  to  the  Romans,  tracing  the  train  of 
thought  hy  the  aid  of  Parallelism,  Edinb.  1868).  The  work  of  Forbes  is  based  upon  the  dis- 
cover}' that  Parallelism  is  not  confined  to  the  poetry  of  the  Bible,  but  extends  also  to  many 
portions  of  its  prose.  It  is  not  a  full  commentary,  but  an  illustration  of  those  passages  alone 
which  Parallelism  seems  to  place  in  a  new  and  clearer  light, — P.  8.] 


SAINT  PAUL.  53 


[SAINT   PAUL. 

Chbist  1    I  am  Christ's  1  and  let  the  name  suffice  you ; 

Aye,  for  me,  too,  He  greatly  hath  sufficed  ; 
Lo,  with  no  winning  words  I  would  entice  you ; 

Paul  has  no  honor  and  no  friend  but  Christ. 

Yes,  without  cheer  of  sister  or  of  daughter — 

Yes,  without  stay  of  father  or  of  son, 
Lone  on  the  land,  and  homeless  on  the  water, 

Pass  I  in  patience  till  the  work  be  done. 

Yet,  not  in  solitude,  if  Christ  anear  me 

Waketh  Him  workers  for  the  great  employ ; 
Oh,  not  in  solitude,  if  souls  that  hear  me 

Catch  from  my  joyance  the  surprise  of  joy. 

Hearts  I  have  won  of  sister  or  of  brother, 

Quick  on  the  earth  or  hidden  in  the  sod ; 
Lo,  every  heart  awaiteth  me,  another 

Friend  in  the  blameless  family  of  God. 

Yea,  thro'  life,  death,  thro'  sorrow  and  thro'  sinning. 

He  shall  suffice  me,  for  He  hath  sufficed ; 
Christ  is  the  end,  for  Christ  was  the  beginning, 

Christ  the  beginning,  for  the  end  is  Christ. 

i^m  a  poem  hj  Fbedebic  W.  H.  Ktbbs,  180S.] 


THE   EPISTLE    OF   PAUL 


ROMANS. 


THE   INSCRIPTION,   INTRODUCTION,   AND   FUNDAMENTAL   THEME. 

Chap.  I.   1-17. 

THE  APOSTLESHIP  OF  PATIL,  APPOINTED  FOPv  THE  GLORY  OF  THE  NAME  OF  GOD  THROPGH 
THE  GOSPEL  OF  CHRIST,  AND  FOR  THE  REVELATION  OF  THE  RIGHTEOUSNESS  OF  GOD  FOB 
FAITH  IN  ALL  THE  WORLD,  AMONG  THE  JEWS  AND  GENTILES,  AND  ESPECIALLY  ALSO  IN 
ROME. 


Inscription  and  Salutation. 

Chap.  L   1-1* 

TO     THE     ROMANS.' 

1  Paul,  a  seiTant  of  Jesus  Christ,^  called  to  be  an  apostle  [a  called,  chosen 
apostle,  y.hjtog  u7i6(jto).o/\,  separated  [set  apart,  ucfo:>Qiofitrog'\  unto  the  gospel  of 

2  God  (Which  he  had  promised  afore  [which  he  promised  beforehand,  nQOEntjy- 
yii).aTo^   by    [through]    his   prophets    in    the    holy   Scriptures ')    [«»«/<  parenthesis], 

3  Concerning  his  Son  Jesus  Christ  our  Lord  [om/niere  the  words :    Jesus  Christ  our 

Lord,    and  transfer  them  to  the  close  of  ver.  4],   which    [who]  WaS    made    [born  *]    of    [from, 

4  ix]  the  seed  of  David  according  to  the  flesh  ;  And  [<>mii  And]  declared  to  be  [who 
was  installed]  "  the  Son  of  God  with  [in]  power,*^  according  to  the  Spirit  of 
holiness,  by  [from,  f|] '  the  resurrection  from  [of]  the  dead '  [ — Jesus  Christ  our 

5  Lord]  :  By  [through]  whom  we  have  received  [we  received]  grace  and  apostle- 
ship,  for  [imtO,    eig,    i.  e.,  for  the  purpose  of,  with  a  view  to,  in  order  to  bring  about]  obedicnce  tO 

the   faith    [of  faith]  *   among   all   [the]   nations,   for  his  name    [name's  sake] : 

6  Among  whom  are  ye  also  the  called  [,  the  chosen  ones]    of  Jesus  Christ :  '* 

7  To  all  that  be  in  Rome,"  beloved  of  God  [To  all  the  beloved  of  God  who  are 
in  Rome],  called  to  be  [chosen]  saints  :  [.]  " 

Gi-ace  to  you,"  and  peace,  from  God  our  Father,  and  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ. 


1  [npbs  'P(i)/xaiov« .  This  is  the  oldest  and  simplest  title  of  Codd.  S.  (Sin.)  A.  B.  C,  .ind  has  been  adopted  by 
Lnchmann,  Tischendorf,  Alford,  Lange,  &c.,  in  the  place  of  the  title  of  the  lexlus  receptus:  HavAov  toO  airocrToAou 
f  irpbs  'Puj|u.aiou9  etrio-roA^.     For  other  titles,  see  the  apparatus  criticus  in  Tischendorf. — P.  S.) 


*  [It  was  thought  best  to  separate  the  three  distinct  sections  embraced  in  chap.  i.  1-17,  \iz.  :  I.  TTie  Address  and 
Salutation,  vers.  1-7.  II.  The  Epistolary  Introduction,  vers.  8-15.  III.  The  Theme  of  the  Epistle,  vers.  16,  17.  Dr. 
Lange  presents  them  as  one  whole,  which,  with  our  numerous  additions,  would  make  it  too  long  and  inconvenient  foi 
reference. — P.  S.J 


56  THE   EPISTLE   OF   PAUL   TO   THE   ROMANS. 

.» . ■ — — ... 4 

'  Ver.  1. — The  readinfr  'ItjctoO  Xptorou  is  coiifinned  by  most  authoritiep  [Codd.  X.  A.  E.  G.,  and  adopted  by  Lach> 
mnun,  Alford],  a^ai  tt  the  roaiiinj:,  CUrtsl  J-sus  (Cod.  15.,  Tiscbniidorf). 

'  Ver.  'l.—[iv  ypa<^al%  ayiaif ,  literally  iii  socnd  writings  (without  the  arliole),  but  better,  with  the  R  V.,  in  iht 
Holy  Svriplui-s.  ypa^ais  was  sufficiently  defineil  by  ayiait  to  be  Understood  bv  the  readers  as  refeiTing  to  the  Old  Testa- 
ment. So  is  nvevixa  oytiuaui-Tis,  ver.  4,  and  nvfvfj.a  aytov  repeatedly  without  the  article.  Comp.  Winer,  Gr.  i>f  th,  N.  T., 
S  1»,  2  b.  (p.  ll;5,  OUi  id.,  p.  119,  7th  eJ.,  by  Lunemanii).  Meyer  insists  that  the  omission  of  the  article  (roi?)  indicates 
that  only  those  poitioiis  or  passinics  of  the  Old  Testami  nt  were  meant  here,  wh  eh  lonlain  Messianic  prophecies,  and  he 
rtfirs  in  proof  to  ypai{>wv  npo<t>riTiKu>v  in  chap.  xvi.  26  (where,  however,  </i<  prophetical  portions  of  the  Old  Xestiiment  are 
meiint).  But  Fritzsetie,  De  Wette,  Tholuck,  riiiiippi,  Alibrd,  Lange  iEx'g.  N'lOs),  an. I  most  commentators  regai-d  ypaufiaX 
ayxtt  as  a  proper  noun  for  the  whole  Old  Testament.  And,  in  fact,  it  is  the  whole  liible,  as  an  organic  unit,  from  Ucnesia 
to  Mnlachi,  which  '.lears  witness  tn  Christ,  comp.  Jolin  v  40. — P.  S.l 

*  Ver.  [i.—[yti'OfjLivov  can  only  be  said  uf  the  liuinan  nature  of  Christ  which  bcjiaii  in  time,  while  Jlisdivinn  nature 
is  irithout  Ijepiniiinif  and  without  end.  Mark  the  ditt'erence  between  iyivtTo  and  ^v  in  John  i.  1,  3,  6.  Comp.  also  Gal. 
iv.4:  €^a.-n  iart  I.  Kev  6  Seos  t'ov  vl'ov  outoO,  y  ivoi^tvov  tK  yvvanioi,  ytv6ti.tvov  vir'o  voixov.  Some  Minus- 
cule MS.S.  read  yeyfui/jLevov  for  yeco/aefou. — i'.  S.] 

*  Vi'r.  4. — [opia  0  dvToi; ,  dci"d,  cmistilutid,  ordained,  innugurated.  Bcngel  :  "bpKT0ivTot  muito  plus  dicit 
qunm  a<)>uipi<T  fieyoi,  wi.l:  nxm  a<^op  t  ^cTai  u)ius  e  pitlribus,  opt^erat  m;iicu»  TMi'.spinni,  Acts  x.  42."  opt^cti' (from 
opo?,  limit)  means,  1.  to  limit,  to  set  bounds ;  2.  to  define  (of  ideas);  3.  to  fix,  to  appoint  or  constitute,  especially  with 
tlie  double  accusative  (Acts  x.  42  ;  xvii.  SI).  The  last  meai.ing  alone  can  apply  here.  iJr.  Lanpe  translates  fistgeslelU, 
eiUihlislfd.  Some  of  the  best  commentators  CChrysostom,  Luther,  Fritzsche,  Olshausen,  Philippi,  Robertson,  Alford, 
Hodge,  and  even  Meyer)  understand  ii  here  of  a  mere  diclnriHion,  or  a  subj^cliv-'  manifestation  and  ncngnitiiiii  of  Christ 
as  toe  Son  of  Ood  in  the  hearts  of  men.  But  there  is  confessetlly  no  instance  where  bpi^eiv  means  (n  d'Cinrr,  to  mmiifist, 
t>i  provf.  .\nd  then  the  hu'iiau  recognition  of  the  Messiahship  of  Christ  \va-  tbe  result  of  an  act  of  God.  I'aul  speaks 
here  not  of  the  preexisient,  but  of  the  incnnuUe  Christ,  of  the  God-Man.  Under  this  view  Christ  was  divinely  decreed 
and  olijcrtively./ijrerf,  constituted,  and  inangurntrd  as  the  Son  of  God  in  power  or  mnjcsty  (ei*  ovvaii.ei  is  to  be  connected 
with  viou,  not  with  the  verb)  at  His  resurrection,  which  implied  the  principle  and  t;enn  of  the  resurrection  of  all  be- 
lievers, and  bj-  which  the  man  .lesus  was  exalted  and  made  partaker  of  the  divine  glory  of  the  Lol'Os  in  His  prei;xistent 
state.  Comp,  I'hil.  ii.  i)-ll ;  John  xvii.  5.  In  a  similar  sense  7roiet;<  is  used,  Acts  ii.  iiC :  "  God  hath  made  this  Jesus 
whom  \e  have  crucified.  Lord  and  Christ."  Paul  had  probably  in  mind  the  divine  decree  (pn  Sept.  np6<nayijia), 
Ps.  ii.  7  :  "  Thou  ait  my  Son :  this  day  have  I  begotten  thee,"  which  he  expressly  refers  to  the  resurrection,  Acta  xiii. 
3) ;  comp.  Heb.  i.  5;  v.  5.  This  is,  of  course,  not  to  be  understood  in  the  Socinian  sense,  which  denies  the  elernal  Son- 
ship  of  Christ ;  on  the  contrary,  the  eternal  Sonship  (Eom.  viii.  3  ;  Gal  iv.  4 ;  Col.  i.  15  ;  Phil.  ii.  7)  precedes  and  under- 
lies the  hsl'iriC'il  Sfmship,  just  as  the  Livinity  of  Christ  is  necessarily  implied  in  His  incarnation ;  for  lie  could  never 
have  beci'me  Gud-M^ui,  if  He  had  not  been  God  before.  The  eternal,  metaphysical  Sonship  of  the  Logos,  which  is 
coequal  with  the  Father,  was  indicated  by  Paul  in  ver.  3,  tou  vioO  outoD,  before  speaking  of  the  incarnation,  and  is,  in 
its  nature,  incommunicable  ;  but  the  historical  Sonship  of  the  God-Man,  which  dates  indeed  li'om  the  incarnation  (Luke 
i.  ib),  but  was  not  fully  developed,  publicly  established,  and  matle  manifst  till  the  resurrection,  is  comnumiatti-d  to 
believers;  first  ucrminally  in  regeneration,  whereby  they  are  made  "sons  of  God,"  Kom.  viii.  14,  and  fully  in  their 
resurrection,  viii.  23,  when  what  is  here  sown  in  weakness  will  be  raised  in  power  {iv  £vi<d/xet),  I  Cor.  xv.  43.  Ilence  the 
riseji  Saviour  is  cabed  "the  first-born  amoni;  many  brethren,"  Rom.  viii.  29;  "the  first-born  from  the  dead"  (irpuio- 
Toicos  (K  tCdv  vfKpCiv),  Col.  i.  18;  Rev.  i.  5.  Comp.  Dr.  Lange,  Exip.  J^oles,  p.  61  Forbes,  Analyl.  Com.,  p.  94,  and  (Bremer, 
Bihi.  theol.  \vi>rti ihiicU,  siili.  opi'^iu.  The  translation  of  the  Vulgate  :  qui  pnedrsli nalus  est  Filius  Dei,  rests  on  a  fiUse 
reading  or  gloss  :  n-poopio-fleVTos.— P.  S.J 

•  Ver.  4. — [e  V  dwatieL  m;iy  be  connected  adverbially  with  optafleVros  (—  rov  iv  Sue.  op.),  with  power,  poioerfuHy, 
tff.ciuitly,  kr(ifl(/iich,  gewillig  (Luther,  Olshausen,  De  AVette,  Meyer,  Alford,  Jlodge),  or  better  adjectivcly  with  the 
preceding  noun  viou  Btov,  in  pmoer  (Melanchtlion  :  "  D  chiratus  est  us.  J<',lius  D.  i piiens,"  Philippi,  Hofmann,  Lange).  In 
the  former  Kise,  the  words  refer  to  the  resurrection  as  an  exhibition  of  the  Divine  power;  iu  the  latter,  tlie.v  contrast 
the  majesty  and  power  of  the  risen  Son  of  God  with  the  weakness  of  His  human  nature,  the  ao-defcia,  implied  in  (rap(. — 
P.  S.] 

'  Ver.  4. — [Dr.  Lange  tran.slates  ef  von-aus,  from,  out,  r,/,  as  indicating  the  origin,  corresponding  to  ix  <nre'pjioT09, 
ver.  3.  Bengel :  "«  iion  modn  timpus,sed  nexum  rerum  denolal."  The  preposition  e«c  marks  in  both  aiscs,  vers.  3,  4, 
Iho  source  /nrm  or  out  of  which  the  relation  springs.  The  seed  of  David  is  the  source  of  the  human  nature  of  Christ ; 
the  resurrection  is  the  stariiug-point  of  His  divine  nature,  not  in  its  preexistent  .-tate,  of  eouise,  but  in  its  objective  hia- 
toricnl  innnifestaliiin  and  puhUc  recognition  among  men.     Comp.  Ex  g.  IVol'S. — P.  S.f 

^  Ver.  4.— lovoo-Taats  vfKpatv,  the  resurrection  of  tlie  dead,  Tudtin-anfersteltuiig,  is  not  identical  with  a.v6.<rr(um  tie 
vtKputv,  resurrection  fnnn  the  dmd  (E.  V.),  but  is  a  stronger  summaiy  expression  which  comprehends  the  resurrection  of 
Christ  and  the  believers  as  one  connected  whole  or  single  fact,  inasmuch  as  the  resurrection  of  Christ,  who  is  "  the 
Resurn  ction  and  the  Life"  itself,  implits  and  guarantees  the  resurrection  of  all  the  members  of  His  mystical  body; 
com)).  John  xi.  25  ;  .\cts  iv.  2;  xvii.  32  ;  xxiii.  6  ;  xxvi.  23  ;  1  Cor.  xv.  12.  Alford  :  "  \Vc  mu.-;t  not  render  as  E.  V.  'tne 
resurrection  from  the  dead,'  but  '  the  resurrection  (//  the  dead,'  regarded  as  accomplished  in  that  of  Christ."  Comp. 
also  I'hilippi  and  Wordssvorth.— P.  S.] 

•  Ver.  j.— [«i«  vifaKOJ)v  jri<rT«<os  (without  the  article)  occurs  once  more,  Rom.  xvi.  26,  and  maybe  translated 
as  a  compound  noun:  G'nulj'osg  U'lrsam.  The  words  express  the  design  and  object  of  Paul's  apostles"hip,  viz.,  thai 
through  Its  instrumentality  all  the  nations  be  brought  to  a  saving  faith  in  Christ.  The  different  views  on  tlie  meaning 
of  jriartj.  whether  it  be  objective  faith,  fidis  qua  credilur,  or  subjective  faith,  Jldes  qua  creditur,  do  not  afi'ect  the  trans- 
lation.    S.->e  Exig.  Nntn.—P.  S.] 

'•  Ver.  6.— (The  E.  V.  and  Dr.  L.inge  make  a  comma  after  v/icit,  and  regard  itAip-oi  'I.  Xp.  as  being  in  apposU 
Won  to  ii/icif.  So  also  the  Kew  Testament  of  the  Am.  Bible  Union,  which,  however,  omits  the  article  before  called, 
and  renders:  among  witirm  are  ye  also,  called  of  Jesus  Clirist.  But  Lachmann,  Tischendorf,  Do  Wette,  Meyer,  Alford, 
omit  the  comma  and  connect  (cAtjtoi  as  the  predicate  with  «o-t«  :  ^' Aiwuig  whum  ye  also  are  called  of  Jesus  C/iritt;" 
Meyer  :  "  Unler  we'clien  audi  ihr  Bei-ufne  Jesu  Chrisli  seid."  Alford  thinks  that  the  assertion  ammig  whom  arc  ye,  with 
a  comma  alter  iintiv.  would  be  liat  and  unmeaning.     This,  however,  is  not  the  case.     See  Exeg.  IVnles. — P.  S.) 

"  Ver.  l.—[iv  'Vionji,  ver.  7,  and  rois  iv  'Piuftj),  ver.  11^,  are  omitted  in  Cod.  O.  Born,  and  Schol.  Cod.  47,  but  this 
omiH.sion  is  too  i.solated  to  Uive  any  critical  weik'ht.     Comp.  Meyer  against  Reiche's  inference.— P.  S. | 

"  Ver.  7. — [According  to  the  usual  consti-uction  still  adhered  to  by  Wordsworth,  who  inakis  a  eoniina  after  ayiotf,  the 
first  seven  verses  form  but  one  sentence,  in  which  cane  we  would  have  a  double  subject,  viz.,  llaiiAof  and  xapit  (cai  cipiji^ 
instead  of  xapiv  kox  tipTJvriv  (Acyct),  anil  a  repetit  on  of  the  persons  addressed,  viz.,  roit  tv  '^uitftjl  and  if/itV.  Hut  it  is 
impos-i'de  t.iut  such  a  gross  grammatical  irregularity  should  occur  not  only  hero,  but  in  all  the  Pauline  Kp  stie.s  its  also 
in  1  and  2  Peter,  Jude,  and  Apoc.  i.  4.  The  nominative  x<^PK  and  ciptjn),  as  well  as  the  v/Jilv,  cle.irly  indicate  that  the 
second  clause  of  ver.  7  (which  should  be  divided  into  two  versos)  forms  a  complete  sentence  by  itself  and  contains  the 
tatutatiiiii  proper,  while  the  preceding  woids  form  the  inscnjtlion.  Hence  there  should  l>o  a  period  before  \a.pii.  So 
Knapp-Oocs<  hen,  Lachmann,  Tisihendorf,  Theile-Stier,  -Vlford,  In  their  editions,  as  well  as  most  of  the  niodcm  com- 
mentators. Tholuck  is  wrong  when  he  says  that  Fritzsche  was  the  first  to  suggest  this  division.  Be/.u  already  did  it : 
"  N'lVam  hie  pi  nudum  inCipm,  adscripln  puncln  post  ayioit." — P.  S.] 

"  Ver.  7. — [Grace  to  yuu,  willnmt  be,  is  in  accordance  with  the  Greek  and  the  Vulg.  (gratia  vi>bit  tl  pax)  and 
preferable.  The  K.  V.  is  inconsistent,  sometimes  in-erting  6'  and  sometimes  onuttlng  it.  The  verlnil  fonu  to  bo  sui>- 
plicd  after  )^dpi.i  in  this  case  would  not  be  the  aniiUiiciative  or  mandatory  ccrrw,  he,  but  the  optative  eii),  may  be  ;  for  the 
vdpit  i/ftlv  IS  no*  an  elliptical  doxolog}-,  nor  an  authoritative  betiedietioii,  but  a  prayer  or  earnest  wish;  comp.  I  Petsf 
I.  -,  X'^P^^  v^iv  Kai  tip^i/r)  7rAi)6i/f6<ii) ;  Jude  2,  cAcot  •  .  •  irAijdufStti). — P.  S.J 


CHAPTER  I.   1-7. 


5'i 


EXEGETICAL  AND   CRITICAL. 

FiEST  Skction. — Insaiption  and  greeting. — Paul,  a 
servant  of  Jesus  Christ,  called  to  be  an  Apostle, 
set  apart  for  the  Gospel  of  God. — His  gospel  iii 
harmony  with  the  Old  Tistament  (of  the  Jews) : 
A  gospel  of  Christ,  who,  in  Bis  human  nature 
and  His  historical  pedigree,  is  the  Son  of  David; 
but  who,  in  His  spiritual  glory,  appears  as  the 
principle  of  the  resurrection  of  the  dead,  and  as 
the  otie  appointed  to  be  the  So7i  of  God  in  power 
(inajesty).  By  this  glorified  Christ  the  Apostle  has 
received  his  Christian  and  apostolic  call,  for  the 
purpose  of  calling  all  nations  to  obedience  to  the 
faith. — All  the  believers  in  Rome  belong  to  this 
totality.  He  accordingly  greets  the  Christians  in 
Rome  with  the  apostolic  salutation. 

[Oeneral  Remarks  on  the  Apostolic  Saluta- 
tions.— On  the  grammatical  structure  of  the  two 
eeateuces,  vers.  1-7,  see  textual  note  "  to  ver.  '7.  St. 
Paul  opens  his  Epistles  with  his  name  and  official 
title,  by  whicli  lie  challenges  respectful  attention  to 
his  inspired  teaching,  and  with  the  assurance  of  his 
brotherly  i-egard  and  love  for  the  readers,  by  which 
he  wins  their  affections.  The  ancient  epistolary  style 
unites  in  a  brief  inscription  what  we  now  distinguish 
as  address,  greeting,  and  subscription.  Paul  com- 
bines the  heathen  and  the  Hebrew  form  of  saluta- 
tion, and  inspires  both  with  a  deep  Christian  mean- 
ing. 

The  Greek  and  Roman  epistolary  inscription  con- 
tained simply  the  name  of  the  writer  in  the  nomi- 
native, and  the  name  of  the  receiver  in  the  dative 
(e.  g.,  Jlkdroiv  JvovfGio),  Cicero  Aitico),  frequently 
with  the  addition  of  the  wish  for  health  and  pros- 
perity, by  the  words  fv  nQaxxdv,  more  usually 
yai(ifi,v,  or  /niQfiv  At'yft,  salutem,  or  sidutem  dicit. 
This  form  we  find  in  the  New  Testament  three 
times :  once  in  the  heathen  sense,  in  the  letter  of 
Lysias  to  the  Roman  governor  Felix,  AcvS  xxiii.  2(3 
{K/.avdi.oi;  Avaiac  tw  .  .  .  'I'r'ihin,  yaijjuv),  and  twice 
in  the  Christian  sense,  namely  in  the  circular  letter 
of  the  Apostolic  Council  of  Jerusalem,  which  was 
probably  written  by  James,  Acts  xv.  23  (ot  anoa- 
ro).oi,  .  .  .  rot'4  .  .  .  aStlqoli;  roT<;  li  idviitv  /al^nv), 
Rnd  in  the  Epistle  of  James,  chap.  i.  1  (  Jaxin^joq 
.  .  .  TuTq  do')()ty.a  (fv).atq  .  .  .  /ai^fiv).*  From  2 
John,  ver.  10  {-/aiijuv  ahrm  fiij  Atj'fXf),  it  appears 
that  Greek  Christians  were  in  the  habit  of  gi'eeting 
one  another  with  the  usual  /al^f  (Vulg.,  ave,  comp. 
Matt.  xxvi.  49  ;  xxvii.  29  ;  xxviii.  9  ;  Mai-k  xv.  18  ; 
Luke  i.  28 ;  John  xix.  3).  But  the  heathen  formula, 
as  implying  a  prayer  to  the  gods,  had  in  it  a  taint  of 
idolatry,  or,  at  all  events,  it  referred  only  to  tem- 
poral prosperity,  and  had  to  give  Avay  before  long 
to  a  change  in  accordance  with  Christian  feeling. 

The  Hebrew  (and  Arabic)  form  of  salutation  is 
Cibd ,  iiQtjvrj,  Peace,  or  Tjb  Cib w^ ,  LXX.,  fi^/jvtj 
ffot.  Peace  be  mth  yon ;  comp.  Gen.  xxix.  6  ;  xliii. 
23  ;  Ex.  xviii.  7  ;  Judges  vi.  23  ;  1  Sam.  x.  4 ;  Dan. 
X.  19  :  Luke  x.  5,  6,  &c.  (With  the  later  Jews  the 
usual  formula  was  "I'i"^"').  The  risen  Saviour  greeted 
thus  the  assembled  disciples,  John  xx.  19,  26,  bring- 
ing the  true  peace  of  the  soul  with  God,  wliich  He, 


*  [Outside  of  the  New  Testament  the  salutatory  x'"'pfi>' 
is  also  found  in  several  epistles  of  Ignatius,  in  the  ejiistle 
of  (pseudo-)  Barnabas,  ani  in  other  ancient  Christian  docu- 
ments ;  comp.  Eusi-bius,  B.  £.  v.  4;  iv.  26.— P.  S.] 


the  Prince  of  Peace,  had  bought  by  His  atoning 
death  and  triumphant  resurrection  (comp.  John  xiv. 
27  ;  xvi.  33  ;  Matt.  x.  12,  13). 

Combining  the  Grsco-Roman  inscription  and  th« 
Hebrew  salutation,  we  would  have  this  form:  '•'■Pan* 
to  the  Romans.     Health  and  peace  be  with  you." 

But  Paul  transforms  the  Greek  /aifju-v  and  the 
Hebrew  shalom  from  the  prevailing  idea  of  physical 
health  and  temporal  comfort,  into  the  deep  mean- 
ing of  the  saving  grace  and  peace  of  God  in  Christ, 
and  comprehends  in  the  two  words  /doiq  and  d^tt'ivri 
the  richest  blessings  of  the  gospel ;  ya()i,q  being  the 
objective  cause  of  the  Christian  salvation,  and  ti(jtjvti 
its  subjective  effect  in  the  soul  of  man.  At  the 
same  time,  there  is,  no  doubt,  a  reference  in  this 
epistolary  greeting  to  the  Mosaic,  or  rather  Aaronic 
benediction.  Num.  vi.  25,  26 :  "  The  Lord  make 
His  grace  shine  upon  thee,  and  be  gracious  unto 
thee  (  "Sn'^'l ,  from  "jn ,  gratiosus  fuit,  hence  "(n , 
ya.{ii,ii),  the  Lord  lift  up  His  countenance  upon  thee, 
and  give  thee  peace  (nibci ,  LXX.,  f;^?/r?;v)."  We 
find  this  salutatory  grace  and  peace  not  only  in  the 
Epistles  of  Paul,  but  also  in  those  of  Peter  and  of 
John  in  the  Apocalypse.  In  the  Pastoral  Epistles, 
1  Tim.  i.  2 ;  2  Tim.  i.  2,  and  Titus  i.  4  {text,  rec), 
Paul,  with  reference  probably  to  the  Greek  version  of 
the  Aaronic  benediction.  Num.  vi.  25  {ii.ftjffn,  af  for 
^Sn^n),  adds  to  the  prayer  for  grace  and  peace  that 
of  mercy  {'thoi;),  which  ministers  of  the  gospel  need 
more  than  any  other  class  of  men.  This  threefold 
blessing,  corresponding  to  the  threefold  Aaronic 
benediction,  we  find  also  in  2  John  3.* 

In  the  Epistle  to  the  Romans,  where  Paul,  con- 
trary to  his  habit,  addressed  a  congregation  which  he 
had  not  founded,  or  even  visited,  he  amplifies  the 
Grajco-Hebrew  inscription  and  salutation  still  more, 
and  inserts  parenthetically  some  of  the  fundamental 
doctrinal  ideas  of  the  Epistle,  as  suggested  by  the 
mention  of  "  the  gospel  of  God,"  namely  :  (1.)  The 
connection  of  the  gospel  with  the  Old  Testament 
revelation,  ver.  2  ;  (2.)  the  divine-human  nature  of 
Christ,  who  is  the  subject  of  that  gospel,  vers.  3,  4  ; 
(3.)  his  call  to  the  apostleship  of  all  the  Gentiles  by 
Clirist,  which  gives  him  a  right  to  address  himself 
also  to  the  Romans,  ver.  5.  In  the  richness  of  this 
salutation  we  see  the  overflowing  fulness  of  Paul's 
mind,  and  the  importance  he  attached  to  this  Epis- 
tle. Calvin :  JEpistola  tota  sic  methodica  est,  ut 
ipsum  quoque  exordium  ad  rationem  artis  composi' 
turn  sit. — P.  S.]  f 

Ver.  1. — Pavil. — Saul  as  Paul,  i.  e.,  the  Small, 
in  opposition  and  contrast  to  Bar-Jesus,  Eltmas 
THE  Sorcerer  of  Cyprus,  Acts  xiii.  8.  [Saul  and 
Paul.  Paulos  is  the  Hellenistic,  Paulus  the  Latin 
form  for  the  Hebrew  Saul,  though  di&'ering  from  it 
in  meaning.  It  was  chosen  as  the  nearest  allusive 
and  alliterative  equivalent,  and  as  a  name  already 


*  [In  post-apostolic  literature,  Clement  of  Rome  wishes 
the  Corinthians  X"P'S  <""  fiprivrj.  Polycarp,  ad  Phil.,  in- 
stead of  this,  has  cAeos  (col  (Lpiijvri  (comp.  Gal.  vi.  16  :  eip^vrf 
fir'  aiiTous  Kal  lAeos).  The  Marly rium  Piilycixrpi,  iti  its 
inscription,  prays  for  lAeot,  eipiivij  (cat  ayawr),  which 
corresponds  with  the  formula  in  Jude  2.  In  the  epistle  of 
the  conttregations  of  Southern  Gaul,  A.  D.  167  (EusebiuB, 
H.  E.  V.  1-4).  we  have  eip^rt)  koI  x^P'S  **'  5df  a. — V.  S.] 

t  [Besides  the  commentaries,  comp.  J.  B.  Bittingcr: 
The  Greelivgs  if  Paul,  in  the  Am.  Presb.  and  Theol.  Me- 
vieiv  lor  Jan.  and  April,  1867  ;  and  especially  J.  C.  Theo. 
Otti>:  Ueher  d<n  (ipostoiischtn  Srgi:nsgruss  xt^pif  Vfilr 
<cal  ilpiqvri,  u  ii  d  xap*'?,  eAeos,  eiprivi),  in  the  Jahr» 
hitch'  r  fill-  Dtutscht  TUcoiogie,  vol.  xii.  Ho,  4  (Gotha,  1867lu 
pp.  678-697.— P.  S.l 


68 


THE   EPISTLE   OF   PAUL   TO   THE   ROMANS, 


familiar  to  the  Greeks;  while  Sacl,  as  a  proper 
name,  was  unknown  to  them.  The  name  Saul — the 
most  distin^ruislicil  name  in  the  genealogy  of  the 
tribe  of  Hcnjaniin,  to  which  Paul  belonged  (Rom.  xi. 
1 ;  Piiil.  iii.  r> ;  comp.  Acts  xiii.  21)— the  Apostle 
used  among  the  Jews,  the  name  Paul  among  the 
Gentiles,  and  in  the  later  part  of  his  life  exclusively. 
The  Jews  and  early  Christians  often  had  two  names, 
either  similar  in  sound  and  identical  in  meaning,  as 
Silns  and  Silvanus  (tiie  former  occurring  uniformly 
In  tiie  Ai'ts  thirteen  times,  tiie  latter  four  times  in 
the  Epistles),  Lucik  and  Lucanus*  (Col.  iv.  14;  2 
Tim.  iv.  11;  Philem.  24);  or  similar  in  simnd  but 
different  in  meaning,  as  Jesus  and  Justus  (Col.  iv. 
11),  Saul  and  Paul,  H'tUel  and  Pollio  ;  or  different 
in  sound  but  identical  in  meaning,  as  Cephas  (He- 
brew) and  Peter  (Greek) ;  or  different  both  in  sound 
and  meaning,  as  Jacob  and  Israd,  Simon  and  Peter, 
Bartholomew  and  Nathanael,  John  and  Mark  (Acts 
xii.  12,  25),  Simeon  and  A'ii/er  (xiii.  1),  Barsubas 
and  Justus  (i.  23).  It  is  possible  that  the  Apostle 
Paul,  as  a  Roman  citizen,  received  this  name  in  early 
youtli  in  Tarsus  (Lightfoot),  or  inherited  it  from 
some  ancestor,  who  may  have  adopted  it  in  becom- 
ing a  freedman,  or  in  acquiring  the  Roman  citizen- 
ship ;  Paul  being  the  well-known  cor/itotne/i  of  sev- 
eral distinguished  Roman  families,  as  the  ffetis 
Emilia,  p'a/jia,  Julia,  Serbia,  &e.  It  is  more  prob- 
able, however,  that  he  chose  the  name  himself  after 
he  entered  upon  his  labors  among  the  Gentiles,  as  a 
part  of  his  missionary  policy  to  become  a  Greek  to 
the  Greeks,  in  order  to  gain  them  more  readily  to 
Christ  (1  Cor.  ix.  19-23).  At  all  events,  the  name 
Paul  is  first  mentioned  during  his  first  great  mis- 
sionary Journey,  wiien  he,  taking  henceforth  prece- 
dence of  Barnabas  in  words  and  in  acts,  struck  Ely- 
mas  the  sorcerer  with  blindness,  and  converted  Ser- 
gius  Paulus,  the  pro-consul  of  Cyprus,  to  the  Chris- 
tian faith  (Acts  xiii.  8).  After  this  striking  fact,  he 
is  uniformly  called  Paul  in  the  latter  chapters  of  the 
Acts,  and  in  all  the  Ei)istles.  But  we  have  no  right, 
for  this  reason,  to  inter  (with  Jerome,  Olshausen, 
Meyer,  Ewald,  and  others)  that  the  name  J\iul  was 
a  memorial  of  the  conversion  of  Sergius  Paulus  as 
his  first-fruit.  For  (1.)  he  may  have  converted  many 
Jews  and  Gentiles  before  that  time  ;  (2.)  pupils  are 
called  after  their  teachers  and  bunef'actors,  and  not 
vice  vcrsi  ;  (3.)  Luke  gives  no  intimation  to  that 
effect,  and  connects  the  name  Paul,  not  with  that  of 
the  proconsul  of  Cyprus  (xiii.  7,  12),  but  with  tiiat 
of  Elymas  the  sorcerer  (ver.  8).  The  last  circun)- 
stance  favors  the  ingenious  hypothesis  of  Dr.  Lange, 
that  the  name  expresses  the  symljolical  significance 
of  the  victory  of  Paul,  the  small  man  of  God,  over 
Elymas,  the  mi.ghtji  magician  of  the  devil,  as  a  New 
Testament  counterpart  of  the  victory  of  David  over 
(loliatii,  or  of  Moses  over  the  sorcerers  of  Egypt. 
Dr.  Lange,  however,  admits  the  prol)ability  that  Paul 
had  his  Roman  name  before  this  occasion.  At  all 
events,  the  change  of  name  has  nothing  whatever  to 
llo  with  his  conversion  ;  and  all  allegorical  interpre- 
Uitson.s  of  Chrysostom,  Augustine,  Wordsworth,  and 
others,  which  go  on  this  assumption,  are  merely 
pious  fancies,  which  are  sufficiently  refuted  by  the 
fact  that  the  Apostle  is  repeatedly  called  Saul  long 


•  [Luennu*  doo«  not  occur  in  tho  Orook  Tostnmont, 
but  In  ocvonil  Lati'i  MSS.  tlio  thinl  Qoiin-I  is  insorilwl : 
Sr'iniflium  M'CU'iJum  fAtcniium.  The  (irci-k  .\ot>Ka«  in,  no 
doulit,  a  cnntnictifin  of  tht»  L:itin  Lhciiiiis,  a-t  SiAat  is  of 
,sr  /r.'iiMjt.  Some  commoiitiitors,  however,  identify  the  names 
tuc'Jt  and  Luciu*  (Acta  xiii.  1 ;  llom.  xvi.  21.)— 1'.  S.] 


after  his  conversion,  as  in  Acts  ix.  25,  30  ;  xii  26 ; 
xiii.  1,  2,  7,  9  ;  and  that  it  is  said  of  Saul  in  one 
passage  (xiii.  9),  that  he  was  "  filled  with  the  Holy 
Ghost."— P.  8.]  * 

A  servant  of  Jesus  Christ. — ^'}^^,  '^2?  • 
This  is  not  merely  the  general  de.-ignalion  of  the 
pious  man  (Fritzsche  :  Christi  cnltor,  Epii.  vi.  6), 
but  the  designation  of  his  office  (Tholuck) ;  1  Cor. 
iv.  1  ;  Phil.  i.  1  ;  James  i.  1.  Reiche :  The  word 
implies  unlimited  obedience.  Schott :  "  dovXot;  de« 
notes  the  Christian,  so  far  as  he,  in  the  discharge 
of  a  special  Christian  calling,  surrenders  himself 
completely  to  (iod's  will,  and  excludes  his  own 
preference."  Here  the  Christian  call  in  its  uni- 
versal character  is  meant,  just  as  it  appears 
in  the  apostleship,  after  the  absolute  service  of 
the  one  great  servant  of  God,  Is.  liii.  Never- 
theless, there  is  no  tautology  in  the  addition  :  called 
to  be  an  apostle.  Calvin  :  Apost'dutus  minislerii 
est  species.  The  same  office,  related  to  Christ, 
makes  the  fjor/oc,  in  the  absolute  sense  (comp. 
Is.  liii.);  but,  related  to  the  world,  it  makes  the 
anomoi.o^.  [A  servant,  literally  bondsman  (f)or»- 
).€(;,  from  ()io),  to  bind),  denotes  generally,  like  the 
corresponding  Hebrew  n^in^  izy  ,  a  relation  of  de- 
pendence on  God,  and  cheerful  obedience  to  His 
will.  Paul  glories  in  this  service,  which  is  perfect 
freedom.  Tlie  more  we  feel  bound  by  the  authority 
of  Christ,  the  more  we  are  free  from  the  bondage  of 
men.  Deo  screire  vera  liUrtas  est  (Augustine).  In 
a  wide  sense,  the  term  applies  to  all  believei-s,  who 
are  both  children  and  servants  of  God  (Is.  Ixv.  13 ; 
Dan.  iii.  26;  Rom.  vi.  22;  xiv.  4;  Eph.  vi.  6; 
1  Cor.  vii.  22  ;  1  Peter  ii.  16  ;  Rev.  xix.  2,  5) ;  in  a 
special  and  emphatic  sense,  it  is  used  of  the  chosen 
oHice-bearers  in  the  kingdom  of  God,  as  Moses,  tiie 
prophets,  and  kings  in  the  Old  Testament  (Deut. 
xxxiv.  5  ;  Josh.  i.  1 ;  Is.  xlix.  5  ;  Jer.  xxv.  4),  and 
the  ministers  of  the  gospel  in  the  New,  particularly 
the  apostles  (so  here ;  Phil.  i.  1 ;  Tit.  i.  1 ;  Col.  iv. 
12;  James  i.  1 ;  2  Pet.  i.  1;  Rev.  i.  1).  Ilodge : 
"  Servant  is  a  general  official  designation,  of  which,  in 
the  present  ease,  apostle  is  the  specific  explanation." 
Paul  "  rejects  all  human  authority  in  matters  of 
faith  and  duty,  and  yet  professes  the  most  absolute 
sulijection  of  c<mscience  and  reason  to  the  authority 
of  Jesus  Christ."  Wordsworth :  "  Other  men,  in 
the  beginning  of  their  epistles,  especially  those  which 
they  addressed  to  the  Roman  people,  recited  their 
own  titles  as  rulers,  kings,  or  conquerors;  but  the 
apostles   claim  to   be  heard   as   dor/.ot,    bondsmen, 

•  [I  add,  as  a  curioEity,  a  quotation  from  Dr.  "Words- 
worth, who,  in  his  Com.  on  Acts  xiii.  9,  uncritically  com- 
bines all  the  various  interpretations  of  the  name  (except 
Dr.  trfinec's,  whicli  wa.s  then  not  yet  known  to  liim),  iiud 
nssipms  no  less  th'in  cipht  reasons  for  the  ch;inpe  of  Saul 
into  Piitil :  (1.)  Heeause  SauAof  was  a  puiely  Jewish  nanio. 
(2.)  Uec:iusc  amoDK  the  Greeks  it  niiuht  expo-e  him  to  con- 
tempt, as  hiivinvr  the  same  !>ound  iis  (ravAot,  wniinn  (seo 
Homer,  Ifi/mn.  M'icur.,  28,  anil  Huhiiken  in  Inc.).  (3.) 
To  iniiicaie  his  clianpe  and  call  to  a  new  life  ;  fioin  a  Jew 
to  a  Christian  ;  from  a  persecutor  to  a  preai'lnr  of  the  gos- 
pel, (t.)  But  in  the  rlinniro  much  of  t'le  original  namo 
was  left  anil  ccnnmcmorafcil  what  he  h'll  been.  The  llro 
of  zeal  of  Sai/Aof  still  (flowed  in  tie  hmrt  of  flavAot,  hut 
its  liaino  was  purilieil  hy  '.he  Holy  Ghost.  ('>.)  llis  new 
nume  de/mted  also  his  mVs.<ion  to  llie  Gentiles,  the  Uoman* 
beinp  familiar  with  the  nann-  P'uhti.  (tJ.)  It  w.is  a  token 
of  humilitVi  Pnitlut-pnmi'us  (1  Cor.  xv.  it).  ("•)  It  eora- 
memorated  the  copnomen  ol  I'aul's  first  (/)  convert,  5  r- 
P'tui-Piiuliin,  and  wu.s  a  pood  aifviirv  of  his  future  iUCCfsa 
in  the  Iloman  worlil.  (**.)  It  indicates  Taiil's  intended 
supremacy  in  the  Koman  or  Western  Church  as  disllno* 
from  the  Aramaic  name  dphns,  and  the  Oreok  name  Pttet. 
-V.  S.] 


CHAPTER  I.    1-7. 


58 


iondsmen  of  Jesus  Chrixt"  Comp.,  however,  my 
annotation  on  anoaroloq,  which  is  a  title  of  dignity 
and  authority. — P.  S.]— -Jesus  Christ.  Tliat  is, 
Jesus  is  the  Christ.  Deahng  with  the  Roman 
Christians,  the  Apostle  had  no  ground  for  saying 
the  reverse :  Christ  Jesus,,  i.  e.,  The  Christ  is 
Jesus. 

Called  to  be  an  apostle. — As  he  had  had  to 
defend  his  call  before  the  Corinthians  and  Galatians 
on  account  of  opponents,  he  does  it  here  because  he 
was  not  yet  personally  known  to  the  Roman  Church. 
[Called ;  choaen,  appointed^  not  self-called,  but 
called  by  Christy  in  opposition  to  an  arbitrary  self- 
constituted  authority  {avro-xXijroq,  self-appointed), 
and  called  directly  by  Christ,  without  the  interven- 
tion of  church  authority,  comp.  Gal.  i.  1 :  "  Not  of 
men  («;t  av&^o')Tio)v),  nor  by  any  man  (rft'  avO^o')- 
nov),  but  by  Jesus  Christ,"  &c.  The  word  refers  to 
the  historical  call,  not  to  the  eternal  election.  Cal- 
vin :  Neqiie  enim  lis  assentior,  qui  eatn  de  qua  loqui- 
tur vocationem  ad  eternam  Dei  eledionem  refeiunt. 
—P.  S.]  The  expression,  apostle,  has  here  its  widest 
significance.  Christ,  the  Risen  One,  has  called  him  ; 
he  is  therefore,  in  the  most  positive  sense,  a  witness 
of  His  resurrection,  and  this  implies  the  apostolic 
witness  of  the  whole  of  His  miraculous  person  and 
work.  [Apostle  is  a  title  of  dignity,  signifying  the 
highest  order  of  servant ;  every  apostle  being  a  ser- 
vant of  Christ,  but  not  every  servant  an  apostle  of 
Christ.  The  one  brings  out  the  dependence  of  Paul 
on  Christ,  the  other  his  authority  over  the  congrega- 
tions, and  the  latter  is  conditioned  by  tlie  former. 
The  term  apostle  may  designate,  etymologically,  any 
delegate,  commissioner,  or  missionary,  but  more  par- 
ticularly, as  here,  and  in  most  passages,  a  chosen  eye 
and  ear  witness  of  the  life  of  Christ,  who  was  personally 
instructed  and  selected  by  Him  for  the  work  of  laying 
the  foundation  of  the  Christian  Church,  and  teaching 
her  througli  all  subsequent  generations.  The  apostles 
were  inspired  messengers  of  Christ,  not  to  a  particu- 
lar charge,  but  to  the  whole  world.  The  term  is 
therefore  generally  restricted  to  the  twelve  (Luke  vi. 
13),  and  to  Paul,  who  was  likewise  directlv  called  by 
the  Lord  (Gal.  i.  1,  12 ;  Acts  ix.  15  ;  xxvi"  17).  The 
sudden  call  of  the  persecuting  Paul  to  the  apostle- 
ship  of  the  Gentiles  corresponds  to  the  sudden  call 
of  the  Gentiles  to  Christianity,  just  as  the  gradual 
instruction  of  the  Jewish  apostles  accords  with  the 
long  training  of  the  Jewish  nation  for  the  gospel. — 
P.  S.] 

Separated,  set  apart. — Not  equal  to  chosen  of 
God  (De  Wette),  nor  to  appointed  by  the  Church 
(with  reference  to  Acts  xiii.  2  ;  Olshausen),*  but 
directed  to  and  appointed  for  this  particular  calling, 
through  the  whole  providential  course  of  his  life 
(comp.  Gal.  i.  15).  An  atpo  q  itf  a  0  ai,  first  took 
place  with  him  [at  his  birth,  comp.  Gal.  i.  15  :  6 
aqofiiaaq  fit  in  xoikiaq  ft  ?j  r  q  6  c;  fiov,  y.al 
y.a).i(Taq,  x.r.L  ;  then. — P.  S.]  when  he  was  sent 
from  Tarsus  to  Jerusalem  [?]  ;  a  second  [third],  at 
his  conversion  and  retreat  into  Arabia ;  and  a  third 
[fourth],  at  his  special  appointment  as  the  Apostle 
to  the  Gentiles  (Acts  xiii.  2  ff. ;  Gal.  ii.).     The  bib- 

•  ['Wordsworth,  also,  explains  the  word  from  Acts  xiii. 
2,  where  the  Holy  Ghost  says  :  'A^opc'craT€  (the  word  here 
used  Viy  Paul)  Sij  /uoi  tov  Bapva^av  koI  SauAov  €15  to  epyov 
o  TrpoCTKexAij/itai  auToii?,  so  th:it  he  was  both  /cAijtos  and 
afupia-ixivoi;.  Vaul  was  not  only  caVed  by  God,  but  was  also 
visibly  Sit  opnri  for  the  npostolic  office  by  an  outward  mis- 
tion  and  oiditmiinn  at  His  command.  But  Acts  xiii.  2 
evidently  refers  to  a  special  and  joint  mission  of  Barnabas 
ttnd  Saul.— P.  S.j 


lical  o^ii^fiv  must  be  distinguished  from  ttqo 
yt,vv')a>iii,v  or  en  Xiy  i  a  &  ai,,  as  well  as  from 
xaXfZv;  it  denotes  the  Divine  determimition  of 
the  historical  career  of  the  man  (see  Acts  xvii.  26). 
[Meyer  refers  ct(f<M^i,afiivoq  to  the  historical  call  at 
Damascus,  and  compares  ay.tvo^  ix/.oyTjq,  Acts  ix. 
15  ;  xxvi.  16  if.  The  word  is  an  explanation  of 
y.Az/To?  a7T6(jroXo(;,  and  gives  us  the  additional  idea 
of  destination.  It  implies  that  Paul  was  selected 
from  the  world,  singled  out,  consecrated  to,  and  des- 
tined for  the  gospel  iservico,  at  the  time  of  his  con- 
version.  It  refers  to  the  Divine  appointment  for  the 
apostolic  oflBce  in  general,  while  vKfoi^harf,  in  Acta 
xiii.  2,  refers  to  a  special  mission.  a<fooiUfi,v,  like 
y.aXflv,  looks  to  the  historical  call,  n(JooQitn'V  to  the 
eternal  decree,  but  the  former  is  only  an  execution 
in  time  or  actualization  of  the  latter. — P.  S.] 

Unto  the  gospel  of  God. — That  is,  not  the 
gospel  having  God  for  its  object  (Chrysostom),  but 
the  gospel  given  by  God  (2  Cor.  xi.  7)  for  promulga- 
tion. [It  is  the  genitive,  not  of  the  object,  but  of 
origin  and  possession  ;  God's  gospel,  whose  author 
is  God,  and  whose  theme  is  Christ  and  His  salvation 
by  free  grace ;  comp.  vers.  3,  4  ;  xv.  16  ;  1  Thess. 
ii.  2,  8,  9.— P.  S.]  GospeL*  Without  the  article.f 
According  to  De  Wette  and  Schott,  it  is  here  not 
the  internal  matter  or  contents  of  the  gospel,  but 
the  fvayyikitia&av.  [De  Wette  :  zur  Ver- 
kundigwvg  des  Evangeliums. — P.  S.]  Tholuck,  on 
the  contrary:  ^^EvayyeXiov  does  not  stand  for 
the  infinitive  fvayyiXluKTd-ai,,  as  we  learn 
from  the  relative  6,  but  it  is  only  an  indefinite 
method  of  expression,  as  2  Cor.  ii.  12 ;  x.  14."  We 
would  say,  rather,  that  it  is  the  concrete  method  of 
expression,  implying  that  the  knowledge  of  salvation 
cannot  be  without  preaching,  and  preaching  caimot 
be  without  the  matter  of  the  gospel. 

Ver.  2.  Which  He  promised  before  by  His 
prophets  in  the  holy  Scriptures. — [So  that 
God  stood  pledged,  as  it  were,  to  reveal  the  gospel.] 
The  second  verse  must  not  be  read,  with  Beza  [and 
the  authorized  English  version,  which  often  closely 
follows  Beza],  as  parenthesis.  The  same  expression 
occurs,  2  Cor.  ix.  5  [rtjv  TTQointjyyfXjuivtjv  fv'/.oylav 
vfiMv,  your  bonuty  before  promised. — P.  S.]  The 
mention  of  the  Old  Testament  promise  of  the  gos- 
pel must  not  only  authenticate  the  Apostle  to  the 
Jewish  Christians,  but  it  must  also  enforce  the  gos- 
pel for  the  Gentile  Christians.  This  preceding  prom- 
ise lay  specifically  in  the  Messianic  passages  (De 
Wette) ;  and,  at  the  same  time,  according  to  the 
New  Testament  view,  in  the  meaning  of  the  whole 
of  the  Old  Testament,  which  promised  the  univer- 
sal Pauline  gospel  (see  ch.  x.).  The  expression 
y ()  a<ii  ai ,  without  the  article,  does  not  denote  pan- 
sages  of  Scripture  (Dr.  Paulus  [Meyer]  ),  but  y(jaqiai 
ayi.au  has  become,  according  to  De  Wette,  a  nomen 
proprium.\  [The  second  verse  teaches  that  the 
gospel  is  no  abrupt  innovation  or  afterthought,  but 
the  forethought  of  God,  the  fulfilment  of  His  prom- 
ise, and  "  the  desire  of  all  nations."  This  harmony 
of  the  New  and  Old  Dispensations  should  be  a  con- 


*  [The  Anglo-Saxon  gnspel,  i.  e.,  either  good  spell,  or 
God's  spell,  is  the  precise  equivalcTit  for  the  Greek  eiay- 
ye'Atoi/,  i.  f.,  good  news,  glad  tidings  (of  salvation).  Geo.  P. 
Marsh,  in  his  Li-ctures  on  Ihf  Eiiglisli  Lnvgungp,  New  York, 
1860,  p  30,  has  a  note  on  the  two  derivations,  either  from 
the  name  of  the  divinity  Gad,  or  from  the  adjective  god, 
good,  au'i  leans  to  the  latter. — P.  S.] 

t  [Comp.  Winer,  N.  T.  Grammar,  p.  118  f  ed.  7th,  and 
Textual  Kote  3.— P.  S.] 

X  [Comp.  Textual  Note  3.— P.  S.] 


60 


THE   EPISTLE   OF   PAUL   TO   THE   ROMANS. 


vincing  proof  of  the  Divine  origin  of  Christianity,  j 
not  only  to  the  Jews,  wlio  already  believe  in  the  Old 
Testament,  and  need  only  be  convinced  that  Jesus 
of  Naz;ireth  w;is  really  the  promised  Messiah,  but 
also  to  the  heathen,  who  well  know  that  it  is  the  ex- 
clusive prerogative  of  God  to  foresee  and  prearrange 
the  future.  In  this  view,  Christianity  is  the  oldest 
as  well  as  the  latest  religion,  going  back  to  the  first 
promise  in  P.lradise,  and  even  beyond  the  beginning 
of  time,  to  the  eternal  counsel  of  God.  Augustine 
says  :  "  The  New  Testament  is  concealed  in  the  Old  ; 
the  Old  Testament  is  revealed  in  the  New."  By 
his  prophets,  is  not  to  be  confined,  of  course,  to 
the  sixteen  prophetical  books,  but  extends  to  the 
whole  Old  Testament  Scriptures,  as  far  as  they  con- 
tain the  gospel,  from  the  promise  of  the  serpent- 
bruiser,  Gen.  iii.  25,  to  Mai.  iv.  2.  In  fact,  the  en- 
tire Scripture  is  one  organic  system  of  prophecies 
and  types  bearing  testimony  to  Christ ;  John  v.  39. 
-P.  S.] 

Ver.  3.  Concerning  his  Son. — This  refers  to 
1 1'  a  y  y  e  A  t  o  1' ,  gospel,  ver.  1,*  and  not  to  promised, 
ver.  2,  as  Tholuck,  Meyer  [Alford,  Hodge],  and 
others  would  have  it.    For  the  question  further  on 


is  concerning  the  gospel  in  its  complete  New  Testa- 
ment development,  and  not  merely  in  its  Old  Testa- 
ment outline.  Meyer  says  that  the  connection  of 
n  f  ^i  with  tvayyiXiov  [instead  of  the  geii, 
objecti]  does  not  elsewhere  occur  in  the  New  Testa* 
ment.  But  it  must  be  noticed  that  here  the  act  of 
preaching  the  gospel  of  evangelization  is  connected 
witli  the  gospel  itself.  Besides,  the  parenthesis  has 
its  influence  upon  the  expression. 

Ver.  3,  4.  Who  was  bom,  &c. — The  words 
from  yivoftivov  to  vf/.iii'iv  (vers.  3  and  4)  are  not 
an  abrupt  parenthesis  (according  to  Griesbach  and 
Knapp),  but  part  of  the  sentence.*  They  character- 
ize the  Son  of  God,  not  according  to  the  antithesis 
of  the  human  and  divine  nature  of  Christ  in  itself, 
but  according  to  the  revelation  of  this  antitiiesis  in 
the  national  Old  Testament  limitation,  and  in  the 
universal  New  Testament  expansion  and  elevation  of 
the  person  of  Clirist  to  heavenly  majesty,  in  accord- 
ance with  the  analogy  of  Phil.  ii.  6.  Yet  that  onto- 
logical  antithesis  is  reflected  in  this  historical  antithe- 
sis.  The  historical  Christ  has  a  double  genealogy 
and  history,  which  is  represented  in  the  following 
analogies  and  antitheses : 


yivoftfvofi 


ex  aTziQfiaroq  /lavuS 
ii  avaardaiox;  vixqUiv 


y.ara  aa(jy.a. 

y.ata  nvtvjua  aytwffi'v^?. 


[This  antithetic  parallelism,  already  hinted  at  by  Bengel,  is  also  brought  out  by  Forbes  {Analyi.  Com^ 
p.  9'7),  and  may  be  more  clearly  and  fully  set  forth  in  this  way : 

"  Concerning  His  Son, 

Who  was  bom  [Son  of  Man  in  weakness] 
from  the  seed  of  David, 
as  to  the  flesh, 
"Vntio  was  installed  Son  of  God  in  power 
from  the  resurrection  of  the  dead, 
as  to  the  Spirit  of  holiness, — 
Even  JesuB  Christ  our  Lord."— P.  S.J 


The  yfvo/ufvoq  denotes  not  merely  the  being  born, 
but,  in  a  wider  sense,  the  genealogical  procession 
from  the  seed  of  David  (see  Matt.  i.  1  ff.).  [The 
house  of  David  represented  the  flower  of  the  Jewish 
nation,  and  foreshadowed  the  kingdom  of  Christ. 
That  the  Messiah  was  to  proceed  from  this  royal  fam- 
ily, was  predicted  in  the  Old  Testament,  Is.  xi.  1 ; 
Jer.  xxiii.  5;  Ps.  cxxxii.  11 ;  and  generally  expected 
by  the  Jews,  Matt.  xxii.  42 ;  John  vii.  42 ;  Acts  xiii. 
23.  Mej'er,  without  good  reason,  confines  ix  ani(>- 
fiarot;  /lavfiii  to  the  male  line  of  descent,  and  refers 
both  genealogies  of  Matthew  and  Luke  to  Joseph ; 
Melanchthon,  on  the  contrary,  identifies  ex  neminc 
David  with  ex  virgine  Maria ;  and  Wordsworth 
infers  from  tiie  words  that  Mary,  as  well  as  Joseph, 
was  of  the  lineage  of  David.  Comp.  Com.  on  the 
genealogies  in  Matt,  i.  and  Luke  iii.  Alford  :  "  The 
words  tx  (T7rt((/<«To;  A.  cast  a  hint  back  at  the 
promise  just  spoken  of.  At  the  same  time,  in  so 
solemn  an  enunciation  of  the  dignity  of  the  Son  of 
God,  they  serve  to  show  that,  even  according  to  the 
human  side,  His  descent  had  been  fixed  in  the  line 
of  him  who  was  Israel's  anointed  and  greatest  king." 
-P.  S.] 

In  distinction  from  this  appearance  of  Christ 
in  human  nature,  the  idea  of  the  exalted  Christ  is 
expressed  by  the  words,  o  (>  trr  &  t  ii;  r  i  ii  i;  0  f  o  T 
iv  dwdfin,,  established  as  Son  of  God  in 


♦  (Orotius  :  "  Hoe  rf/f.rlur  ad  illud  nuod  prircrtsit  tvay 
ycAiOf  ;  rrpliciilur  ncmp'',  dn  qwi  agul  i(/<'  S'rvi"  buna  nun- 
Ham."  So  also  Calvin,  Bongel,  tho  E.  V.,  and  all  who 
rof?!ird  vor.  2  as  a  parenthesis.  The  senno  in  cither  cnse  is 
the  same.    Chrint  is  tho  groat  subject  of  tho  gospoL — 1*.  8.] 


power.  The  attempt  to  analyze  and  divide  this 
one  conception  (for  example,  in  Luther's  German 
translation)  has  obscured  the  passage  very  much. 
The  Son  of  God,  in  distinction  from  His  Old  Testa- 
ment origin,  is  absolutely  destined  {i')^i.afiivoi;,  Acta 
X.  42)  to  be  the  Son  of  God  in  majesty,  or  in  the 
majestic  exercise  of  his  power  (see  Phil.  ii.  6  ff.) 
The  6^/^ftv  of  God  constitutes  the  central  point  of 
all  kindred  conceptions — of  the  6(>oi>faiai,  Acts  xviL 
26  ;  of  the  7Tijoo()i^nv,  Rom.  viii.  29  ;  and  of  tho 
d(fo(ji!^ftv,  Gal.  i.  15.  It  expresses  here  God's  abso- 
lute determination  or  establishment  concerning  Christ 
as  the  centre  of  all  the  historical  developments  of 
the  new  world,  the  Head  of  all  things  (Matt,  xxviii. 
18  ;  Eph.  i.  20  ft'.).  The  expression  refers  not  to 
the  Son  of  God  as  such  simply,  but  to  the  Son  of 
God  as  exalted  to  heavenly  majesty.  As  such,  He  is 
o(nffflf/<;,  not  merely  7tvoo()i,a&tii;,  preedes/iuatua 
(Ambro.se,  Augustine,-)-  \  uigate,  &c.,  according  to 
the  Greek  fathers,  and  the  gloss  7i(Joo(Ji,(Tfyivro.i). 
But  as  He  is  the  ytvofitvoi;  tx  aniit naro^ 
Jai'fii\,  his  descent  from  David  being  the  human 
and  historical  antecedence  for  his  higher  dignity ; 
so  is  He  6(iia&f  ii;  vioi;  &iov  ii  avnardcuD^ 


*  [So  Laehmann,  Tischcndorf,  Alford,  who,  in  thoii 
editions,  omit  the  parenthesis,  and  Meyer  in  Inc.  Comp. 
Winer:  Onimmar  y.  T.  p.  .'liS,  7th  ed.  :  rirU  tilnffere 
Eintchnllungen  tind  nicht  Parrnihrtm,  tnndrrn  Digrf*' 
tiiinrn,  tn/rrn  sii'  riur  drn  Oidinikrnfnrtschrilt,  nicht  den 
Liiuf  d>r  Vonilruclion  au/halln." — P.  S.] 

t  [A-  prird.  sand.  c.  25.  Augustine  had  but  a  stiper* 
flcinl  knowledge  of  Greek,  and  was  here,  as  in  IlDm.  v.  11 
and  in  other  passngog,  milled  l>y  tho  translation  of  tho  Vul- 
gpitc,  which  reads  :  priecUttinal'ui  (s-poopurfi^tTot).— P.  S.] 


CHAPTER  I.   1-7. 


61 


ftuQviv.  The  i x ,  according  to  the  analogy  of  in 
a7zi(jfiaroc,  cannot  merely  mean  since  the  resurrec- 
tion, or  tlirough  (by)  the  resurrection,  but  it  indicates 
the  origin :  out  of  the  resurrection.  The  ane^/ta 
Javtixi  is  the  whole  genealogy,  or  "  the  root  of 
Jesse"  (ch.  xv.  12),  as  it  became  manifest  by  the 
birth  from  the  Virgin.  Thus,  likewise,  the  resur- 
rection is  not  merely  the  fact  of  the  resurrection 
of  Christ,  but  with  the  fiict  of  the  resurrection 
there  are  brought  to  light  the  strength  and  root 
of  the  resurrection  of  the  dead  in  tlie  world, 
(Eph.  i.  19  flf.).  It  is  in  accordance  with  this  that 
Christ  can  say :  "  I  am  the  resurrection  and  the 
life."  Deep  in  the  heart  of  the  first  world — for 
which  Christ  is  the  first-born  of  every  creatxire 
{7TQon6rnxo<;  ndari^  xriaio)i;,  Col.  i.  15) — there  is 
at  work  the  power,  proceeding  from  the  Logos,  of 
a  new  world  (Rom.  viii.  23),  for  which  Christ  is 
the  firs'-horti  from  the  dead  (n^onoroxoi;  i/.  r<~iv 
vfx^i'iv,  Col.  i,  18).  And  this  world  of  the  resurrec- 
tion, which  became  manifest  in  His  personal  resur- 
rection, continues  now  to  operate  dynamically,  and 
will  continue  to  do  so  until  the  flower  of  the  new 
world  appears  in  the  first  resurrection  of  the  elect 
(1  Cor.  XV.  23),  and  the  fruit  in  the  last  general 
resurrection.  The  Apostle  therefore  means  here  the 
power  of  the  resurrection  as  the  cliristological  prin- 
ciple of  life  in  the  world,  which  has  become  mani- 
fest by  the  resurrection  of  Christ,  and  acts  and  works 
as  the  historical  principle  of  tlie  universal  resurrec- 
tion of  the  dead.  Christ  arose  from  his  death  and 
resurrection  as  the  fixed  and  established,  or  insti- 
tuted Son  of  God  in  power.  (Comp.  the  Messianic 
passage,  Ps.  ii. :  "  This  day  have  I  begotten  Thee  ;  " 
which  denotes  the  very  day  of  the  seditious  rebellion 
against  the  Messiah  as  the  grand  day  of  his  glorifi- 
cation). The  destination  which  Christ  had  from  the 
beginning,  became  inauguration  or  institution  at  His 
resurrection.  The  ofjiad-tii;  therefore,  does  not 
merely  mean  "shown,"  " declaratively  established " 
(Meyer,  according  to  Chrysostom,  dayQivToq) ;  *  the 
lit  does  not  mean  merely  since  or  after  (Theo- 
doret,  Erasmus,  and  others)  ;*  and  the  araa-raffn,- 
vc/.Qm'  does  not  mean  merely  avd(TTa(7i,q  e-/.  vir.qm'. 
And  Philippi,  following  Melanchthon,   and  others, 


*  [Comp.  my  textual  note  No.  *.  Chrysostom:  Ti  ovv  i(T- 
Tiv  opKjSsvTOi;  ToO  Scix^eVTO?,  a7ro(^a>'9eVT09,  Kpt9eVT05, 
onoXoyijSei'TOS  Trapa  Trjj  anoLVTiDV  yvuiixr)^  Koi  <pr\(f)OV.  So 
Theoplij-lact.  Luther  :  erwieseu.  MeytT  agrees  with  this 
as  to  the  sense,  hut  insists  that  here  as  elsewhere  opi^eiv 
■with  the  double  accusative  means  to  appoint,  desisruate, 
institute  some  one  for  something  (Acts  x.  42).  Philippi 
(3d  ed.) :  "  C/irisius  ist  als  Sohn  Gottcs  darqethan,  erwie- 
SEN,  insofer-n  er  von  d^n  Menschf.n,  oder  in  dir  Ueber- 
ZECGUNG  DER  JIenschen,  durcli  die  AufKislehung  vnn  den 
Todlen  dazu  eingcse.l.zt  ist.  Ganz  paral'el  ist.  der  Gidaiilce, 
Acts  xiii.  33."  Alford  :  "  The  opi'^eiv  here  spoken  of  is  not 
the  ohjcetiv^  '  fixing,'  '  appointing '  of  Christ  to  be  the  Son 
of  God,  but  the  subjiclive  mani/estation  i7i  mfn's  minds  that 
He  is  so.  Thus  the  objective  words  noielv  (Acts  ii. 
36),  yei/i/av  (Acts  xiii.  33),  are  used  of  the  same  proof  or 
manif-sl'ilion  of  Christ's  Sonship  by  His  resurrection.  So 
again  eSticatioflr),  1  Tim.  iii.  1(3."  But  all  this  is  contrary 
to  the  meaning  of  opifcii/,  which  denotes  the  ohjrctive 
fixing  and  appointing.  "Wordsworth  explains  somewhat 
diti'erently :  ""Who  was  defined  (as  distinguished  from  all 
othel•^:)  by  a  divine  decrfe,  and  proclaimed  to  be  the  Son 
of  God."  He  refers  to  Ps.  ii.  7  as  the  best  exposition  of 
this  text:  "I  will  declare  the  decree  (pn)  whereby  the 
Lord  said  unto  me,  Thou  art  my  Son,  this  day  hove.  I  he- 
gotten  Thee."  Bengel  refers  to  the  same  passage  and  re- 
marks that  pn  here  means  the  same  as  6pt<r;iid!,  and 
that  the  divine  decree  implies,  that  the  "Father  has  most 
delcrmitmtely  said,  Tlimi  ail  my  Sun.  The  dirdSeifi?,  the 
approving  of  the  Son,  follows  in  the  train  of  this  bpurnot. 
-P   S.l 


has  very  properly  connected  the  iv  Suvufai  with 
vlov  vJ^foT',  and  did  not  follow  Luther,  Meyer,  and 
others  in  connecting  it  with  oQiaOivroq.  Meyer  has 
therefore  no  ground  for  opposing  the  explanation  of 
Bengel — that  our  resurrection  is  comprehended  in 
Christ's  resurrection — by  remarking  that  the  term 
the  resurrection  from  the  dead  is  only  the  general 
expression  of  the  category. 

In  the  third  antithesis,  x«Ta  aaQxa,,  "ac- 
cording to  the  flesh,"  means  the  fleshly  or  physical 
origin  of  Christ,  but  net  according  to  the  first  con- 
ception of  adi>t,  i.  e.,  the  sensuous,  susceptible, 
vital  fulness  of  corporeity,  as  distinct  from  and  sub- 
jected  to  the  spirit,  or,  in  a  more  general  sense,  the 
"  earthly  man,"  dvO^oTTot;  yo'Uofi  (1  Cor.  xv.  4*7 ; 
Gen.  ii.).  Still  less  has  flesh  here  the  second  mean- 
ing, viz.,  sinful  sensuousness  and  susceptibility,  as 
opposed  to  the  spirit,  and  without  it ;  or,  in  the  more 
general  sense,  the  "  natural  man,"  dvO^onoq  i/'c/t- 
>to(,-  (John  iii.  6  ;  1  Cor.  ii.  14).  But  ad(jl  has  here 
its  third  meaning,  and  expresses  the  physical  human 
nature  under  the  influence  of  the  spirit  (John  i.  13  ; 
vi.  51),  yet  in  historical  relations,  or  man  in  his  his- 
torical finiteness,  limitation,  and  qua.lificafion  (Gal. 
iv.  4).  For  Christ's  incarnation,  and  the  growth  of 
His  physical  nature,  evidently  involved  no  opposition 
to  the  "  Spirit  of  holiness,"  but  took  place  under  its 
consecrating  influence. 

[Flesh  (o-«4<i,  1^3  )  is  here,  and  in  all  the  pas- 
sages where  it  is  used  of  the  incarnation  (Rom.  ix, 
5  ;  1  Tim.  iii.  16  ;  John  i.  14 ;  1  John  iv.  2),  a 
strong  Hebraizing  term  for  human  nature,  with  the 
imphed  idea,  perhaps,  of  weakness  and  frailty,  though 
not  necessarily  of  sin  (somewhat  analogous  to  the 
occasional  use  of  the  German  der  Sterbliche,  and  the 
English  mortal,  for  man).  It  is  as  correct  to  say : 
Christ  became  man  {Mensehwerdung),  as  to  say : 
Christ  became ^esA  (incarnatio,  incarnation,  Fleisch- 
werdung),  but  the  latter  expression  is  more  emphatic ; 
it  exhibits  more  strongly  the  condescension  of  Christ, 
the  identity  of  His  nature  with  our  own,  and  the 
universalness  of  His  manhood.  The  word  ffa(>i, 
therefore,  when  applied  to  Christ,  must  not  be  un- 
derstood in  an  Apollinarian  sense,  as  if  Christ  nieiely 
assumed  a  human  body  with  the  animal  soul,  but  not 
the  rational  soul,  whose  place  was  supplied  by  the 
divine  Logos.  It  impUes  the  entire  human  constitu- 
tion, body,  soul,  and  spirit,  sin  only  excepted,  which 
does  not  originally  and  necessarily  belong  to  man. 
It  is  not  the  flesh,  as  opposed  to  the  spirit,  that  is  here 
intended,  but  the  human,  as  distinct  from  the  divine. 
The  flesh,  as  an  organized  system  of  life,  is  the  out 
ward  tabernacle  and  the  visible  representative  of  the 
whole  man  to  our  senses.  The  ad(ji  of  Christ  was 
the  seat  of  a  human  ^n'/tj,  with  its  affections,  and  of 
a  hinnan  roTg  or  nnviia,  with  its  intelligence  (comp. 
Matt,  xxvii.  50 ;  John  xi.  33  ;  xix.  30),  but  not  of 
the  diia(>Tla.  He  was  subject  to  temptation,  or 
temptable  (Heb.  ii.  18;  iv.  15),  but  neither  (7«()xtxde 
(Rom.  vii.  14),  nor  xi'it/txot;  (1  Cor.  ii.  14).  He  np- 
peared  not  "  in  the  flesh  of  sin,"  but  only  "  in  the 
likeness  of  the  flesh  of  sin  "  (Rom.  viii.  2).  At  the 
same  time,  the  limitation,  y.aid  ad(jy.a,  pl.ainly  im- 
plies the  divine  nature  of  Christ.  "  Were  He  a 
mere  man,"  says  Hodge,  "  it  had  been  enough  to  say 
that  He  was  of  the  seed  of  David ;  but  as  He  ia 
more  than  man,  it  was  necessary  to  limit  His  descent 
from  David  to  His  human  nature." — P.  S.l 

Ver.  4.  According  to  the  Spirit  of  holiness, 
xara  nvtv  fta.  ay  ko  a  vvrj  i; . — We  accejit,  with 
Bengel,  against  Thol ick,  that  the  dyttoffuviy  if 


62 


THE   EPISTLE   OF   PAUL   TO   THE   ROMAXa 


certainly  distinguished  from  the  ayiori;^ — just  as 
tauciimoiiiit  lA  I'miu  s<inclitaii — in  cxpre.s.sing  the 
operation  of  the  Spirit,  though  in  a  more  compre- 
heneive  relation.  This  is  tiie  Spirit  of  God,  who,  as 
the  sanctifying  Spirit  in  the  world,  constitutes  the 
complete  opposition  and  counteraction  to  the  entire 
corruption  of  m\  ;  who  was  first  tlie  cause  of  the 
holy  birtli  of  Christ,  and  tlien  of  Uis  resurrection ; 
and  who  now  proceeds  from  the  glorified  Christ  as 
the  principle  of  the  sanctitication  of  humanity  and 
the  world.  liengel :  Ante  reHurrectioneni  la/efmt 
tub  came  S/tirltux ;  post  rrsurrcctionein  carnem 
penitiig  abscondit  Splritus  sanclii/ionut.*  We  accept 
this  statement  in  a  wider  sense.  From  the  divina 
natnra  of  Clu'ist  as  s<iitctijicali<niis  omnis  {■««<«  (Me- 
lanelithon,  Calov,  [Bengel,  Olshausen],  and  others), 
we  must  distinguish  the  expression  so  far  as  it  does 
not  denote  the  individual,  but  the  universal  vital 
principle  of  the  new  birth  of  humanity.  And  we 
must  distinguish  it  from  the  Holy  Spirit,  the  nvtr/ia 
o/toi'  (Clirysostom,  and  most  commentators ;  see 
Meyer),f  so  far  as  it  denotes  tliis  principle,  not 
merely  according  to  its  complete  New  Testament 
revelation,  but  also  according  to  the  Old  Testament 
preparation  of  tlie  divine-human  life.  But  we  must 
not  make  tlie  distinction  so  that  the  nvfriia  aymt- 
ai'vtji;  will  represent  the  difference  between  the  ab- 
solute communication  of  the  Spirit  to  Christ  and  the 
relative  operation  of  the  nvunct  uyiov  (Tiioluck, 
Baur).  We  shall  be  secure  against  confounding  the 
ideas,  nvtvna.  ayn'iiri'nj^,  /.dyo,'  or  tixm'  tot  O^fov 
(Riickert,  lieiche),  if  we  observe  the  ditference  be- 
tween the  univeisil  and  individual  divine  principle 
of  life  in  revelation.  This  difference  is  most  de- 
cidedly ignored  by  Baur,  when  he  understands  by 
the  TTvfTnct  ay.  the  Messianic  Spirit.  When  Cle- 
mens Romanus,  Ep.  ii.,  terms  Christ  tlie  first 
Spirit^\  he  means  the  individual  designation  of  the 
divine  nature  of  Christ,  yet  according  to  its  univer- 
sal relation,  just  as  the  spirit  of  a  man  is  the  individ- 
ual himself,  but  according  to  his  universal  relation. 

[/Caret  nvtvfia  cic y i, o) a i' v rj  t;  is  .evidently 
the  antithesis  or  counterpart  of  xct  ra  aaQxa,,  and 
as  acioi  here  means  the  human  nature  of  Christ, 
TTvfT/ta  must  mean  His  divine  nature,  which  is  all 
Spirit,  and  intrinsically  holy,  ayuorrrv/j^  is  the  geni- 
tive of  qualification,  showing  that  holiness  is  the 
essential  cliaracteristic  of  Christ's  Spirit,  and  yet  it 
distinguishes  this  from  the  nvu/ia  nyiov,  wiiich  is 
the  technical  designation  of  the  tliird  person  of  the 
Trinity.  Comp.  .John  iv.  24  :  "  God  [i.  e.,  the  di- 
vine being  or  nature  which  the  three  persons  of  the 
Trinity  have  in  common)  is  Spirit;"  2  Cor.  iii.  17, 
where  Christ  Himself  is  called  "  the  Spirit ;  "  1  Tim. 
iii.  10:  "justified  in  Spirit"  (fv  TTvu'/mTi.);  Heb. 
ix.  14  :  "  Wlio  with  an  eternal  Spirit  {Aid  jirn'iiaTO^; 
ui'iriui)  offered  Himself  witliout  spot  to  God  ;  "  and 
1  Peter  iii.  18,  where  a  somewhat  siniilar  distinction 
la  made  between  the  flesh  and  the  spirit,  or  the 
human  and  divine  nature  of  Christ :  "  Being  put  to 

•  f  bcn?ol  h!\»  a  lar(?o  note  on  irvtufjia  ayua<Tvtn)t  whirh 
irt  well  Worth  readin'r  in  full.  Ho  roi^iids  ayuorvvri,  iiinc- 
timoniii,  as  a  kind  of  middle  term  tictweoM  oyidrr^,  hiiUmis, 
and  oyiaiTfKit,  inic'ificitirtn. — P.  S.  1 

t  (Wordnworth  ;inJ  Forbes  aluo  wroMKly  identify  the 
nvtu)ia  aymjTuiTjt  with  tlic  irvevfia  ayiov,  tlic  third  i>ers<m 
In  the  Holy  Trinity,  and  I herr by  destroy  the  obvious  con- 
ti'nnt  I'f  KaTo  nv.  ayiwcr.  and  Kara  <rdpKa.—V.  S.]  < 

t  [Ep'tl.  ml  Cor.  II.  c.  0  :  'Of  Xpitrrbt  6  xupiof,  i  (Merot 
i)liai,  utv  II  if  T&  irpiIiTov  wvtu  pta ,  iyivtro  aap%,  ttai 
oCrut  qM<>t  iKa\t<Ttv  oiirut  koX  hiitli  iu  raiirp  Tf)  aapxl 
airoAi)ii>i>/i<9a  tof  fiiaOov.  The  Clemi'ntinc  ori;^n  of  the 
8-Cond  Kpiatlo  to  thr  (Jurinthiuiu  is  very  duubtiul.— 1'.  S.] 


death  in  the  flesh,  but  quickened  by  the  Spirit,' 
altiiougli  tills  piis-sage  is  not  exactly  parallel.  Meyei 
takes  nvtvfia  o/toimW'//?  to  mean  the  'iaut  a.r!}(ioy' 
not;,  the  whole  inner  life  of  Christ,  which  was  ele- 
rated  above  all  purely  human  spirits,  filled  with  the 
Spirit  of  God,  sinless  and  perfect.  De  Wette: 
"Tlie  Spiritual  side  of  the  life  of  Christ,  yet  with 
the  attriliute  of  holiness  partly  as  a  quiescent  ciuality, 
partly  as  an  efiieacious  power  emanating  from  it." 
Suljstitute  for  this :  "  The  Divine  side  of  Chnst'a 
person  wi  h  the  essential  characteristic  of  holiness," 
&e.,  and  we  can  adopt  this  explanation.  If  fiesh 
means  the  whole  human  nature,  it  implies  a  human 
spirit,  hut  not  tiie  nvtvfta  ayio)auv^i;y  which  is  es- 
sentially Divine. — P.  S.] 

Of  Jesus  Chiist  our  Lord. — ['///(roe  X^ifT 
ToTi  ToP  /.rfiini'  '/,<"''»',  ver.  4,  in  apposition  witii  to'/ 
v'lov  &foT',  anticiiiated  in  the  E.  V.  ver.  3J.  This 
expresses  the  relation  of  the  exalted  Son  of  God  to 
tlie  Apostle  and  tlie  Roman  Christians  as  the  ground 
and  bond  of  their  union.  They  together  aceipted 
Jesus  as  the  Christ  of  God,  and  served  Him  as  their 
common  Master.  [Alford  :  "  Having  given  this  de- 
scription of  the  person  and  dignity  of  the  Son  of 
God,  very  man  and  very  God,  he  now  identifies  this 
divine  person  with  Jesus  Christ,  the  Lord  and 
ILuster  of  Christians — the  historical  object  of  their 
faith,  and  (see  words  following)  the  Appointer  of 
himself  to  the  apostolic  office."  De  Wette:  "'/»;ff. 
A'o.  bezeichnet  den  Sohn  Gntles  als  hiflori-ich-kirch- 
liche  Er-icheiiiunf/."  So  Tholuck,  Philippi.  Jesiis 
is  the  personal,  Christ  the  official  name  ;  the  former 
expresses  His  true  character  and  mission  imd  relation 
to  the  world,  the  latter  His  connection  with  the  Old 
Testament  and  the  promise  of  God.  Jesus,  i.  e^ 
Saviour,  was  the  Hebrew  name,  announced  by  the 
angel  before  His  birth.  Matt.  i.  25  ;  Luke  i.  81,  and 
given  at  His  circumcision,  Luke  ii.  21 ;  Christ,  the 
Greek  tjquivalent  for  the  Hebrew  J/cs.-fa//,  /.  e.,  the 
Anointed,  exhibits  Him  as  the  fulfiller  of  all  the 
prophecies  and  types  of  the  Old  Testament,  as  the 
divinely  promised  and  anointed  Prophet,  Priest,  and 
King  of  Israel,  who  had  for  ages  been  the  desire  of 
all  nations  and  the  hope  of  all  believers.  Lord  is 
here,  and  often,  applied  to  Christ  in  the  same  sense 
in  wliich  the  Septuagint  uses  xr(>40<,-  for  the  Hebrew 
■^jiix  and  nin^.  See  the  Lexica.  Christ  is  so. 
calleci  as  tlie  supreme  Lord  of  the  New  Dispensation, 
or  the  sovereign  Head  of  Christendom,  to  whom  all 
believera  owe  allegiance  and  obedience. — P.  S.] 

Ver.  6.  Through  wrhom  we  received. — After 
stating  the  common  relation  of  believers  to  Christ, 
there  follows  the  account  of  the  special  relation  of 
the  Apostle  to  Him.  It  is  plain  that  neither  ver.  5 
nor  ver.  6  can  be  parenthetical ;  but  here  is  prepared 
the  whole  treatment  of  the  Epistle  on  the  relatioa 
between  the  call  of  the  Apostle  and  the  call  of  the 
churcli  at  Rome.  cVt'  or.  Christ  is  the  personal 
means  of  communicating  his  call  on  God's  part 
[or  the  mediatorial  agent  in  conferring  grace  from 
(iod  to  man,  comp.  (}al.  i.  1  ;  1  Cor.  i.  9. — P.  S.]. 
t).d fSontv  (rccfivrd)  denotes  not  only  the  free 
divine  gift,  but  also  the  li\iiig  religious  and  moral 
appropriation  by  faith.  It  is  plain  that  the  plural 
here  has  reference  to  the  call  of  Paul  alone  (not  to 
the  apostles  in  general,  according  to  Bengel),  from 
the  following  signature  of  his  apostlcshij),  by  which 
he  is  the  Apostle  to  the  Gentiles.* 

♦  f  Comp.  the  note  of  Meyer  in  loeo  offtiinat  Reiohe,  and 
of  Aliord  ugaliist  I'oile,  who  infers  that  the  subjool  of  tki^ 


CHAPTER  I.    l-T. 


63 


Qrace  [in  general]  and  apostleship  [in  particu- 
lar.— P.  S.].  Grace,  as  the  operative  call  to  salvation 
and  to  the  full  experience  of  salvation  in  justifica- 
tion, is  the  preliminary  condition  for  every  Christian 
cilice,  and,  above  all,  to  the  apostleship.  The  grand 
unfolding  of  his  apostleship  was  therefore  preceded 
by  an  extraordinary  degree  of  grace  [in  his  conver- 
sion]. The  explanation,  /ci(ji.v  a/Toa-to'/.TjQ,  ■  race 
of  opos'les/iip  (Heudiadys,  so  Chrysostom,  Beza,  PLi- 
lippi,  and  others),  obliterates  the  force  of  that  pre- 
liminary condition ;  *  but  when  the  (/race  is  regarded 
merely  as  pardoning  grace  (Augustine,  Calviu),  the 
fundamental  part  is  mistaken  for  the  whole.  Thus, 
also,  the  extraordinary  apostolic  gifts  {/afjid/iara) 
to  which  Theodoret,  Luther,  and  others  refer  /uquv, 
presuppose  grace  (/m^hc;)  already.  Meyer  under- 
stands the  expression  to  mean  Divine  grace  in 
general ;  that  is,  the  translation  into  the  com- 
mujn'on  of  the  beloved  of  God. 

Unto  obedience  of  faith  [ft?  v7ia.y.oijv 
Ttiarfioq,  zum  Glauhensgehorsam,  comp.  Rom. 
xvi.  26. — P.  S.].  That  is,  for  the  purpose  of  estab- 
lishing obedience  to  the  faith.  The  f  t?  denotes  not 
merely  the  purpose,  but  also  the  operation  of  the 
apostleship  ; — an  instance  of  Pauhne  conciseness.  It 
may  be  asked  here,  whether  the  genitive  n  iar  fox; 
indicates  the  object,  or  must  be  read  as  apposition  : 
the  faith  which  consists  in  obedience  [to  the  Word 
and  Will  of  Christ. — P.  S.].f  But  this  question  is 
limited  by  the  second,  whether  niatvi;  can  stand  in 
the  objective  sense  as  fides  q,vm  creditur  [^quod  ere- 
dendum  est,  doctrina  Chr.'s'iana. — P.  S.]  ?  Meyer 
denies  this,  and  asserts  that  niari.q,  in  the  New 
Testament,  is  constantly  subjective  faith  [fides  qua 
creditur,  fides  credens. — P.  S.],  though  it  is  often 
made  otDJective,  as  here,  and  is  regarded  a  power, 
or  controlling  principle. ;}:  But  this  would  give  us 
the  idea  of  obedience  toward  the  faithful.  The 
obedience  here  meant  is  either  identical  with  faith 
(the  obedience  which  consists  in  faith,  according  to 
Theophylact,  Calvin  §  ),  or  it  is  obedience  to  faith  in 
its  objective  form.  The  latter  interpretation  is  sup- 
ported by  the  expressions  vna/.oij  tov  X^ktto?, 
2  Cor.  X.  5  [vTzaxof]  rrjq  a/.>j,9-fla(;,  1  Peter  i.  22], 
and  particularly  Acts  vi.  7  ["  a  great  company  of 
priests  vntj/.ovov  t^  niatfi.,  became  obedient  to  the 
faith,"  comp.  Rom.  x.  16 :  vnij/.oi'aav  roi  ivay- 
yfUm.—F.  S.].     Comp.  1  Peter  i.  2,  14.     But  this 


Pofiev  must  be  the  same  as  the  preceding  riiJi.o>v,  overlook- 
ing the  formulary  characttr  of  the  phrase  6  kuoios  iiixiav. — 
P.  S.] 

*  [Alford :  "  Keep  the  xapiv  koX  anoa-To\riv  separate, 
and  strictly  consecutive,  avoiding  all  nonsensical  figures  of 
Hendiadys,  Hj-pallage,  and  the  like.  It  was  the  general 
bestowtil  of  grace  which  conditioned  and  introduced  the 
special  bestowal  (xai,  as  so  often,  coupling  a  specific  portion 
to  a  whole)  of  apostleship;  cf.  1  Cor.  sv.  10,"  Augustine: 
"  Gratinm  cum  omnibus  jideHbus,  aposlolaluin  autem,  non 
cum  omnibus  commuiiem  hnbet." — P.  S.] 

t  [Or  rather  :  the,  obedience  which  consists  in  faith,  in 
the  act  of  believing.— P.  S.] 

t  [Meyer,  4th  ed.  1865,  p.  43  :  "irio-Tit  fur  doctrina 
FiDEi  zu  nehmen  (Beza,  Tolet.,  Estins,  Bengel,  Heum., 
Cramer,  Roscnm.,  Flatt,  Fritzsche,  Tholuck,  u.  M.),  ist 
duichous  grgpAi  di-.n  Sprachgebrauch  dcs  N.  T.,  in  veichem 
dit  wiffTts  sUts  der  sxiBJECirvE  Glaube  ist,  ohioohl  ofl,  wie 
hier,  OBjErTiviET,  als  Pnle.m  gedaclil.  Vrgl.  xvi.  26;  Gal. 
i.  23.  Die  iri<mi  isl,  nach  P.,  die  Veberzeuyung  und  Zuvcr- 
ficht  (assenscs  und  riDuciA)  von  Jesus  Chrislus  als  dnn  ein- 
tigtn  und  vollkommenen  Vermitthr  der  goUlichi'n  Gnafir  und 
des  ewigen  L'bens,  durch  Sfin  Vcrsdhnungsweik.^' — P.  S.] 

§  [So  also  Hodge  :  "  The  obedience  of  faith  is  that 
obedience  whicli  consists  in  faith,  or  of  which  faith  is  the 
contvolling  principle."  "Wordsworth:  " That  I  might  bring 
all  nations  tc  that  faith  which  manifests  itself  in  heaiken- 
ing  to  the  "Word,  and  in  obedience  to  the  Will,  of  God  "- 

E.ai 


niariq  cannot  mean  only  doctrina  fidei.  Even  obe- 
dience to  the  gospel  (Rom.  x.  16)  does  not  express 
the  most  definite  form  of  the  objective  nian.^  :  this 
is  Christ  Himself.  An  Epistle,  sent  to  Rome  by  the 
ambassador  of  a  Lord  and  King,  who  declared  him- 
self appointed  to  call  all  the  peoples  of  the  Roman 
Empire  to  obedience  or  allegiance,  must  have  been 
planned  in  full  consciousness  of  the  antithesis,  aa 
well  as  of  the  analogy,  between  the  earthly  Roman 
Empire  and  the  Kingdom  of  Christ.  Therefore  the 
Apostle  expresses  the  analogy  when  he  characterizes 
himself  as  an  ambassador  who  appeals  to  the  nations 
to  be  obedient  to  his  Lord.  But  the  antithesis  lies 
in  his  denoting  this  obedience  as  an  obedience  to  the 
faith.  We  must  admit  that  the  idea  of  the  subjec- 
tive faith  also  has  here  a  good  sense  in  itself.  Faith 
is  not  at  all  arbitrary,  but  an  obligatory  obedience 
incumbent  upon  the  inmost  soul  and  conscience ;  yet 
its  obedience  is  not  slavish,  but  the  joyous  act  of 
free  faith,  as  it  is  assensus  and  filucia.  And  if  we 
accept  this,  the  expression  would  be  an  oxymoron, 
like  the  expression :  law  of  the  Spirit.  But  since 
the  question  is  concerning  a  characterization  of  the 
apostleship,  the  fuller  idea  must  be  expected :  obe- 
dience toward  the  object  of  faith,  especially  as  the 
freedom  of  faith  is  thereby  also  declared.  Even  the 
Christian's  hope  can  be  used  in  an  objective  sense 
(Col.  i.  5). 

Among  all  the  nations  {iv  naaiv  roTq 
t&vf(Ttv). — Since  this  expression  constitutes  one 
definition  with  the  preceding,  it  is  an  improper  alter- 
native to  refer  it  either  to  ildfi.  (Beza)  or  to  ft? 
inax.  TTiffTfioq  (Meyer  [Hodge]).  We  translate 
here,  among  all  the  nations  (with  Riickert,  Reiche, 
Baur) ;  not  among  all  Gentiles  (Tholuck,  Meyer), 
because,  from  the  following  salutation,  the  Jews  are 
included  in  the  designation,  and  because  it  is  in  har- 
mony with  the  purpose  of  the  whole  Epistle  to  estab- 
lish a  united  congregation  from  among  Jews  and 
Gentiles.  With  this  view,  the  subordinate  idea  of 
heathen  nations  is  immediately  introduced,  yet  not 
clearly  before  vers.  13,  14,  &c.  [Hodge :  "  The 
apostles  were  not  diocesans,  restricted  in  jurisdiction 
to  a  particular  territory.  Their  commission  was  gen- 
eral. It  was  to  all  nations," — yet  with  an  amicable 
division  of  the  immense  field  of  labor ;  comp.  Gal. 
ii.  9  ;  Rom.  xv.  20  ;  2  Cor.  x.  16.— P.  S.] 

For  the  sake  of  his  name. — (See  Acts  v. 
41).  Not  for  "  the  good  "  of  His  name  ;  nor  for 
the  glorifying  of  the  same  (Meyer),  which  would 
have  been  expressed  in  the  form  of  a  doxology,* 
but  for  the  spread  of  His  name  (Phil.  ii.  10).  There- 
fore the  words  are  not  an  addition,  but  an  explana- 
tory parallel  to  the  expression,  '■\for  obedience  to  the 
faith,''''  kc,  and  relate,  in  common  with  this,  to  the 
antecedent.  His  name  is  the  object  of  the  faith  to 
which  the  nations  should  render  obedience  in  Hi3 
name. 

Yer.  6.  Among  whom  are  ye  also. — Wa 
place  here  a  comma,  and  read  the  words,  the  called, 
the  chosen  ones  of  Jesus  Christ,  as  an  address  (with 
Riickert,  Philippi,  &c.) ;  but  not,  among  nhom  are 
ye  also  called  of  Jesus  Christ  (with  Lachmann,  Mey- 
er [Alford],  and  others).     For  the  principal  weight 

*  [Not  necessarily;  comp.  Acts  is.  16;  xv.  26;  xxi. 
13,  where  the  same  phrase,  imep  tov  ovd^aros  roi!  Kvpiov 
'Irjo-oO,  occurs  in  the  sense  :  for  the  glory  of  Christ.  3Ioy- 
er's  interpretation  is  also  adopted  by  Alford  and  Hodge. 
The  words  aptly  express  the  final  end  of  Paul's  apostle- 
ship, which  was,  to  promote  the  knowledge  and  glory  of 
Christ.  In  the  "name"  of  Christ  is  summed  up  all  thai 
He  was,  did,  and  sutTered.—  P.  S.l  « 


64 


THE    EPISTLE    OF   PAUL   TO    THE   ROMANS. 


rests  on  the  thought,  that  the  Roman  Christians  were 
included  in  the  totality  of  nations  to  which  the  Apos- 
tle was  sent.  He  did  not  need  to  say  first  to  tlieni 
that  they  were  the  called  of  Jesus  Christ.  Thus  we 
have  the  beautiful  aniithesis:  I  am  the  chosen  Apos- 
tle for  all  nations  :  you  are  the  chosen  believers  iu 
the  midst  of  all  nations :  we  are  therefore  directed 
toward  each  other. 

The  called  of  Jesus  Christ. — Not,  whom 
Christ  has  called  (Luther,  Riickcrt,  and  others);  but 
who,  as  the  called  [by  the  accepted  call  of  God 
throuirh  the  gospel],  i)elong  to  and  are  subject  to 
Him  (the  genitive  of  possession  ;  Erasmus  [Calvin, 
De  Wette],  Meyer,  and  others).*  Paul  refers  the 
call  (through  Christ)  to  God  (Rom.  viii.  SO,  &e. ;  see 
Meyer).  The  Apostle  seems,  by  this  address,  to  an- 
ticipate the  salutation  itself;  but  the  address  must 
pre[)are  the  way  for  the  salutation  by  the  reminder 
that  he  can  salute  them  as  pertaining  to  him. 
[Hodge :  "  01  xIijtoi,  the  called,  means  the  effectu- 
ally called ;  those  who  are  so  called  by  God  as  to  be 
made  obedient  to  the  call.  Hence  the  yJ.tjroi  are 
opposed  to  those  who  receive  and  disregard  the  out- 
ward call.  .  .  .  Hence,  too,  x/^/toi  and  i/.h/.roi  are 
of  nearly  the  same  import ;  y.arct  n(/6f)KTi,v  x/./^to/, 
Rom.  viii.  28  ;  corap.  Rom.  ix.  11  ;  1  Cor.  i.  2ii,  27. 
AVe  accordingly  find  x/.tjToi  used  as  a  familiar  desig- 
nation of  believers."  This  is  not  quite  correct. 
x/.>jToi  and  ey./.r/.roi  (a  paronomasia  in  Greek,  like 
the  German  erwd/iU  and  auscrwahlt)  are  clearly  dis- 
tinguished, Matt.  XX.  16  and  xxii.  14  :  no/./.o'i  yci(j 
flfnv  zAijToi,  o/.iyot.  <\e  i/.h/.roi,  many  are  callel,  hut 
few  chosen;  in  the  last  passage  they  are  even  put  in 
antithesis.  All  the  members  of  the  visible  Church 
ore  x/./jToi,  though  they  may  ultimately  be  lost ;  but 
only  the  members  of  the  invisible  Church,  or  the 
true  believers,  are  i/.}.ty.roi,  or  yJ.ijToi  xara  n(>6- 
S  fOiv  (Rom.  viii.  28).  Comp.  the  notes  on  Matt. 
XX.  ItJ,  in  vol.  i.  p.  l-')52  and  854  f. — P.  S.] 

Ver.  7.  To  all  that  are  in  Rome. — The  ad- 
dress and  the  silutation.f  The  Epistle  is  addressed 
to  all  Christians  in  Rome.  Residence  in  Rome  and 
connection  with  the  body  of  Roman  Christians  are 
certainly  presupposed  (see  ver.  8).  But  the  Roman 
Christians  are  saluted  according  to  the  condition  of 
things,  as  an  incipient  church  not  yet  fully  organ- 
ized, but  destined  to  become  so — an  end  to  which 
this  very  E[)istlc  was  directed.  The  Apostle  ex- 
presses himself  otherwise  in  the  Epistles  to  the 
Corinthians,  Galatians,  and  Thessalonians.  There 
he  salutes  the  Christians  as  a  church,  or  churches, 
[The  Christians  residing  at  Rome,  whether  born 
there  or  not,  are  viewed  as  one  community,  however 
imperfectly  they  may  have  been  organized  at  the 
time ;  but  they  no  doubt  woi-shijjped  iu  ditfurent 
parts  of  the  city,  and  were  thus  divided  into  various 
domestic  congregations,  i/././.tjirlru  xar  oixor,  xvi.  5. 
The  population  of  the  city  of  Rome  at  the  time  of 
Clu-ist  is  variously  estimated  from  one  to  two  mill- 
ions. In  his  earliest  five  epistles,  Paul  addresses 
himself  ttj  ixxXijaia,  k.t.)..  ;  in  all  the  others,  tok 
aj'i'otc. — P.  S.] 

Beloved  of  Ood,  called  to  be  saints. — The 

•  [Alford  tjiko"!  'Ij|<roO  XptoroO  not  fts  the  if'"'"'-  pnfuei- 
tioni$,  bui  -At  equivnU-nt  t<>  !»i/ Jesuj  Christ.  But  thi-  call 
of  liclifvprs  Id  uiiifnrmlv  referred  to  the  Futher.  Alfnrd 
quotes  .Iiilm  v.  2'i  iind  1  *rim.  i.  12  ;  but  these  possnges  are 
not  to  tt.e  point.— P.  S.] 

t  ('ITii'  i-alutation  commcnrea  with  X'M'^fi  """l  should 
form  n  verse  hy  Itxelf.  The  <irnt  clause  of  ver.  7  connecfii 
with  ver.  1  and  indicates  the  readers.     See  Text.  Note  '*. — 

r.  8.  J 


root  of  their  Chiistian  faith  is,  that  they  Know  them 
selves  beloved  of  God  by  the  experience  of  liia 
reconciliation ;  the  goal  and  crown  of  their  Chris- 
tian faith  is  holiness.  But  they  are  not  merely  called 
to  be  saints  (De  Wette).  As  truly  called,  they  are 
actually  saints  first  in  this  sense :  that,  according  to 
the  analogy  of  theocratic  holiness,  they  are  sepa- 
rated from  the  ungodly  world  and  consecrated  to 
God ;  secondly,  in  the  sense  that  Christ  dwells  in 
them  as  the  principle  of  increasing  holiness,  and 
that  they  are  characterized  according  to  the  ruling 
principle  of  their  new  life  (1  Cor.  vii.  14).  Thia 
general  designation  does  not  imply  that  the  Apostle 
could  say  it  of  every  individual,  still  less  that  he 
should  ascribe  to  individuals  a  personal  holiness  of 
life.  [x/^;toi  has  the  same  relation  to  ciyioi  as 
x/;/TOs-  lias  to  anofJToloi;,  in  ver.  1,  and  ex|)res8e3 
the  vocation  of  the  Roman  Christians  to  holiness, 
which  is  both  an  actual  possession  as  to  jjrinciple, 
and  a  moral  aim  to  be  realized  more  and  more  by 
daily  growth  in  Christ. — P.  S.] 

Grace  to  you  and  peace. — The  Greek  /aU 
^nv  (Acts  XV.  23  ;  James  i.  1),  and  the  Hebrew 
csb  cibd ,  are  here  reflected  unitedly  in  the 
infinitely  richer  Christian  salutation.  The  grace 
which,  as  the  cause  of  peace,  has  its  source  in  God 
and  Ciirist ;  the  peace,  as  the  operation  of  this  cause, 
whicti  becomes  the  source  of  new  life  in  believers. 
The  more  definite  Christian  conception  is  destroyed 
if  we  substitute  (with  Meyer,  against  Olshausen, 
Philippi,  and  many  others)  salvation  instead  of 
peace,  and  kindness  instead  of  grace.  [Grace  and 
peace  are  related  to  each  other  as  cause  and  effect, 
and  constitute  the  chief  blessings  of  Christianity, 
embracing  all  that  we  need.  The  profound  Christian 
meaning  of  ■/ci.(>i^ — the  redeeming  love  of  God  in 
Clirist — and  of  tto/jvtj — the  peace  with  God  by  the 
reilcmption — compared  with  the  ordinary  meaning 
of  the  Greek  /ai^nv  and  the  Hebrew  shaloiu,  affords 
a  striking  example  of  the  transforming  power  which 
the  genius  of  Christianity  exercised  over  ancient  lan- 
guage and  custom.  See  the  General  Remaiks  on  p. 
57.— P.  S.] 

From  God  our  Father. — The  expression  of 
the  specifically  Christian  consciousness  of  God. 
The  experience  of  pardon  through  Christ  produces 
the  consciousness  of  the  itoOKiici  (sonsliip,  ado{)- 
tion)  as  a  result. 

And  [from]  the  Lord. — [Ki()lov  'J.  X(>.  is 
not  dependent  on  Uar(>6i;  and  parallel  with  r,iim; 
but  is  ruled  by  «;to  and  is  coordinate  with  Htov 
ilciTitrti;.  God  is  nowhere  called  "  o«r  rt«rf  Christ's 
Father,"  and  Christ  never  addresses  God  "  our,'^  but 
"  J/v  Father,"  owing  to  His  peculiar  relationship 
which  is  rooted  in  the  hnonirrirt,  or  eiiuality  of 
essence.  This  fVccpient  coiirdination  of  Christ  with 
the  Father,  as  equally  the  object  of  prayer  and 
the  source  of  spiritual  blessing,  implies  the  reeog 
nition  of  the  divinity  of  Christ.  No  Heiirew  mono- 
theist  could  thus  associate,  without  blasplu'my,  the 
eternal  Jehovah  with  a  nu're  man.  So  also  Pliilij)pi, 
Hodge,  and  others. — P.  S.]  Not  of  the  Lord  (Era.s- 
mus,  (Jhkkler).  Nevertheless,  we  would  not  read, 
with  Meyer  :  xai  itno  xi  (iloi;  and  not  merely  view 
('hri.'it  as  causa  niedianx,  in  distinction  from  the 
Father,  as  the  causa  firinci/ialix.  For  the  dominion 
(if  the  exalted  Saviour  must  be  distinguished  from 
the  mediatorship  of  Christ  ns  causa  jmdiaiis.  [God 
the  Father  is  the  autln,>r,  Christ  the  mediator  and 
procurer,  the  Holy  Spirit  the  upplicr  or  imparler,  of 


CHAPTER  I.    l-T. 


65 


grace  and  peace.  The  Spirit  takes  them  from  Christ 
and  shows  them  to  the  believer  (comp.  John  xvi. 
14).  The  hitter  may  be  the  reason  why  the  Holy 
Spirit  is  not  especially  mentioned  in  the  epistolary 
palutations,  except  2  Cor.  xiii.  13,  14  ;  1  Peter  i.  2. 
—P.  S.] 


DOCTRINAL  AND  ETHICAL. 

1.  The  Epistle  of  the  Apostle  to  the  Romans  on 
the  righteousness  of  faith  is  still  in  a  special  sense  a 
new  message  to  the  Romans,  and  a  witness  against 
Romanists.  [It  connects  admirably  with  the  con- 
cluding verses  of  the  Acts,  chap,  xxviii.  30,  31,  as 
a  specimen  of  Paul's  preaching  in  Rome,  and  to  the 
Romans. — P.  S.] 

2.  The  significance  of  the  Epistle  to  the  Ro- 
mans :  (1.)  As  the  first  of  the  Xew  Testament  Epis- 
tles ;  (2.)  in  the  group  of  the  Pauline  Epistles ; 
(3.)  as  an  original  record  of  the  missionary  activity 
of  the  Apostle,  and  as  an  example  for  evangelical 
missions ;  (4.)  as  the  central  point  of  the  Christian 
doctrine  of  salvation,  and  thus  as  the  starting-point 
of  the  Western  (Latin)  Church,  and  especially  of 
the  Protestant  Evangelical  Church  (see  the  Intro- 
duction). 

3.  The  epistolary  inscription  of  ancient  writers 
contrastfed  with  the  subscription  of  recent  ones. 
The  former  characterizes  the  Epistle  as  a  substitute 
for  personal  intercourse ;  the  latter  has  become 
an  independent  form  of  personal  communication. 
Frankness  predominates  in  the  former,  courtesy  in 
the  latter. 

4.  Servant  of  Jesus  Christ,  called  to  be  an  apos- 
tle. The  extent  of  one  idea  is  determined  by  that 
of  the  other. —  Gospel  of  God:  glorious  unity. — 
Connection  of  the  Old  and  New  Testaments. — The 
apostles,  unlike  the  Pharisees,  acknowledge  no  tra- 
ditions in  connection  with  the  Old  Testament. — 
Grace  and  office  must  not  be  separated. — Just  as  lit- 
tle can  we  separate  the  experience  of  God's  love  and 
the  beginning  of  sanctification. — Neither  can  grace 
and  peace  be  separated  ;  nor  the  paternal  authority 
of  God  and  the  authority  of  Christ. 

5.  The  importance  of  the  inscription  of  this 
Epistle.  The  importance  of  the  salutation.  The 
adaptation  of  the  great  Apostle  of  the  Gentiles  and 
of  the  Christian  congregation  of  the  great  metropo- 
lis to  each  other.     See  the  Exeg.  Notes. 

6.  The  antithesis :  Christ  born  of  the  seed  of 
David,  and  appointed  (he  ISon  of  God  in  majesty 
and  honor  (also  over  the  Roman  world),  is  an  eco- 
nomical antithesis,  at  the  foundation  of  which  lies 
the  ontological  antithesis :  that  Christ  is  the  tem- 
poral Son  of  David  and  the  eternal  Son  of 
God. 

7.  The  resurrection  was  historically  accomplished 
and  essentially  finished  in  Christ.  As  the  ideal  and 
dynamical  productive  energy  of  the  Logos,  its  roots 
and  impulse  pervade  the  whole  history  of  the  world 
and  of  man,  and  especially  the  history  of  the  king- 
dom of  God.  The  same  may  be  said  of  the  Spirit 
of  holiness.  See  the  Exeg.  Notes.  The  Logos 
lighteth  every  man  that  cometh  into  the  world 
(John  i.  9). 

8.  Paul,  as  the  ambassador  of  Jesus  Christ,  the 
Son  of  God  in  regal  power,  announces  to  the  believ- 
ers of  the  imperial  city  of  Rome  that  it  is  his  busi- 
ness to  call  the  world  to  obedience  to  the  faith  and 
to  subjection  to  Christ. 


HOMILETICAL  AND    PRACTICAL. 

An  apostolic  salutation  :  1.  From  whom  does  it 
come  ?  2.  what  is  its  import  ?  3.  to  whom  is  it 
addressed  ?  (vers.  l-?). — The  one  gospel  of  God : 
1.  Promised  by  His  prophets ;  2.  fulfilled  by  Hij 
Son  (vers.  3,  4). — The  missionary  preaching  among 
the  Gentiles  was  a  preaching  of  obedience  to  tho 
faith  for  the  glorifying  of  the  name  of  Jesus  Christ 
(ver.  5). — Every  office  is  a  gift  of  grace.  The  ser- 
vants of  Christ  must  remember  this :  1.  For  their 
humility ;  2.  for  their  elevation  and  encouragement 
(ver.  5). — How  can  preachers  of  the  gospel  guard 
against  bitterness  toward  the  members  of  their  con- 
gregation ?  By  considering  tliat  the  congregation 
are :  1.  Beloved  by  God  ;  2.  called  by  Jesus  Christ 
(ver.  7). — Grace  and  peace  :  on  one  side  different  in 
manifestation,  but,  on  the  other,  one  in  origin. 

Luther: — The  Spirit  of  God  was  given  after 
Christ's  ascension,  since  which  time  He  sanctifies 
Cliristians  and  glorifies  Christ  in  all  the  world  as  the 
Son  of  God  in  power,  in  word,  miracle,  and  sign 
(ver.  4). 

Starke  : — The  preachers  of  the  gospel  must 
preach  both  the  law  and  the  gospel  in  their  respec- 
tive order,  and  especially  the  gospel  (ver.  1). — He 
who  does  not  become  a  saint  on  earth,  will  not  be 
numbered  among  the  saints  in  heaven  (ver.  7). 

QoESNEL  : — Every  thing  that  comes  to  light  is  not 
therefore  new :  the  oldest  errors  are  continual  novel- 
ties, and  the  newest  truths  are  ever  old. 

OsiANDRi  Bibl. : — Christ,  according  to  His  hu- 
man nature,  is  our  brother.  0  great  consolation ! 
(ver.  8). 

Cramer  : — Worldly  peace  is  a  great  treasure, 
but,  after  all,  it  is  not  sufficient  for  us.  When  Christ 
communicates  His  peace  to  us  (John  xiv.  27),  it  is 
grace  in  God ;  and  then  have  we  peace  with  God 
(ver.  7). 

Bengkl  :  The  Gospel  of  God  is  also  the  Gospel 
of  Christ  (ver.  1). — Jesus  Christ  is  the  Son  of  God 
(vers.  3,  4).  This  is  the  ground  of  all  legitimate 
address  of  Christ  to  His  Father  and  God,  and  of 
our  legitimate  address,  through  Him  as  our  Lord,  to 
His  Father  and  our  Father,  His  God  and  our  God, 
who  hath  made  us  His  own.  He  was  Son  of  God 
before  His  humiliation  ;  but  His  Sonship  was  veiled 
during  His  earthly  life,  and  not  fully  unveiled  till 
after  His  resurrection.  On  this  rests  His  justifica- 
tion, 1  Tim.  iii.  16  ;  1  John  ii.  1,  and  this  is  the 
ground  of  our  justification,  Rom.  iv.  25. 

Gerlach: — According  to  the  flesh,  the  Son  of 
God  belonged  to  the  Jews  alone.  But  by  the  com- 
pletion of  His  atonement,  through  the  resurrection. 
He  became  the  universal  King  of  the  human  race, 
Lord  of  heaven  and  earth,  according  to  the  Spirit 
which  dwelt  in  Him,  and  has  perfectly  pervaded  Hia 
human  nature  (vers.  3,  4). 

Heubnee  : — Prophets  and  apostles  had  one  call- 
ing, one  work  (ver.  2). — The  apostolic  benediction — 
of  what  fulness  of  spiritual  gifts,  of  what  a  holy 
heart,  does  it  give  witness  !  It  is  grand  to  express 
such  a  wish  for  a  church ;  it  presupposes  the  per- 
sonal possession  and  appreciation  of  these  gifts,  but 
also  a  serious  zeai  to  apply  them  to  the  congregation 
(ver.  7). 

Roos : — If  the  theme  of  Paul's  preaching  had 
been  only  virtue,  and  a  supreme  Being  whom  we   , 
call  God,  he-would  have  pleased  the  Greeks  ;  and  if  "> 
he  had  preached  on  a  Messiah  yet  to  come,  and  on 


86 


THE    EriSTLE    OF   PAUL   TO   THE   ROMANS. 


tlie  works  of  the  law,  tlie  Jews  woiiM  liave  been 
contented  with  him.  But  he  preached  on  the  Son 
of  Ciod.     Tluit  was  tlie  voice  of  lii:-  gospel  (ver.  4). 

Bkssek  : — Tlie  Spirit  of  holiiu'ss  is  the  very  force 
by  which  Christ  has  taken  away  the  power  of  death, 
and  has  destroyed  niortjility,  through  the  triumph  of 
His  imp'.'rishahle  life  (ver  4). 

J.  r.  Lamjk  : — How  Christ  exhibits  His  power  as 
Iiord  by  the  Spirit  ol'  sanclifieation :  1.  As  the  Risen 
One  ;  2.  as  tlie  Son  of  (lod  (vers.  1-4). —  The  xai/ie  : 
Like  man,  like  salutiition. — The  joy  with  which  the 
Apostle  announces  the  majesty  of  Christ  in  imperial 
Rome :  1.  How  foolish  this  joy  appeared ;  2.  how 
gloriously  it  w.us  justified  ;  3.  how  it  must  be  fulfilled 
ouce  more. — The  internal  connection  between  the 
power  of  the  resurrection  and  the  Spirit  of  holiness 
in  Christ. 

[BiiKKiTT  : — Panl  declares  :  1.  The  person  from 
whom  he  received  authority  to  be  an  apostle,  name- 
ly, Cinist ;  2.  how  free  and  undeserved  a.  favor  it 
was ;  3.  the  special  duty  and  office  of  an  apostle ; 
4.  how  he  puts  the  Romans  in  mind  of  their  con- 
dition by  nature  before  the  gospel  was  revealed  to 
them  and  received  by  them  ;  hence  it  is  the  duty  of 
both  ministers  and  people  to  be  mindful  of  what  was 
their  condition  by  nature. —  ir//_v  is  the  Holy  Ghost 
fictwled  in  the  sniutation  of  ver.  7  ?  He  is  not  ex- 
cluded, though  He  be  not  named  ;  but  is  necessarily 
implied  in  the  forementioned  gifts.  Besides,  in  other 
Balutations  the  Holy  (iliost  is  expressly  mentioned  ; 
1  Cor.  xiii.  13,  14.  —  Hk.nuy: — The  Apostle  de- 
scribes :  1.  The  person  who  writes  the  Epistle  ;  2. 
the  gospel  itself;  3.  the  persons  to  whom  it  is  writ- 
ten ;  and  4.  pronounces  the  apostolic  benediction. — 
DoDDRiDOE  : — We  are  called  to  partake  of  the  privi- 
leges of  God's  people ;  we  belong  to  the  society  of 
those  who  are  eminently  bclove<l  f)f  (Jod,  and  who 
lie  under  great  ol)ligations,  as  they  are  called  a  holy 
nation,  a  jieculiar  people.  May  we  not  dishonor  the 
sacred  coiiiniunity  to  which  we  belong,  and  may  we 
finally  enjoy  the  important  privileges  of  that  stjite 
of  everlasting  glory  in  which  the  kingdom  of  the 
Son  of  God  shall  terminate  ! — Clarkk: — The  Apos- 
tle invokes  upon  the  Romans  all  tlie  blessings  which 
can  flow  from  God  a.s  the  fountain  of  grace  ;  |)ro- 
dueing  in  them  all  the  happiness  which  a  heart  filled 
with  the  peace  of  God  can  possess  ;  all  of  which  are 
to  be  communicated  to  them  through  the  Lord  Jesus 
Christ. —  Comprehensive  Coniin. : — The  Cliristian  pro- 
fession is  not  a  notional  knowledge,  or  a  naked  as- 
sent, or  useless  disputings  ;  but  it  is  obedience  to 
the  faith.  The  act  of  faith  is  the  obedience  of  the 
understanding  to  God  revealing,  and  the  product  of 
that  is  the  obedience  of  the  will  to  (Joil  comniand- 
ing. — Barnes: — From  Paul's  connecting  the  Lord 
Jesus  Christ  with  the  Father,  we  see:  1.  That  the 
Apostle  regarded  Him  as  the  source  of  grace  and 
peace  as  really  as  he  did  the  Father ;  2.  he  intro- 
duced them  in  the  same  connection,  and  with  refer- 
ence to  the  bestowal  of  the  same  blessings  ;  3.  il' 
the  mention  of  the  Father  implies  a  praytir,  the  same 
is  implied  by  the  mention  of  Christ,  and  hence  was 
an  act  of  worship  to  the  latter ;  4.  all  this  shows 
that  Paul's  mind  was  fainiliarizi'd  to  the  idea  that 
Christ  was  divine. — These  seven  verses  are  a  striking 
instance  of  the  manner  of  Paul.  While  the  subject 
is  simply  a  salutation  to  the  Roman  church,  his  mind 
«oemH  to  catch  fire,  and  to  burn  and  blaze  with  sig- 


nal intensity.  He  leaves  the  immediate  subject  bo. 
fore  him,  and  advances  some  vast  thought  that  awe* 
us,  ami  fixes  us  in  contemplation,  and  involves  us  in 
difhculty  about  his  meaning,  and  then  returns  to  hia 
subject. — HoiiGE  : — God  is  called  our  Father,  not 
nierely  a.s  the  author  of  our  existence  and  the  source 
of  every  blessing,  but  especially  as  reconciled  toward 
us  through  Jesus  Christ.- -If  Jesus  Christ  is  the 
great  subject  of  the  gospel,  it  is  evident  that  we  can- 
not have  right  views  of  the  one  without  having  cor- 
rect opinions  concerning  the  other. — J.  F.  H.] 

[Schakf: — The  epistolary  addresses  generally 
bear  on  the  doctrine  of  the  ministerial  office  and  itii 
relation  to  the  congregation,  and  furnish  suitable 
texts  for  ordiiudion  and  inslallntion  sermons. — 
Ver.  1.  Pall,  a  model  for  a  Christian  minister: 
I.  In  his  hniiiiUlji — a  servant  (bondsman)  of  Jesus 
Christ.  II.  In  his  dir/niti/ — a  chosen  apostle.  His 
sense  of  dependence  on  Christ  (servant)  precedes  and 
underlies  his  sense  of  authorit;/  over  the  congrega- 
tion (apostle). — Only  the  true  servant  of  Christ  can 
be  a  true  servant  of  the  people. — Ministers  derive 
their  authority  from  Christ,  not  from  the  people,  but 
for  the  people. — A  servant  of  Christ.  The  service 
of  Christ  is  perfect  freedom,  John  viii.  36.  St.  Augus- 
tine :  "  Deo  servire  vern  libertas  est." — A  chosen  apos- 
tle. The  apostle  and  the  ordinary  minister  :  I.  The 
unU// :  (a.)  Both  are  called  by  God ;  (6.)  both  are 
servants  of  Christ ;  (c.)  both  labor  for  the  same  end 
— the  glory  of  God  and  the  salvation  of  souls.  II. 
Tiie  difference  :  (a.)  An  apostle  is  called  directly  by 
Christ ;  a  minister,  through  the  medium  of  church 
authority  ;  (h.)  an  apostle  is  inspired  and  infallible  ; 
a  minister  is  only  enlightened,  and  liable  to  err ; 
(c.)  an  apostle  has  the  world  for  his  field  ;  a  minis- 
ter is  confined  to  a  particular  charge. — Chosen,  set 
apart.  The  necessity  of  a  Divine  call  for  the  min- 
istry :  I.  The  inner  call  by  the  Holy  Ghost.  II. 
The  outward  call  by  the  authority  and  ordination  of 
the  Church. — The  regularly  called  minister  contrast- 
ed with  the  self-constituted  minister  and  fanatic. — 
Skt  apart  unto  the  gospel.  The  preaching  of  the 
gos|)el :  I.  The  chief  duty  of  the  minister,  to  which 
all  otiiers  must  be  subordinated.  II.  The  highest 
work,  in  whii'li  Christ  Himself  and  all  the  apostles 
engaged.  III.  Tlie  inconsistency  of  connecting  any 
secular  calling  with  the  holy  ministry. — Ver.  2.  The 
close  connection  of  the  Old  and  New  Testaments. 
Cliristiiinity  a  new,  and  yet  an  old  religion. — The 
historical  character  of  Christianity — in  opposition  to 
the  Gnostic  and  fanatical  theory  of  a  magical,  abrupt 
descent  from  the  clouds. — Vers.  3,  4.  Jksus  Christ 
the  great  theme  of  the  gospel.  His  double  nature, 
the  linman,  earthly,  historical,  and  the  divine,  heav- 
enly, eternal — both  inseparably  united  in  one  per- 
son.— The  ini|)ortjiiice  of  the  rksurrecpion  a.s  an 
argument  for  the  Divinity  of  Christ. — Ver.  5.  Christ, 
the  mediator  of  all  grace. — Ver.  7.  The  Christians 
are  saints — t.  e.,  separated  from  the  world  and  con- 
secrated to  the  .service  of  God  ;  holy  in  princijile, 
and  destined  to  become  more  and  more  holy  and 
perfect  in  their  whole  life  and  conduct. — The  re. 
deeming  okack  of  (Jod  in  Christ — the  fiuintiun  of 
peace  with  (Jod  and  with  ourselves. — First  grace, 
then  peace. — No  grace  without  peace ;  no  peaca 
without  grace. — The  coiirdination  of  Christ  with 
(rod  the  Father  in  the  epistolary  inscriptions—*]: 
indirect  proof  of  the  Deity  of  Christ.] 


CHAPTER   I.   8-15. 


IL 

The  Introduction, 

Chap.  I.  8-15. 

8  First  [of  all],*  I  thank  my  God  through  Jesus  Christ  for  [concerning] '  you 
all,  that  your  faith  is  spoken  of  throughout  the  whole  world  [in  all  the  world]. 

9  For  God  is  my  witness,  whom  I  serve  Avith  [in]  my  spirit  in  the  gospel  of  his 
Son,  that  [how,  Wi,-] '  without  ceasing  I  make  mention  of  you  [how  unceasingly 

10  I  remember  you ;]  always  in  my  prayers  ;  Making  request,  [ ;  always  asking  in 
ray  prayers,]  *  if  by  any  means  now  at  length  [if  haply  now  at  last]  ^  I  might 
have  a  prosperous  journey  [I  may  be  prospered] "  by  the  will  of  God  to  come 

11  unto  you.  For  I  long  to  see  you,  that  I  may  impart  unto  you  [share  with  you, 
jM67«5a)]  some  spiritual  gift,  to  the  end  ye  may  be  established  [in  order  that  ye 

12  may  be  strengthened]  ; '  That  is,  that  I  may  be  comforted  together  with  you, 
by  the  mutual  faith  both  of  you  and  me  [among  you  by  each  other's  faith,  both 

13  yours  and  mine].*  Now  [But]  I  would  not'  have  you  ignorant,  brethren,  that 
oftentimes  [often]  I  purposed  to  come  unto  you  (but  was  let "  [hindered] 
hitherto)  "  that  I  might  have  some  fruit  among  you  also,  even  as  among  other 

14  Gentiles  [the  rest  of  the  Gentiles].  I  am  debtor  both  to  the  Greeks,  and  to  the 
Barbarians  ;  both  to  the  wise,  and  to  the  unwdse  [Both  to  Greeks  and  to  Barba- 

15  rians  ;  both  to  wise  and  to  unwise,  I  am  debtor],  So,'*  as  much  as  in  me  is  [as 
far  as  lies  in  me],  I  am  ready  '^  to  preach  the  gospel  to  you  [also]  that  [who]  are 
at  Rome  also  [omu  also]. 

TEXTUAL. 

'  Ver.  8. — [irpiaTov  iniv,  primum  quidem,  ziivordersf,  first  of  all.  The  tlra  S4  is  omitted  in  the  pressure  of  thought 
and  flow  of  speech,  as  in  Acts  i.  1  ;  Kom.  iii.  2  ;  I  Cor.  xi,  18.  Comp.  Winer,  Grammar,  p.  508  (fith  ed),  and  Alex.  Butt- 
Dtann,  Grammatik  des  N.  T.  Sprachgebrauchs,  p.  313.  Alford  finds  the  corresponding  Si  in  ver.  13,  and  connects  thus  : 
"  Ye  indeed  are  prosperin'.;  in  the  faith  ;  but  I  slill  am  aiixious,/>/r;//cr  to  aiivance  that  friiitfulness."  But  this  anxiety 
was  already  expressed  in  ver.  10,  and  the  fit  in  ver.  Vi  is  simply  /neTo/SoTKcdv. — P.  S.] 

'■'  Ver.  8. — Trepi  is  best  suppurted  in  oppositio.i  to  vvkp.  [The  prepositions  ircpi  and  vnip  both  occur  in  this  connec- 
tion (1  Cor.  i.  4  ;  Col.  i.  3  ;  1  Thess  i.  2  ;  2  Thess.  i.  3),  though  inrep  more  rarely  (Eph.  i.  16 ;  Phil.  i.  4),  with  sulstan- 
tially  the  same  meaning;  tlie  difference  is,  that  trepi,  concerning,  implies  simply  that  the  Eoman  Christians  are  the 
suhjtcl  of  thanks ;  whUc  iiitip,  for,  in  behalf  nf,  fir  the  sake  of,  gives  the  idi-a  of  intercession  and  aid.  But  jrepi  has  also 
the  latter  meaning.  They  are  often  confounded  by  the  MSS.,  but  the  best  codices  (l!<-  -A..  B.  C.  D*.  K.)  and  critical 
editors  (Orriesbach,  Lachmann,  Tischendorf,  Meyer,  Alford,  Wordsworth)  are  here  in  favor  of  Trepi  against  the  iinep  of 
the  textus  rcceplus. — P.  S.] 

"  Ver.  9.— [(is  differs  from  ort  and  expresses  the  mode  or  degree.  Comp.  Phil.  i.  8;  2  Cor.  viL  15;  1  Thess.  ii.  10; 
Acts  X.  28,  and  Meyer  and  Philippi  i)i  loe.—F.  S.] 

*  Ver.  10. — [The  translation  depends  here  upon  the  punctuation,  which  is  left  to  critical  coniecture,  the  ancient  MSS. 
having  no  punctuation.  I  make  a  comma  or  semi-colon  after  noiov/xat,  and  connect  ndvTOTe,  k.t.A.,  with  Seo^ei'os.  So 
Meyer,  Philippi,  Alford  (in  his  notes).  Dr.  Lange,  however,  in  his  version  and  Exeg.  JVotes,  follows  Ti.schendorf,  who 
makes  a  comma  after  irpoa-evf^uv  p-ov,  like  the  E.  V.  In  this  case  wa-vroTe  must  be  taken  as  an  intensification  of  aSia- 
Aein-rois  =  assidue  semper,  assida  ssime ;  but  this  would  require  a  different  position  of  the  words,  viz.,  ui  afiioAein-Tujt 
irdi'ToTe,  K.T,\.  As  it  is,  navTore  cttI  tCiv  npoiTfVf^wv  pov  Se6p.evoi  Is  better  taken  as  an  explanation  of  aSioiAeiTrTws  p^veiav 
iipiav  noiovp.ai,  so  as  to  mark  at  the  same  time  a  progress  of  the  idea,  the  incessant  remembrance  of  the  Komans  cul- 
minating in  direct  prayer.— P.  S.] 

*  Ver.  10. — [ci  ttcos  tjSij  iroTe,  ob  etwa  enrf^'c/i  fi'n7na' (Meyer,  Olshausen,  Lange,  &c.) ;  Alford:  if  by  any  means 
before  long.  jr<o«,  haply,  possibly,  implies  the  possibility  of  new  delays  and  hindrances.  ^6t(,  already,  may  mean  finally  or 
at  last,  with  reference  to  things  long  noped  for  and  delayed,  and  in  connection  with  ttotc,  tond/m  aliqwindo.  See  Hartung, 
ParlikeHehre  i.  238.     The  Apostle's  desire  in  this  respect  ■was  granted  about  three  years  afterwards,  a.  d.  61.  —P.  S.] 

*  Ver.  10.— [Or  succed,  euo6ci)9q(To/K.ai.  The  original  meaning  of  66ds,  ivay,  journey,  is  lo.st  in  the  verb.  See  Ertg. 
N'otes.  But  the  parting  wish  in  Greece  to  travellers  is  even  now  Ka\bv  KarfvoSiov,  as  in  Italy,  buon  viaggio,  a  happy 
journey. — P.  S.] 

'  Ver.  11.— [Dr.  Lange  inserts  after  gift:  personal,  peculiar  grace,  and  after  established:  for  yaw  world-historical 
calling.    See  his  explanation  below,  which  I  cannot  adopt. — P.  S.] 

*  Ver.  12. — [av^irapoucATj^vai  iv  iipiv  5ia  TJjs  iv  aAA^Aois  TriaTecoy,  vniov  t€  xaX  ip.ov.  The  infinitive  (rv/mropoucA.  (which 
compound  verb  only  occurs  here  in  the  N.  T.)  is  parallel  vrith  the  preceding  arripixdfivai^  the  subject  epe  being  under- 
stood from  €inno0oj,  ver.  11.  The  <rvp  is  generally  resolved  into  r/fta?  kol  ipavrov,  you  and  I,  but  Meyer,  on  account 
of  iv  vpiv,  makes  Paul  the  only  subject  of  <ru/i.7rapaicAr)9^i'at.  This  would  require  the  omission  of  together  in  the  E.  V. 
The  u/nwi'  (which  is  politely  put  first)  and  ipov  explain  eV  dAA^Aois,  which  is  a  little  more  emphatic  than  dAA^Awi/,  show- 
ing that  faith  dwelled  in  the  hearts  of  the  Roman  Christians.  The  mutual  faith  of  the  E.  V.  suggests  the  wrong  sense  : 
faith  which  each  has  in  the  other.  Dr.  Lange,  in  accordnnce  with  his  specific  interpretation  of  xapurp-a,  adds  to  cow- 
forttd:  made  joy  fid  for  the  common  coll  for  tlie  conversion  of  the  world. — P.  S.] 

»  Ver.  13.— [For  ov  ScAco,  Codd.  D*.  E.  G.  and  Ital.  read  ovk  olo/nai.— P.  S.] 

1"  Ver.  13.— (The  verb  to  let,  is  used  here,  and  2  Thess.  ii.  7,  by  the  E.  V.  in  the  rase  sense  to  hinder,  to  forbid,  to 
prevent  ((cwAveiv,  KaTi\nv),  as  in  Tennyson's  lines  : 

"  Mine  ancient  wound  is  hardly  whole, 
And  lets  me  from  the  saddle." 
Put  the  word  is  now  generally  used  in  the  opposite  sense,  to  allow,  to  permit.    On  the  contrary,  the  verb  to  prevent,  in  th« 
E.  V.  (and  in  the  Anglican  Liturgy),  means  to  precede,  to  anticipate  (prse-venire) ;  while  in  modem  EngUsh  it  signiiid 
the  reverse,  to  hinder,  to  obstruct.— P.  S.] 


68 


THE    EPISTLE    OF   PAUL   TO   THE   ROMANS. 


"  Ter.  13. — [Tho  words  itai  ««>A«;^i'  axpi  toD  Stvpo,  area  parenthesis,  since  ivo  must  depend  upon  npofOi^Tjv,  &c.  , 
It  is  not  iiecfrts;wy  on  this  account  to  take  kol  in  the  adversative  sciibo,  to  which  Fritzsche  and  ilcyer  object.    &€vpo  is 
only  here  in  the  X.  T.  a  particle  of  time,  although  often  in  Phito  ami  later  writers.— P.  S.] 

■  i»  Ver.  15. [Or  :  And  so,  Hence.    The  force  of  ovtus  is  :  Since  I  am  a  debtor  to  all  the  Gentiles,  &c. — P.  S.] 

•"  Ver.  15.  — [oOtus  to,  kclt  «V<>  npoBvuov  (fC.  icm).  On  thi-  different  interi)rctations  of  this  phrase  which  do  not 
materially  alter  the  sense,  comp.  Ex-g.  Ti'di-s.  As  may  be  inferred  from  my  punctuation,  I  connect  (with  tljc  li.  V., 
Calvin,  Philippi,  Wordsworth,  Meyer,  in  his  lust  edition)  to  with  npodviiov,  and  take  np69vtiov  as  equivalent  to  th« 
substantive  vpokvfiia  (as  to  xprjixTov  for  ^7  xP')<'"''°"l^'  "■  *  >  comP-  to  ixuipov,  to  dafiece';,  1  Cor.  i.  25),  and  as  the  sub- 
ject of  the  sentence  :  This  heuxj  sn  (oi/Tios),  Ik'  r,-  is,  mi  my  pail,  or,  as  fur  as  I  om  cmariied  (kot"  e/i«,  quanlum'ad  w), 
a  xoiUiiign  ss  or  d'Sire  (npoSvpiOi') ;  or  /,  as  mitch  as  in  me  is,  am  wilting  (Calvin  :  Jloqw,  iju  intum  in  nu  est,  paratM  iitm), 
Comp.  Tijf  Ka0'  ii/10?  iriiTTLV,  Eph.  i.  15;  TMv  Kad'  i>/iias  noiriTiov,  Acls  xiii.  28;  1  Cor.  ill.  3;  sv.  32).  kot  «fie  is  more 
expressive  than  p.ov  (after  npodvixov)  would  be ;  the  Apostle  laying  stress  on  his  dipendence  and  subraLssion  to  a  hipher 
power,  as  if  to  say :  As  fivr  as  it  depends  on  mo,  I  am  anxious  to  come  and  preach  to  you,  but  my  will  is  subject  to  the 
vriVl  of  God,  who  may  have  decreed  otherwise.— P.  S.] 


EXEGETICAL  AJNT)  CRITICAL. 

Second  Section. — The  connecting  link  in  the  form 
of  doxologi/,  and  the  transition  of  the  author  to 
his  designed  argunvnt  in  the  fundamental  topic. 
Tlie  praise  of  the  faith  of  the  Roman  Christians 
known  all  over  the  world,  and  the  desire  and  pur- 
pose of  the  Apostle  to  visit  them. 

Ver.  8.  First  of  aU,  I  thank.— De  Wctte: 
"In  all  hi.s  Epistles,  with  the  exception  of  Galatians, 
1  Tim.,  and  Titus,*  the  Apostle  pursues  the  natural 
coui-se  of  first  placing  himself,  so  to  speak,  in  rela- 
tion with  his  readers ;  and  his  first  point  of  contact 
with  them  is  gratitude  for  their  participation  in 
Christianity."     [So  also  Alford  in  /of].     Comp.  also 

1  The-ss.  i.  2;  2  Thess.  i.  3  ;  1  Cor.  i.  4.  This 
means  more  definitely  that  the  Apostle,  in  his  epis- 
tles, with  thanksgiving  to  God,  seizes  the  point  of 
coimection  for  his  subsequent  argument ;  and  this 
point  of  connection  \s  in  general  a  recognition  of 
what  has  been  already  attained,  but  it  takes  it«  pecu- 
liar form  from  the  conditon  of  the  difterent  church- 
es. KiiUner  calls  this,  captatio  henevolentice.  Tho- 
luck :  The  Apostle  opens  his  way  to  the  hearts  of 
the  church  by  a  declaration  of  his  love.  [Words- 
worth :  "  As  usual,  the  Apostle  begins  with  a  senti- 
ment  by  which  he  expresses  his  gratitude  to  God, 
and  conciliates  the  good  will  of  those  to  whom  he 
writes."— P.  S.]  According  to  Tholuck  [De  Wette] 
and  Meyer,  we  would  properly  ex|)cct  an  ura  di. 
[or  'inn-Tu  ()i]  after  nuonitv  11  tv,  but  not  in  point 
of  fact,  since  the  niii'iTov  niai'l<s  the  emphasis  of  the 
following  introductory  word. — My  God.  Not  only 
the  expression  of  genuine  feelitig  (De  Wette),  but 
also  of  the  thought  that  God  has  shown  Himself  as 
the  God  of  his  apostolic  call,  by  opening  before  him 
a  path  in  Rome  for  the  cause  of  Christ  (Acts  xxviii. 
15).  [The  language  of  personal  application,  with  a 
cerresponding  sense  of  personal  obligation  :  the  God 
who,  with  all  His  blessings  ami  promises,  belongs  to 
me,  as  I  belong  to  Him,  and  am  bound  to  serve 
Him.  Comp.  Acts  xxvii.  23  :  lov  Ofor  or  tl/n,  01 
xai  }.ar()fvio,  1  Cor.  i.  4  ;  Phil.  i.  3  ;  iv.  19  ;  Phile- 
mon 4.— P.  S.] — Through  Jesus  Chri.st.  [Not 
to  be  connected  with  /lof  (Kopi)e,  (ihicklcr),  but 
with  fi'/aiJifTTw. — P.  S.]  Comp.  Rom.  vii.  25  ;  Col. 
iii.  17;  Hcb.  xiii.  15;  I'Peterii.  5.  Origen:  Christ, 
as  the  mediator  of  the  prayer,  also  presents  the 
thanksgiving.  ["  Velut  per  pontificem  magmim  : 
opportet  enim  scire  ettm  qui  vull  offerre  sacrificium 
JJeo,  quod  per  manus  Pordijicis  debet  offerre."     So 

*  (1  Tim.  is  no  exception,  comp.  1  Tim.  i  18-17 ;  nor  Is 

2  Cor.,  as  01shaunen  thmkB,  for  in  2  Cor.  i.  8-22  we  have 
at>  equivalent.  The  absence  of  the  usjial  praise  and 
tliankn(?ivinf<  in  the  Epistle  to  the  OalatianB,  Is  to  bo  ex- 
plained by  their  apostasy  from  the  simplicity  of  the  gospel. 
—P.  8.) 


al.«o  Calvin,  who  refers  to  Heb.  xiii.  15,  Bengel,  Ola- 
hausen,  and  Hodge,  who  justly  .says  that  it  is  the 
clear  doctrine  of  the  Bible  that,  in  all  our  approach- 
es to  God  in  prayer  or  praise,  we  must  come  in  the 
name  of  Christ  as  the  ground  of  our  accept;ince.^ 
P.  S.]  Meyer  objects  to  this  view  as  not  justified  by 
Paul's  usual  method,  and  explains  that  he  renders 
thanks  for  what  has  come  to  pass  by  Christ.  [Simi- 
larly Alford.]  But  what  is  meant  by  giving  thanks 
for  every  thing  in  the  name  of  Jesus  Christ  ?  (Eph. 
V.  20.)  Tlie  thanksgiving,  as  well  as  jjiayer,  must 
be  sanctified  by  the  spiritual  communion  with  Christ, 
and  thus  come  before  God ;  by  this  means,  all  selfish 
interests,  and  all  human  and  passionate  joy  ai  the 
obtained  results  are  excluded. — For  you  all.  The 
TZf^i  and  vntQ  were  often  confoimdod  or  clianged 
by  the  copyists ;  therefore  the  Receida  has  int^ 
here.  Here,  as  at  the  beginning  of  ver.  7,  the  Apos- 
tle emphasizes  the  fact  that  he  has  in  view  all  the 
believers  in  Rome,  and  will  not  appeal  to  or  favor 
any  partisan  tendency. — That  your  faith  is  spo- 
ken of.  Mention  is  made  of  it,  and  it  has  become 
famous  among  Christians  in  the  whole  world  (see 
chap.  X.  18 ;  xvi.  19).  The  expression,  which  has 
the  outward  appearance  of  being  hyperbolical,  ac- 
quires its  complete  significance  chiefly  in  conse- 
quence of  the  powerful  position  of  the  metropolis 
of  Rome,  by  the  weight  which  Christianity  gained  in 
all  the  world  by  the  conquest  of  this  central  home 
of  the  world,  and  by  the  Apostle's  views  of  the 
future  of  this  apostolic  station.  See  the  quotations 
from  Grotius  and  Calvin  in  Tholuck.  [Meyer  :  "  iv 
oha  Ti'i  y.oiTKi,) — a  popular  hyperbole,  but  admirably 
suited  to  the  position  of  the  congregation  in  tlie 
metropolis  of  the  world,  to  which  the  eyes  of  all 
were  directed."  Remember  the  adage :  Orbis  in 
xirbe  continetitr. — P.  S.l 

Ver.  9.  For  God  is  my  ■witness.  The  for 
establishes  the  foregoing.  Here,  therefore,  the 
thanksgiving  through  Christ  is  also  explained  (Phil, 
i.  3  ;  Col.  i.  3 ;  1  Thess.  i.  2).  The  sense  of  the 
solemn  asseveration  is :  My  declaration  is  before  the 
face  of  God.  The  free  asseverations  of  this  charac- 
ter arise  in  the  Apostle's  case  from  the  inner  charac- 
ter of  his  work  and  the  loftiness  of  his  position.  He 
cannot  adduce  earthly  witnesses  of  the  peculiarity 
of  the  facts  which  he  has  to  assure  ;  they  are  of 
heavenly  origin,  and  he  calls  on  God  as  their  wit- 
ness :  that  is,  his  whole  knowledge  of  God,  and  his 
apo.stolic  conscience,  must  be  pledged.  Piueua : 
"  Ignotus  ad  ignotos  scribens  jurat."  Against  this, 
Meyer  quotes  "Phil.  i.  18  [and  2  Cor.  i.  23.— P.  S.] 
as  decisive.  The  necessities  for  etich  strong  cxpres- 
sions  of  the  fervent  man  were  indeed  very  difl'erent ; 
but  one  8i)ecies  of  them  is  that  adduced  by  Pareus. 
The  general  constraint  of  the  Apostle  to  let  his  read- 
ers sometimes  look  into  the  sanctity  of  his  inncF 
life,  is  secured  by  the  solemn  asseveration  against 
all  danger  of  profanation.     Meyer  adduces  as  u  iiio- 


CHAPTER   I.    8-15. 


6S 


tive  "  the  strange  fact  that  he,  the  Apostle  to  the 
Gentiles,  had  not  yet  become  active  in  the  church  at 
Rome,  although  it  belonged  to  his  school."  [Ben- 
gel  :  "  A  pious  asseveration  respecting  a  matter 
necessary  and  hidden  from  men,  especially  from 
those  who  were  remote  and  unknown."  AUbrd : 
"  There  could  be  no  other  witness  to  liis  practice  in 
his  secret  prayers,  but  God  :  and  as  the  assertion  of 
a  habit  of  incessantly  praying  for  the  Roman  Chris- 
tians, whom  he  had  never  seen,  might  seem  to  savor 
of  an  exaggerated  expression  of  aftection,  he  sol- 
emnly appeals  to  this  only  possible  testimony.  To 
the  Ephesians,  Philippians  (see,  however,  Phil.  i.  8), 
Colossians,  Thessalonians,  he  gives  tlie  same  assur- 
ance, but  without  the  asseveration.  The  thus  call- 
ing God  to  witness  is  no  uncommon  practice  with 
Paul ;  see  ref.  in  E.  V."  The  Apostle's  frequent 
appeal  to  God  (2  Cor.  i.  23  ;  xi.  31  ;  Phil.  i.  8  ; 
1  Thess.  ii.  6, 10 ;  Gal.  i.  20)  is  a  devout  recognition 
of  God's  omniscience,  aiid  hence  an  act  of  worship. 
It  disproves  the  literal  interpi-etation  of  Matt.  v. 
33  ff.,  which  prohibits  perjury,  and  all  useless  and 
thoughtless  swearing.  Comp.  Tholuck,  Die  Ber  - 
predif/f,  p.  263  ff.  (3d  ed.).— P.  S.] 

Whom  I  serve  in  my  spirit.  The  idea  of 
the  real  service  of  God,  which  so  powerfully  per- 
vades the  Epistle  to  the  Romans,  first  appears  with 
the  '/.arijiviit  (see  ver.  21 ;  cliap.  ii.  22 ;  iii.  25 ; 
T.  2  ;  xii.  1  ;  xv.  16  ;  xvi.  25-27  ;  comp.  Acts  vii. 
7).  As  such  a  ).aT(jtvii)v,  he  stands  before  God. 
But  he  serves  Him  in  his  spirit ;  that  is,  his  priest- 
hood is  not  merely  external,  but  the  living  service 
"of  God  by  a  spuitually  awakened,  vital,  and  stead- 
fast consciousness.*  Grotius  and  Reiche  have  found 
in  the  ).<xtq.  an  antithetical  relation  to  the  Jewish 
?.aT(tiria  in  the  law.  Meyer  thinks  such  an  idea  far- 
fetched. But  we  are  rather  of  the  opinion  that 
the  Apostle  is  still  thinking  of  all  external  character 
of  worship,  and  especially  that  of  the  heathen  Ro- 
mans. [Umbreit,  approvingly  quoted  by  Alford : 
"  The  Apostle  means  that  he  is  an  intelligent,  true 
priest  of  his  God,  not  in  the  temple,  but  in  his 
spirit ;  not  at  the  altar,  but  at  the  gospel  of  His 
Son."  /.ciTQfvfvv  ("i^J")  and  hiroi'^yiiv  {VX:) 
are  used  in  the  Septuagint  of  the  ministrations  of 
the  Jewish  priesthood  in  the  temple  (comp.  Luke  i. 
23 ;  Heb.  viii.  6 ;  ix.  21),  and  in  the  New  Testament 
applied  to  the  Christian  ministry,  and  to  worship 
generally  (Matt.  iv.  10;  Phil.  ii.  17).  The  words  o, 
kaT^tvifi,  &c.,  give  additional  force  to  his  solemn 
asseveration,  and  attest  its  sincerity. — P.  S.] — In 
the  gospel  of  his  Son.  (Genitive  of  the  object.) 
His  spirit  is  the  temple,  the  sphere  of  his  service  ; 
the  gospel  of  the  Son  of  God  in  the  great  work  of 
evangelization,  is  the  substance  and  form  of  his  ser- 
vice of  God. — How  without  ceasing.  Meyer  : 
o)q  does  not  stand  for  on  (as  it  is  usually  taken, 
even  by  Fritzsche),  but  expresses  the  mode  (the  de- 
gree). This  thanking  without  ceasing  is  not  only 
more  precisely  defined,  but  more  exactly  conditioned 
Dy  what  follows. 

Yer.  10.  Alw^ays  in  my  prayers.  His  spirit- 
aal  longing  and  striving  are  directed  toward  Rome  ; 
therefore  he  is  ever  (and  everywhere.  Bretschnei- 
der  :     Ubicumque  locoruni  et  quovis  tempore.      Lu- 


•  [De  'Wette  :  "Das  inntre.  leb'tidige  Element  und  somU 
dte  WoUrhiftigkeit  des  Diensles."  Meyer:  "iv  nvevtiari 
uov,  in  Tntiiitm  hoheren  sUtHchi-n  Selbslbi'wu.ilse'i).  welches 
die  lebensrolle.  inrtere  WerUstdltf  difses  DiensUs  int."  On 
fch  >  spiritual  service  of  God,  comp.  John  iv.  24.— P.  S.] 


ther :  in  all  places)  praying  with  his  mind  fixed  on 
Rome.  The  thought  is  thus  defined,  if,  with  Tisch- 
endorf,  we  place  a  comma  after  n(JO(jfi'/o)v  uov. 
We  prefer  this  view  to  that  of  Meyer :  Alwai/s  asl-- 
ing  in  my  prayers.  [Comp.  here  my  Textual  Note  * 
in  defence  of  Meyer's  punctuation. — P.  S.]  There 
was,  during  his  prayers,  an  ui(C<asiii<j  remembrance 
of  the  Romans  (the  tni  is  the  determination  of  the 
time  or  the  occasion),  and  this  became  a  specific  and 
urgent  prayer. — If  haply  now  at  last  I.  The  ex- 
pression declares  at  the  same  time  the  earnestness 
of  the  petition,  and  humble  resignation. — Might 
have  a  prosperous  journey  [better :  may  be 
prospered. — P.  S.]  Meyer  :  "  The  active  tloftovv 
seldom  has  the  exact  signification,  to  lead  tcrU,  cape- 
ditum  iter  pjyeebire ;  .  .  .  but  the  passive  never 
means  via  recta  inccdere,  expeditum.  iter  habere,  but 
always  [even  in  Prov.  xvii.  8]  metaphorically,  pros- 
pero  snccessu  gaudire.  [Meyer  then  quotes  a  num- 
ber of  passages. — P.  S.]  Therefore  the  explanation, 
which  anyhow  gives  a  trivial  idea,  prospero  itinere 
utar  (Tulgate,  and  others),  must  be  rejected."  [So 
also  Alford.]  Nevertheless,  the  choice  of  the  word 
was  suited  to  the  allusion  that  the  prosperity  which 
the  Apostle  desired  would  consist  in  a  successful 
journey  to  Rome ;  and  we  have  sought  to  express 
this  in  the  translation  (  Wohlfahrt).  The  affair  is  a 
sulyect  of  his  prayerful  solicitude,  for  it  is  not  from 
selfishness,  but  only  in  accordance  with  God's  will 
that  he  will  come  to  Rcmie.  (Schott  connects  the 
f'r  T.  Ot'/..  r.  OhoT-  not  with  i/.Oclv,  but  with  tio- 
()o)l)ij(TOfiai, ;  but  then  the  word  would  not  seem  to 
have  been  well  chosen.) 

Ver.  11.  For  I  long  to  see  you,  'Enino- 
Oiu).  Fritzsche:  simply  cnpio.  [Not  valdk  or 
ARi)EXTE[{  cupio ;  comp.  2  Cor.  v.  2;  for  ini  does 
not  intensify,  but  simply  expresses  the  direction  of 
the  noSoi:,  which  itself  means  strong  desire.  So 
also  De  Wette,  Meyer,  and  Alford.— P.  S.]  Schott, 
TToOoi'  I/O)  tni.  According  to  Schott,  the  see  you, 
Idflv  vfidt;,  would  indicate  that  Paul  did  not 
design  to  stay  in  Rome.  But  yet  it  constitutes  an 
antithesis  to  the  Epistle  now  about  to  be  written. — 
Some  spiritual  gift,  /d^iu/ia  nvfi'/iarixor. 
De  Wette :  /cc(jt.(Ti'cc  is  simply  a  gift,  without  spe- 
cial reference  to  Divine  grace.  [De  Wette  under- 
stands by  it  the  7r«fj«/;//,<T«.-,  ver.  12,  and  is  fol- 
lowed by  Alford. — P.  S.]  But  the  word  must  be 
explained  by  Paul's  use  of  language,  especially  by 
1  Cor.  xii.  4.  The  specific  gift  of  Paul  consists  in 
his  being  the  Apostle  to  the  Gentiles  ;  and  without 
doubt  this  expression  means  not  only  that  the  Ro- 
man Church  is  to  receive  a  general  spiritual  blessing 
from  him,  but  shall  also  share  in  this  special  spirit- 
ual gift.  [But  such  specific  reference  seems  to  be 
excluded  by  rt,  nor  was  the  apostolate  of  the  Gen- 
tiles strictly  communicable  to  a  congregation.  Hence 
I  prefer,  with  Tholuck,  Olshausen,  and  Philippi,  to 
give  ydoLffiicc  a  more  general  application  :  spiritual 
invigoration  of  the  whole  Christian  life,  ntrrTLC. 
dydntj,  i).nic,  '/voktu;,  &c.  So  Hodge  :  "  Any  in- 
crease of  knowledge,  of  grace,  or  of  power." — 
P.  S.]  The  adjective  nvii'/ti  ari/.ov,  especially  in 
connection  with  ■/aQi.aiia,  can  only  denote  a  spirit, 
ual  quality  of  the  gift  which  proceeds  from  the 
communion  of  the  divine  Spirit.  ["  Springing  from 
the  Spirit  of  God,  and  imparted  to  the  spirit  of 
man  ; "  Alford].  The  following  explanations  are 
one-sided:  Miraculous  gifts  (Bengel,  &c.);  gilts  of 
the  human  spiritual  life  (Kijllner,  &c.).  The  t^, 
some,  expres.ses  not  only  the   Apostle's  modesty 


70 


THE   EPISTLE    OF   PAUL    TO   THE    ROMANS. 


(Meyer),  but  an  acknowledgment  that  the  Romans 
were  alreiidy  in  the  faith,  togetlier  with  an  intima- 
tion that  .-onicthing  w;ls  still  waiitinj^  in  tiieni. — 
In  order  that  ye  may  be  strengthened  (see  chap. 
xvi.  25).  Tills  is  till'  uhjftt  of  the  eliaiisniatic  com- 
munication. [Paul  uses  the  pa.ssive  (7Tt^(it/{/7jt'cu, 
since  he  is  simply  the  instrument  through  which 
God  Himself  strengthens  and  invigorates  the  spirit- 
ual life  In  man  ;  comp.  xvi.  2i>  :  riji  dvvafitriit  i^icii; 
arijpiiai.,  and  2  Tliess.  il.  17. — P.  S.] 

Ver  12.  That  is,  that  I  may  be  comforted 
together  with  you,  &c.  The  connection  of  the 
two  objects  serves  to  explain  one  as  well  as  the 
Other.  The  Apostle  wisiies  that  the  Romans  be 
strengthened  by  him  (the  choice  of  the  passive  is 
not  merely  an  exjiresslon  of  modesty,  but  also  of 
the  information  that  the  matter  Is  not  of  human 
choice,  but  that  the  blessing  must  come  from  the 
Lord),  not  only  in  their  faitii  in  general,  but  also  in 
their  particulir  calling  as  Roman  Christians  in  their 
central  relation  to  the  world.  And  the  result  therc- 
fi-om  will  be,  that  the  Apostle  will  be  encouraged 
and  aided  in  his  universal  apostleship.  T/ir  addi- 
tion, that  is,  &e.,  is  therefore  not  a  sanda  adulalio 
(Erasmus),  nor  a  safeguard  against  the  appearance 
of  presumjition  (Meyer),*  but  the  statement  of  his 
whole  purpose.  This  purpose  is  not  to  seek  comfort 
and  consolation  anioi»g  them,  as  the  <Tviina()a- 
x/.rjO-Tjvat  {cinai  /.fyn/ifvov  in  the  New  Testa- 
ment) is  explained  by  many,  in  harmony  with  the 
Peshito  and  Vulgate ;  but  he  will  find  Christian 
encouragement  among  them  when  they  are  strength- 
ened (Meyer).  Yet  this  Is  not  only  "in  general," 
but  with  a  view  to  his  Western  mission.  The  (ti\u 
does  not  include  the  readers  (Fritzsche),  but  is  re- 
lated as  a  lerqiination  to  the  (jtijoi/OTjvhi,  of  the 
Romans.  This  can  be  seen  by  the  following :  By 
our  common  (reciprocal)  faith,  both  yours  and 
mine.  This  is  a  brief  form  of  expression  (Kelche, 
Van  Hengel,  and  others,  supply  the  iv  a).h]).oi,i; 
with  an  h't()yoi\iiirrji;).  He  declares  the  fact  that 
the  comnnmlon  of  faith  should  serve  for  the  recip- 
rocal promotion  of  the  faith.  Fritzsche  and  Schott 
miss  iiii,  but  this  is  implied  in  the  words  of  the  first 
person  in  ver.  11. 

Ver.  13.  But  I  would  not  have  you  ig- 
norant. Well-known  form  of  annoimcement,  espe- 
cially of  sonielhing  new  ami  im|iiii-taiit  (cha|).  xl. 
25;"l  Cor.  x.  1  ;  1  thcss.  iv.  13).— That  often- 
times I  purposed,  &c.  Together  with  the  Apos- 
tle's other  impediments,  it  is  of  special  considera- 
tion that,  after  every  mi.ssionary  journey,  he  found 
It  necessary  to  return  to  Jeru.salem  in  order  to  es- 
tablish the  unity  of  his  new  congregation  with  the 
mother  church.  Many  delays  were  occa-sloned  also 
by  the  necessary  insi)ectloji  and  review  of  his  organ- 
ized churches,  their  internal  disturbances,  and  the 
persecutions  on  the  part  of  the  Jews.  The  fact 
that  he  desired  first  to  establish  his  mission  in  the 
East,  he  could  not  call  an  impediment.  Meyer 
points  to  chap.  xv.  22.  [So  does  Alford.]  But  the 
Apostle  seems  to  Intimate  here  (according  to  vers. 
20,  21)  that  he  must  prepare  the  church  at  Rome,  as 
a  churrh  already  existing,  for  his  visit  (by  .sending 
out  his  friends  in  advance).  Meyer's  remark  is  odd  : 
"Therefore  hindered  neither  by  the  devil  (1  The.ss. 
ii.  18),  nor  by  the  Holy  Ghost  (Acts  xvi.  6);"  for 
bis  general  hinderance  is  specified  in  these  terms. — 

•  [So  iilso  Wordt^irorth,  who  explalnB  toOto  84  iariv  : 
*  Think  nol  thnt  I  am  no  prcxumptuuim  as  to  ima^pne  that 
lie  benefit  will  be  wboUj'  youn."— P.  S.] 


That  I  might  have  some  frait.  Harvest-fruit, 
as  a  laborer.  The  figure  is  frequent  (Phil.  i.  22^ 
[John  iv.  36;  xv.  16;  Col.  i.  6.  The  "fruit"  is 
not  the  result  of  Paul's  labor,  or  his  reward,  but  the 
good  works  of  the  Roman  Christians  who  have  been 
planted  to  bring  forth  fi  uit  to  God.  This  fruit  the 
Apostle  expe(;ted  to  gather  and  to  present  to  God. 
Alford. — P.  S.].  The  choice  of  the  expression  is 
evidently  a  new  evidence  of  his  delicacy  and  mod- 
esty. We  cannot  urge  that  a/w  is  the  antithesis  of 
/inv  (Meyer:  gdiubt  hdll<)  and  obtain  (Kidlner). 
— Among  you  also.  The  xui  intensifies  the 
comparison,  in  lively  expression.  The  expression, 
t&vtj,  is  used  here  to  indicate  definitely  the  Gen- 
tiles ;  first,  because  the  Romans,  as  Romans,  are 
Gentiles,  from  whom  the  remaining  Gentiles  arc  di^ 
tingulshed  as  such  ;  then,  because  he  has  hitherto 
labored  as  the  Apostle  to  the  Gentiles.  See  the 
Jix'ff.  JS^olc  on  ver.  14.  Schott:  "There  runs,  from 
vers.  11-13,  this  thought:  The  Apostle  Paul,  in  pre- 
paring himsi'lf  for  apostolic  preaching  in  the  midst 
of  the  Western  Gentile  world,  regards  it  necessary 
to  secure  the  Roman  Church  as  a  point  of  support 
and  departure — so  to  speak,  as  a  base  of  operations." 
While  this  opinion  is  correct  enough  as  far  as  the 
definiteness  of  his  aim  is  concerned,  the  Apostle  was 
far  Irom  regaiding  Rome  merely  as  the  means  for  an 
end,  without  first  having  chiefly  in  view  the  purpose 
of  edifying  the  Roman  Church  for  its  own  sake. 

Ver.  14.  To  Greeks  and  to  Barbarians. 
What  is  the  desire  of  his  heart  and  his  effort.  Is  at 
the  same  time  his  calling  and  the  duty  of  his  office. 
His  apostleship  belongs  to  the  whole  Gentile  world, 
and  for  this  reason  incidentally  also  to  the  Jews. 
Tiierefore,  in  consequence  of  the  existing  unity  of 
Grecian  and  Roman  culture,  the  Greeks  and  the  Ro- 
mans are  combined  under  the  term  Greeks,  in  an- 
tithesis to  the  so-called  Barbarians  (Cicero,  I)e  Fin. 
ii.  15  :  A'o7i  Holum  GrcBcia  el  Italia,  t<d  ciiam  oinnis 
harbaria),  just  as  the  term  wise  comprehends  Jews 
and  Greeks  (1  Cor.  i.  20),  and  the  nnwi^e  those  bar- 
barian nations  who  stood  lowest  in  intellectual  cul- 
ture.*  The  antithesis  of  Greeks  an<l  Barbarians 
means,  according  to  the  original  Greek  usage, 
Greeks  and  non-Greeks — the  latter  as  uncultivated 
JJarbarians  in  a  national  sense.  It  is  in  this  sense 
that  the  present  p;issage  is  interpreted  by  Reiche 
and  others.  But  at  a  time  when  Greek  was  written 
in  Rome,  and  to  Rome,  the  word  undoubtedly  indi- 
cated an  historical  antithesis  of  culture,  according  to 
the  expression  quoted  from  Cicero ;  and  Paul,  with 
his  refined  feeling,  could  hardly  have  chosen  the 
word  in  the  former  restricted  sense.  (Ambrosiaster, 
and  othei-s.)  Meyer  objects  that  the  Romans  were 
nowhere  enumerated  as  Hellenes.  But  this  is  cer- 
tainly tiie  case  in  ver.  16,  where  the  Hellene  repre- 
sents heathendom  in  general.  Comp.  chap.  ii.  9, 
10;    X.  12;   and  the  many  antitheses  of  a  similar 

♦  IBop/3apo?— nn  onoinntopoetic  word  imlt^tinir  a  ronch 
80unitin«,  uniiitclliKililc  InmruMRe — mcuiih  t)ti»nually  sim- 
ply a  foioitrniT,  a  mau  spi-iikiiii;  a  struniie  toiiuuo  (l  Cor. 
XIV.  11  ;  ciiin]).  Ovid's  "  liniha.us  li'C  'rgn  <um,  quia  it'-n  in- 
I'lliffiir  lUli  "),  and  dops  not  iiocpsKnrily  imply  reproh.'h,  but 
the  Orcck.s,  with  their  prido  of  ruoe  and  rulture,  and  the 
Knnianii,  with  thoir  pride  of  power,  looked  down  with  sove- 
reijm  contempt  upon  all  other  nations.  Jiellen  and  Dirr- 
baiian  refora  to  the  di-itiiiction  of  lanpiiaRO  and  raee  ;  wise 
(iikI  uiitoif.  In  llio  dilferenee  of  niiturMl  Int'llicenoe  and 
culture  in  every  nation.  Itoino,  bcinij  "  nn  epitome  of  ttis 
world,"'  in<'lu<i(>d  rppre»ontativo8  of  all  nations  and  nil 
shiidcH  of  culture  and  innomnce.  The  Jews  xhould  not  ht 
mixed  in  hi-rc  ;  the  Ai)ostle  siieaka  simply  of  hi.i  imlehu-d- 
noHs  to  the  whole  Ucntile  woild  without  distiuction  of  ruM 
and  culture.—  P.  S.] 


CHAPTER   I.    8-15. 


71 


character  in  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles,  and  in  the 
other  PauHne  Epistles.  Therefore  Meyer's  state- 
ment is  unsatisfactory,  that  Paul  would  only  express 
his  Gentile-apostolic  obligation  in  its  universality, 
and  that  he  dues  this  in  double  merisruat  c  form,  as 
well  according  to  nationality  as  according  to  the 
degree  of  culture.  The  sense  certainly  is,  that  he 
is  pledged  to  all  Gentiles.  In  this  relation,  he  is 
6q>fi\irt]i;  in  the  sense  of  indebtedtiesx,  which  he 
assumed  at  his  call.     See  1  Cor,  ix.  10.* 

Ver.  15.  So,  as  far  as  lies  in  me,  I  am 
ready.  So  far  as  it  depends  on  him,  he  is  not  only 
willing,  but  determined  ;  his  inclination  corresponds 
to  his  indebtedness  {n(j6&i'fiov  =  n^oOvfia). 
TO  xar'  ifti  is  variously  explained.  1.  (Ji'tox:, 
TO  xMT  ifti :  nQoO-vfiQv  {sc,  nQo&vftla  tan).  2. 
Oi'Twi;  TO  (xwT  i,ue)  7i(j6&v/[tov.  3.  Oiniiti;  ro  y.ar 
ifte  7T(j60 i'f(Ov  {=^  to  Ti^oO'i'/iov  fiov).  4.  Ovrux;: 
TO  y.ax  i/iE  7T(j6<9i'fiov.  Be  Wette  and  also  Meyer 
[in  the  third  edition  of  1859,  but  not  in  the  fourth. 
— P.  S.]  are  for  the  first :  As  far  as  I  am  concerned, 
there  is  readiness.  [This  explanation  connects  to 
with  y.aT  «,«*)  3nd  takes  7Z(j6&t'fiov  as  the  predicate 
and  a  substantive  =  n(jo0i<f>ia. — P.  S.]  Reiche 
[Calvin,  Philippi,  Van  Hengel,  and  Meyer,  in  the 
fourth  edition  of  1865,  where  he  gives  up  his  for- 
mer view. — P.  S.]  are  for  the.  second  :  And  so  am  I 
— as  far  as  lies  in  me — readi  Fritzsche  is  for  the 
third:  Mi/  readiness,  or  desiie,  is.  [zar  iui  in  this 
case  is  taken  as  a  mere  periphrase  for  (for,  but  it 
has  an  emphasis,  and  expresses  Paul's  sense  of  de- 
pendence on  a  higher  will. — P.  S.]  Tholuck  is  for 
the  fourth  :  So,  for  my  part,  I  am  ready.  [Tholuck, 
though  not  very  decidedly,  follows  Beza  {Qnulyuicl 
in  me  siium  est,  id  promptum  est),  Grotius,  Bengel, 
and  Riickert,  and  takes  to  /«t  i/ie  as  the  subject 
of  the  sentence  =t  iyo),  and  n^oSi'/iov  as  an  adjec- 
tive and  as  the  predicate  :  I  am  ready.  But  Meyer 
objects  that  to  y-ar  Ifii  is  never  used  as  a  peri- 
phrase for  the  personal  pronoun  ;  ra,  vuirnja  for 
vniTi;,  and  Tot  «/(«  for  «J'"'  "ot  being  parallel. — P.  S.] 
I  think  the  explanation  of  Reiche  the  correct 
one.f  For  further  particulars,  see  De  Wette,  Tho- 
luck, and  Meyer.  Theodore  Schott  explains  the 
oi'Tojq,  under  such  circumstances,  and  translates 
thus :  Under  such  circumstances  it  is  my  present 
inclination.  But  Paul  has  not  at  all  spoken  of  cir- 
cumstances. He  asserts  that  oi'toic,  used  absolutely, 
never  means  itaque,  but  always  "  under  this  con- 
dition, these  circumstances."  But  as  the  circum- 
stances  may  be  attending,  so  they  may  be  causative ; 
comp.  Rom.  v.  12. — To  you  also  ■who  are  in 
.Rome.  Schott  thinks  that  by  these  words  are 
meant,  not  the  Christians  in  Rome,  but  the  Gentile 
inhabitants  of  Rome  !  The  natural  conclusion  from 
this  view  would  be,  that  his  Epistle  also  must  have 
been  designed  for  the  Gentiles  in  Rome.  Certainly 
he  had  in  view  from  the  start,  besides  the  Christians, 


*  [We  mention,  as  an  esegetical  curiosity,  that  Dr. 
"Wordsworth  finds  in  this  passage  proof  of  the  universal 
gift  of  lansruage  for  preachina;  the  gospel :  "  How  could  St. 
Paul  be  said  to  owe  the  dfht  of  the  gospel  to  oil  the  world,  if 
he  had  not  the  means  of  paying  it  1  And  how  could  he  pay 
it,  without  the  coinage  of  intelliifible  words? ''  It  would 
be  hard  for  Dr.  "Wordsworth  to  prove  that  Paul  preached 
in  the  Chinese,  the  Sanscrit,  the  Teutonic,  and  Celtic  lan- 
guages, to  nations  who  understood  no  other,  and  whom  he 
never  visited.  From  Actsxiv.  U,  14,  it  would  seem  that  be 
did  not  understand  the  popular  language  of  Lycaonia. 
The  knowledge  of  Greek  and  Hebrew  was  sufficient  for  liis 
apostolic  mission  within  the  limitg  of  the  whole  Roman 
empire. — P.  S.  ] 

t  IComp.  my  Textual  Note  "  on  ver.  15,  p.  68.— P.  S.] 


those  Gentiles  also  who  were  yet  to  be  converted 
[rorc;  h  'F(i')f<t]  is  emphatically  added,  since  Rome, 
the  "  caput  et  iheatrum  orbis  ten- arum ^''  could  least 
of  all  be  excluded  from  that  general  apostolic  coii> 
mission.     Bengel  and  Meyer. — P.  S.] 


DOCTEHTAIi  AND   ETHICAL. 

1.  The  point  of  connection  (ver.  8).  Every 
Pauline  Epistle  has  its  definite  point  of  connection. 
So,  too,  has  every  apostolic  sermon  of  Peter,  Paul, 
and  John.  And  this  is  as  much  a  vital  law  for  prop- 
er Christian  preaching,  as  for  missions.  See  the 
connecting  point  in  Acts  xvii.  The  doxological 
character  of  this  section.  Without  gratitude  for 
what  is  given,  there  is  no  real  continuance,  still  less 
any  real  progress.  Gratitude  must  also  be  sanctified 
by  working  in  Christ. 

2.  Asseverations,  prayers,  proofs  of  the  Apos- 
tle's prayer.     See  the  Exeg.  Notes. 

3.  The  difference  between  the  longing  of  the 
Apostle  for  Rome,  and  the  longing  of  the  modern 
world  for  Rome.  If  the  Pauline  Cliristianity  of  the 
Evangelical  Ciiurch  were  not  so  much  paralyzed  by 
the  indifference  of  humanitarianism,  by  the  hatred 
and  ignorance  of  rationalism,  and  by  the  morbid 
literalism  of  confessionalism  and  sectarianism,  it 
would  be  able  to  wield  the  weapons  of  the  Spirit  as 
heroically  against  niediteval  Papal  Rome — which  is 
now  besieged  at  so  many  points — as  Paul,  the  poor 
tent-maker,  combatted  pagan,  insperial  Rome.  Still, 
the  gospel  of  God  will  triuin])h  in  the  end. 

4.  The  great  missionary  thought  of  the  Apostle 
(vers.  11,  12).  See  the  A'je.g'.  iV^oto.  Ver.  12:  The 
Popes  do  not  write  thus  to  the  Romans. 

5.  The  impediments  (ver.  13).  Although  the 
Apostle  knew  well  that  on  the  absolute  height  of 
faith  all  impediments  are  only  means  of  advance- 
ment for  believers  (Rom.  viii.  28),  he  yet  speaks  of 
impediments  with  a  truly  human  feeling.  But  each 
of  these  impediments  marks  a  point  "where  he  sur- 
renders to  God  his  desire  to  pa.ss  beyond  those  sacred 
limits  through  which  an  enthusiast  would  have  vio- 
lently broken. 

(5.  How  Paul  subsequently  attained  ttie  object  of 
his  wishes,  though  not  according  to  human  purposes, 
but  according  to  the  counsel  of  God  ;  first  as  a  pris- 
oner, and  last  as  a  martyr. 


HOMILETICAL  AND  PRACTICAL. 

How  the  Apostle  introduces  himself  to  the 
Church  at  Rome :  1.  As  remembering  it  in  prayer 
(vers.  8-10) ;  2.  as  desiring  its  personal  acquaint- 
ance (vers.  11,  12);  3.  as  previously  prevented  from 
visiting  it  and  fulfilling  his  obligation  (vers.  13-15). 
— The  truly  Christian  manner  of  introducing  one's 
self  to  strange  people. — Praise  without  flattery  (ver. 
8). — Under  what  circumstances  can  we  call  on  God 
to  witness?  1.  When  we  are  conscious  that  we 
serve  Him  ;  2.  when  the  matter  in  hand  is  sacred 
(ver.  9). — We  cannot  always  do  what  we  would 
(vers.  11-13). — For  what  purpose  should  Christian 
friends  visit  each  other  ?  1.  To  give  ;  2.  to  receive 
(vers.  11,  12). — Paul  a  debtor  to  the  Greeks  and  to 
the  Barbarians,  to  the  wise  and  the  unwise  :  1.  In 
what  did  his  obligation  consist  ?  2.  when  did  he  ac- 
knowledge it  ?  3.  how  did  he  desire  to  discharge  it ! 


72 


THE   EPISTLE    OF   PAUL   TO    THE   ROMANS. 


(vera.  It,  15). — The  obligation  of  Christians  to  the 
heathen  (ver.  14). 

SxAiiKK  :  We  have  greater  occasion  to  thank  God 
for  spiritual  than  for  temporal  blessings  (ver.  8). — 
We  must  not  always  be  brief  in  prayer,  but  we  must 
continue  until  the  heart  becomes  warmed  (ver.  10). 
— Com[)k'te  sovereignty  over  auditors  does  not  be- 
long to  any  teacher  or  preacher  (ver.  13). — Quks- 
KKL :  Thaukfidness  is  one  of  the  most  excellent,  but 
one  of  the  niost  neglected  duties.  Preachers  must 
supply  this  deficiency  on  the  part  of  their  flocks 
(ver.  8). — The  oath  may  be  allowed,  if  God's  honor 
requires  it  (ver.  !)). — Cramer  :  The  presence  and 
living  voice  of  teachers  can  accomplish  more  than 
the  mere  reailing  of  their  writings.  Thei'eforc  Chris- 
tians should  not  think  that  they  have  done  enough, 
when  they  read  God's  word  in  sermons  at  home ; 
but,  whenever  they  can,  they  should  hear  their  in- 
structors personally,  and  industriously  attend  pul)lic 
worship  (ver.  11). — Osiandri  Bibl. :  We  should  do 
no  less  than  our  cidling  directs ;  but  we  should  not 
include  therein  any  thing  that  does  not  belong  to 
it,  lest  we  trespass  on  the  office  of  another  (ver. 
15). 

Lisco,  on  vers.  9-12  :  The  fruits  of  the  (apos- 
tolical) sense  of  gratitude :  (a.)  Continual  remem- 
brance of  the  Roman  Christians  in  prayer ;  (6.) 
prayer  that,  by  the  will  of  God  (ver.  10),  an  open 
way  might  be  made  for  his  personal  acquaintance 
with  the  church. 

Hecd.nkr,  on  ver.  8 :  1.  There  is  an  extended 
Christian  celebrity  in  the  estimation  of  others ;  yet 
it  must  not  be  sought  nor  circulated  designedly,  but 
come  of  itself;  2.  we  learn  that  Christian  churches 
should  take  knowledge  of  each  other.  Metropoli- 
tivn  cities  can  exert  an  important  influence  on  the 
whole  country.  So  with  Rome  at  that  tima. — On 
ver.  9  :  Sacred  fidelity  to  one's  calling  is  true  ser- 
vice of  God. 

Lange  :  The  justification  of  praise  :  1.  So  far  as 
it  corresponds  to  the  truth  ;  2.  is  embraced  in  thanks- 
giving ;  .3.  is  sanctified  as  an  incitement  to  greater 
success. — The  estimation  of  good  human  conduct  is 
not  ignored  by  the  exclusion  of  the  merit  of  works, 
but  secured  against  profanation. — Rome  formerly  a 
celebrated  congregation  of  believers. — The  different 
phases  of  Rome  in  universal  history. — Tlie  apostoli- 


cal longing  for  Rome :  1.  An  image  of  the  longing 
of  Christ  (Luke  xii.  49) ;  2.  a  life.-picture  of  hunjan 
destination,  —  The  sanctification  of  longing.  —  The 
proper  estimate  of  impediments  in  life :  1.  We 
should  distinguish  between  imaginary  and  real  hin- 
derances ;  2.  we  should  not  become  discouraged  by 
them,  but  we  should  not  stubbornly  force  our  way 
through  them ;  8.  we  should  overcome  them  by 
prayer ;  4.  we  should  transform  them  into  helps, 
(The  Epistle  to  the  Romans,  besides  other  blessings, 
arose  from  the  Apostle's  hinderances.) 

[BuKKiTT :  From  the  Apostle's  longing  to  see 
the  Romans,  learn  :  1.  That  the  establishment  in 
faith  and  holiness  is  needed  by  the  holiest  and  best 
Christians  ;  2.  that  the  presence  of  the  ministers  of 
Christ  with  their  people  is  necessary  for  their  estab- 
lishment ;  3.  that  the  Apostle  desired  to  be  person- 
ally present  with  the  Church  and  saints  at  Rome  for 
his  own  benefit  as  well  as  for  their  advantage.^ 
Henry  :  Ver.  8.  The  faith  of  the  Roman  Christiana 
came  to  be  talked  of  because  of  the  ])rominence  of 
Rome.  That  city  being  very  conspicuous,  every 
thing  done  there  was  talked  of.  Thus,  they  who 
have  many  eyes  upon  them  need  to  walk  very  cir- 
cumspectly  ;  for,  whether  they  do  good  or  evil,  it 
will  certainly  be  reported.  How  is  the  purity  of 
Rome  departed  !  The  Epistle  to  the  Romans  is  an 
argument  ar/ainst  them. — Scott  :  The  most  of  us 
must  own  with  shame  that  we  are  not  so  earnest  or 
particular,  even  in  our  narrow  circles,  as  Paul  was 
in  respect  to  his  most  extensive  connections  and 
multiplied  engagements.  We  ought  to  long  for  op- 
portunities of  usefulness,  as  worldly  men  do  for  a 
prosperous  trade,  or  occasions  of  distinguishing 
themselves  and  acquiring  celebrity. — Clarke  :  Ver. 
9.  Paul  presents  the  spiritual  worship  of  God  in 
opposition  to  the  external.  Our  religion  is  not  one 
of  ceremonies,  but  one  in  which  the  life  and  power 
of  the  eternal  Spirit  are  acknowledged  and  experi- 
enced. — Barnes  :  1.  One  efl'ect  of  religion  is,  to 
produce  the  desire  of  the  communion  of  saints ; 
2.  nothing  is  better  fitted  to  produce  growth  in 
grace  than  such  communion  ;  3.  the  firm  faith  of 
young  converts  is  very  much  calculated  to  excite  the 
feeling  and  strengthen  the  hope  of  Christian  minis- 
ters ;  4.  the  Apostle  did  not  disdain  to  be  taught  by 
the  humblest  Christians. — J.  F.  H.] 


m. 

The  Fundamental  Theme. 


Chap,  I.   16,  17. 


16 


17 


For  I  am  not  ashamed  of  the  gospel  of  Christ '  [omit  Christ] :  for  it  is  the 
power  of  God  [God's  power]  unto  salvation  to  every  one  tliat  belie veth  ;  to  the 
Jew  first,^  and  also  to  the  Greek.  For  therein  is  the  righteousness  of  God 
[God's  righteousness]  revealed  from  faith  to  faith :  as  it  is  written,  The  just 
[The  righteous]  shall  live  by  [of]  faith  (Hab.  ii.  4).* 


'Ver.  Ifi.— The  Codd.  A.  B.  C.  I).,  &c.,  rend  rb  tvayyiXiov  without  the  addition  of  toO  Xpto-ToC.  [Cod.  Pin. 
likewipe  omitH  toO  Xpurrov,  o^  do  ni-arly  nil  the  crlticiil  editors,  Mill,  Bonirol,  Grioitbflch,  r.nehinniin,  Tischi'ndorf, 
Alford,  Wordsworth,  &c.    The  words  aro  fouiid  in  the  ComplutonBian  Text  aud  in  Elzevir,  and  ore  defended  by  Wet- 


Btoin  a'jd  Mat-ihuci.— P.  8.] 


CHAPTER  I.    16,    IV. 


73 


«  Ver  17  —The  wpiarov  is  left  out  by  Codd.  B.  and  G-.  [not  A.,  as  Lanpe  has  it] ;  probably  because  it  had  an  offen- 
rive  ai'pearance.  [MSS.  X.  A.  C.  D.  K.  U.  have  it.  Tischendorf,  Meyer,  Alford,  and  others  retain  it.  Lachmann  put* 
it  in  brackets.— P.  b.] 

3  Ver.  17.— [This  is  a  free  tranflation  of  the  Hebrew  (Hah.  ii.  4):  Tl'^^n']  ir3!lOX3  p'^'^^V  lit-,  the  righteoui 
shall  live  in  (by)  his  faithfulness.  The  Masoretic  accentuation,  however,  connects  the  first  two  words  ;  The  righteous  ir 
his  faith,  shall  live.  The  Hebrew  H^I'OX  and  the  Christian  ttiVtis  both  rest  on  the  fundamental  idea  of  trust  iu  God- 
Paul  follows  in  his  rendering  tho  Septuauint,  but  pmperly  omits  the  ;u.ou  which  these  insert  :  6  SUaio^  ij-ov  e/c  fficrretoi 
C^a-eTdt.  YnlcMe  ■  Justus  in  Jidc  stia  vivet.  Most  commentators  connect  ex  Trio-Teco?  with  the  verb  ^ijo-erat.  But 
Dr.  iiaiigc,  with  Beza  and  Meyer,  connects  e/c  wia-reiai  with  6  Si/caios,  and  translates  :  He  tljikt  is  righteous  by 
taith,  shall  live.     See  the  Ex<y.  JVotes.—F.  S.] 


EXEGETICAL  AND  CRITICAL. 

Thikd  Section.  —  The  fundamental  theme.  The 
joy  of  the  Apostle  to  proclaim  the  gospel  of 
Christ,  since  it  is  a  power  of  God  for  Jews  and 
Gentiles  as  a  revelation  of  the  righteousness  of 
God — a  righteousness  by  and  for  the  faith. 

Ver.  16.    For  I  am  not  ashamed  [not  even 
in  the   metropolis  of   the   heathen  world. — P.  S.]. 
Evidently,  this  general  declaration  refers  not  merely 
to  ver.  15,  but  also  to  ver.  14.     There  could  be  no 
difficulty  to  the  Apostle  to  preach  to  the  believers  in 
Kome ;  but  it  was  difficult  to  preach  to  the  whole 
Gentile  world,  especially  to  its  wise  men,  who  were 
BO  much  inclined  to  despise  the  gospel  as  foolish- 
ness.     And  finally,   it   was  particularly   difficult  to 
preach  to  the  Gentiles  in  the  proud  metropolis  of 
Rome,  the  central  seat  of  the  culture  and  pride  of 
the  ancient  world.     It  is  plain  from  ver.  15,  yoii  that 
are  at  Home,  that  he  would  not  confine  himself  to 
the  congregation  of  Christians  in  Rome.     The  desig- 
nation of  his  disposition  is  exact  in  relation  to  that 
pride  of  wisdom  wliich  everywhere  opposed  him,  as 
he  had  experienced  particularly  in  Athens  and  Cor- 
inth,     He   is    not   afraid   of    the    threats   of    the 
world  ;  he  does  not  avoid  the  offence  of  the  Jews  ; 
nor   is   he    ashamed  in   view   of  the  contemp'   of 
the    Greeks   and   of  the   wise   men.     And  this    is 
not  only  expressive  of  his  real  joy  in  general,  but 
of  his  Christian  enthusiasm,  by  which  he  could  glory 
in  the  cross  of  Christ  (Rom.  v.   2  ;    Gal.  vi.  14). 
[I  am  not  ashamed,  is  an  answer,  by  anticipation,  to 
an  objection  which  was   readily  suggested  by  the 
word   Home,  with   all  its  associations   of   idolatry, 
worldly  power,  pride,  pomp,  corruption,  decay,  and 
approaching  persecution  of  Christians.     Tacitus,  the 
heathen  historian,  says  of  Rome,  that  there  cuncfa 
undique   atrocia   aut   pudenda   conjluunt   celebran- 
turque  (Annal.  xv.  44).     See  Chrysostom,  Alford, 
Wordsworth,  Hodge  in  loc.    Meyer  explains  the  term 
more  with  reference  to  the  past  experiences  of  Paul 
jn  other  heathen  cities,  as  Athens,  Corinth,  Ephesus, 
and  to  the  general  character  of  the  religion  of  the 
cross  (1  Cor.  i.  18).     It  is  true  that  human  nature, 
as  such,  in  its  carnal  pride,  is  apt  to  be  ashamed  of 
the  gospel.     But  this  carnal  pride  culminated  at  the 
time  in  Rome,  and  found  a  fit  expression  in  the  blas- 
phemous worship  of  the  emperors  as  present  deities. 
That  Paul  has  special  reference  to  Rome,  is  al.so  evi- 
dent from  his  definition  of  the  gospel  as  a  power  of 
God,  which  puts  to  shame  the  world-power  of  Rome 
{^liuirj,  strength).     Dealing  with  the  Greeks,  who  ex- 
celled in  wisdom,  he  defines  the  gospel  to  be  the  lois- 
dom  of  God,  wliich  turns  the  wisdom  of  this  world 
into  folly.      When  afterwards  a  prisoner  in  Rome, 
Paul  was  not  ashamed  of  his  bonds  (2  Tim.  i.  12),  in 
which  he  felt  more  free,  mighty,  and  happy  than  the 
emperor  on  the  throne. — P.  S.]. 

Of  the  gospel  of  Christ.     Here,  also,  we  can- 


not separate  the  concrete  unity  of  the  gospel  and  its 
promulgation. 

For  it  is  a  power  of  God.*  The  for  an- 
nounces  the  reason :  it  is  the  highest  manifestation 
of  the  power  of  God — the  highest  manifestation  of 
the  compassionate  love  and  grace  of  God ;  it  is  the 
blessing  of  salvation  for  faith  throughout  the  world. 
The  power  of  God.  This  cannot  apply  to  the 
preaching  of  the  gospel  alone,  but  to  the  objective 
gospel  itself,  which  combines  with  evangelization  for 
complete  operation.  The  question  whether  there  is 
a  metoiiyme  f  here  (see  TholucU),  becomes  impor- 
tant only  when  that  unity  is  dissolved.  The  gospel, 
in  the  objective  sense,  implies  :  1.  The  revelation  of 
God  in  Christ ;  2,  redetnption  by  Christ ;  3.  the  vic- 
tory, the  glory,  and  the  kingdom  of  Christ ;  4.  the 
presentation  of  this  salvation  through  the  medium 
of  the  Church  in  word  and  sacrament,  under  the 
operation  of  the  Holy  Spirit. J 

Unto  salvation.  Both  the  negative  and  posi- 
tive sides  of  the  idea  of  the  (XiorijQia  must  be 
elucidated,  the  former  denoting  redemption,  the  lat- 
ter adoption.  The  operation  of  a(inrn>ia  reaches 
from  the  depths  of  hell  to  heaven.  When  man  is 
truly  delivered,  he  is  always  delivered  from  the 
depths  of  hell,  and  raised  to  the  heights  of  heaven  ; 
because  he  is  saved  from  the  condemnation  of  his 
conscience,  and  from  the  judgment  of  wrath,  and  is 
made  a  participant  of  salvation  through  the  right- 
eousness of  faith  which  leads  to  righteousness  of 
life.  The  expression,  blessedness,  denotes  the  high- 
est effijct  and  the  highest  aim  of  the  (Ti<ixij()ia. 
Comp.  Acts  iv.  12 ;  xiii.  26  ;  Rom.  x.  1.  The  oppo- 
site is  aTTMhva,  Odvaroc,  and  similar  terms. 

To  every  one  that  beUeveth.  De  Wette : 
"The  navri  is  opposed  to  Jewish  particularism, 
and  the  Trto-Tf  I'orTt  to  Jewish  legalism."  §  The 
highest  operation  of  God's  power  is  not  at  all  a  fatal- 
istic  or  mechanical  operation ;  it  is  a  personal  deal- 
ing of  love,  and  presupposes  personal  relations.     For 

*  [To  Svvafiii  8eov,  comp.  1  Cor.  i.  24,  where  Christ  ia       i 
called  6eov  Svi/afnf;  and  9eov  a-o<j>ia. — P.  S.] 

t  [/.  c,  here  rei  per  iustiumentum  cjficffe  pro  inslru- 
meniii,  as  if  we  say,  the  knife  cuts,  while  it  is  the  hand  of 
man  that  cuts  with  the  knife.  So  it  is  the  Holy  Spirit  that 
operates  through  the  gospel  as  the  instrumentality.— P.  S.] 

t  [ivvanii  Oeov  is  not  to  be  resolved  into  div'n,:  power 
(.Jowett),  but  the  gospel  is  a  power  in  and  through  which 
God  Himself  works  efficaciously,  i.  <■■,  so  ns  to  save  the  sin- 
ner by  rousing  him  to  repentance,  faith,,  and  obedience, 
fleov  is  qi'v.  autoris  or  rather  passessivus.  Comp.  1  Cor.  i. 
18.  Alford  explains  :  "  The  bare  substantive  &vvatm  here 
(and  1  Cor.  i.  24)  carries  a  superlative  sense  :  the  highest  and 
holiest  vehicle  of  the  divine  power,  the  Swatm  /car'  efox^t'." 
Umbreit  remarks  that  the  law  is  never  called  God's  power, 
but  a  light  or  teaching,  in  which  man  must  walk.— P.  S.] 

§  [Or  rather:  iveri/  one,  implies  the  universulily ;  thai 
biiieiKlh,  the  subjective  cfnitjitinn,  of  the  gospel  salvation  ; 
fiiith  being  the  apprehending  and  appropriating  organ. 
Paul  says  not :  to  every  one  who  is  circumcised,  or  bttpfized, 
or  r:biys  the  law,  but,  to  every  one  that  hellewlh.  Without 
faith,  sacrnments  and  good  works  avail  nothing.  But  true 
saving  faith  is  of  course  a  living  faith,  including  knowl- 
edge of  the  truth,  assent  to  the  truth,  and  trust  or  con- 
fidence in  Christ  ;  it  submits  to  all  the  ordinances  of  Christ, 
and  necessarily  produces  good  works. — P.  S.] 


74 


THE   EPISTLE   OF  PAUL   TO   THE   ROMANS. 


"19  it  cannot  be  said,  on  the  one  bund,  that  faith  com- 
pletes objective  sidvation,  so  we  cannot  say,  on  the 
otiier,  that  it  is  a  compulsory  operation  of  salva- 
tion. It  is  the  condition  of  the  ellicacy  of  salva- 
tion (John  iii.  16,  ic. ;  see  Gen.  xv.),  the  causa  ap- 
pre/itndenn. 

To  the  Jew  first.  Tliis  priority  is  economical, 
as  it  rests  upon  the  Old  Testament  revelation  of 
God,  and  the  laitli  of  Abraham  (cliap.  iv.  9) ;  and  as 
such  it  is:  1.  The  (jenetic  priority.  "Salvation  is 
of  the  Jews"  [John  iv.  22].  2.  Tlie  historical  pri- 
ority (Chrysostom,  and  others).  3.  A  legal  priority 
(as  to  Ibrm)  of  the  nearest  claim  to  the  gospel 
in  accordance  with  the  direction  given  to  the  apos- 
tles. Acts  i.  8  (Calov,  De  Wette,  Tholuclv).  But  not- 
withstanding all  this,  the  Jew  had  no  real  right  to 
the  gospel,  since  salvation,  1.  is  not  a  product  of 
Judaism,  but  of  free  grace ;  2.  faith  is  older  than 
Judaism  (chap,  iv.) ;  3.  faith  itself  is  the  reality  and 
substance  of  which  Judaism  was  only  the  symbol.* 

And  also  to  the  Greek.  Tlie  E/J.^v  is  here 
the  representative  of  all  who  are  not  Jews.  [Jew 
and  Grc'k  here  refer  not  to  the  national  distinction, 
as  Greek  and  Barbarian,  ver.  14,  but  to  the  re- 
liffi&us  antagonism  of  the  world  at  the  time,  so  that 
Greik  is  equivalent  to  Gentile.  " E)J..  x.  Bc'tijli.  is 
the  Greek,' Joi'd.  x.  "E/J..  the  Jewish,  designation  of 
all  maukuid ;  comp.  Acts  xiv.  1 ;  1  Cor.  x.  32. — 
P.  S.] 

Ver.  17.  For  therein  is  the  righteousness 
of  God.  Proof  of  the  previous  proposition.  The 
dvvaiui;  Ofou  *t(,'  friiiTtj(jiai'  is  a  Tzoxd/.vxpn;  of 
the  ()i,xaioavvti  &fo7t,  &c. 

[Pkei.imi.nary  Philological  Rkmarks  on  Ji- 
xai.o(Ti'vtj  AND  THK  CoGNATK  Tkrms. — Thesc  are 
of  primary  importance  in  Paul's  Epistles,  especially 
the  Romans  and  Galatians.  Their  root,  according  to 
Aristotle  {Eth.  Nic.  v.  2),  is  i)iya  =  twofold;  hence 
dtxci-fn',  to  divide  into  two  equal  parts,  to  judge  ; 
<K>ta(TT>,',-,  judge,  dispenser  of  justice.  Others  derive 
them  from  ()ixt]  (the  daughter  of  Zeus  and  Themis), 
custom,  right,  judgment.  At  all  events,  the  funda- 
mental idea  of  dixtuonin'tj  is  an  even  relation  be- 
tween two  or  more  parts  where  each  has  its  due, 
or  conformity  to  law  and  custom,  a  normal  moral 
condition.  According  to  Homer,  he  is  liixaioraroi; 
who  best  fulfils  his  duties  to  God  anil  men.  Plato 
develops  the  idea  of  righteousness  in  his  Poll'eia, 
and  identifies  it  with  moral  goodness.  In  the  Bible, 
the  will  of  God,  as  expres.sed  in  the  written  law,  and 
more  fully  in  the  perfect  life  of  Christ,  is  the  stand- 
ard both  of  morals  and  religion,  which  are  always 
viewed  as  essentially  connected.  God  Himself  is 
righteous — i.  e.,  absolutely  perleet  in  Himself,  and 
in  all  His  dealings  with  His  creatures,  aivl  rccpiires 
man  to  aim  at  this  perfection  (Matt.  v.  48).  Accord- 
ingly, we  may  define  the  several  terms  (referring  to 
the  dictionaries  and  concordances  for  passages)  as 
follows : 

Aixavot;,  P"'^^,  conform  to  the  law,  inwardly 
as  well  as  outwardly,  holy,  perfect.  It  is  used  in  the 
aboolute  ^ense  of  God,  in  a  relative  sense  of  man, 
also  of  things.  Du  Caiige  :  "^/txato?  duitur  vel 
de  re  vel  de  persona,  in  qua  nee  abundat  aliqidd  nee 

•  ;  Alford :  "  Not  that  the  Jew  had  any  prr/erfncf  under 
tkc  pospel ;  only  he  inhirilt  and  ha^  a  pnad' nee."  Words- 
worth :  "  First,  in  having  u  prior  chiiin,  as  the  covennnled 
people  of  God  :  first,  thuroforo,  in  the  Bi-uson  of  lis  oUor, 
but  not  in  the  condition  of  its  rccipiouti*  it/Irr  itn  a<;C'ei)t- 
nnoe."  Dr.  Ilodito  refers  wputrov  merely  to  rtio  priority 
In  time,  which  ia  not  aulUcieut.— X'.  S.l 


deficit,  qua  muneri  suo  par  est,  numeris  suia  aht^ 
lutay 

dixatoaiivij,  niT'iS,  juslUia,  the  normal, 
moral  and  religious  condition.  If  used  of  man,  it 
means  conformity  to  the  holy  will  and  luw  of  (jod, 
godliness,  or  true  piety  toward  God,  and  virtue 
toward  man.  If  used  of  God,  it  is  one  of  Hid 
moral  attributes,  essentially  identical  with  His  holi- 
ness and  goodness,  as  manifested  in  His  dealing* 
with  His  creatures,  especially  with  men. 

dixaioii)  (Aoyt'l'ftv  n'v  dixui.odi'Vfjv),  p'^^SHj 
justificare,  to  put  right  with  the  law,  i.  e.,  to  declare 
or  pronounce  one  righteous,  and  to  treat  him  accord- 
ingly.  Etymologically,  the  word  oug  t  Id  mean,  to 
make  just  (since  the  verbs  in  oio,  derived  I'rom  ad- 
jectives of  the  second  declension,  signify,  to  make 
a  person  or  thing  what  the  priiuitive  denotes, 
as  rvip).oti},  dor).6iii,  oo f)^6o),  qart()Oii),  n/.noM  = 
rvq>).6v,  &c.,  noi^tlr).  But  in  Hebrew  and  Hellenis- 
tic, and  often  also  in  classical  usage,  it  has  a  forensic 
sense,  to  which,  however,  when  used  of  God,  the  ob- 
jective state  of  things,  either  preceding  or  succeed- 
ing, must  correspond,  for  God's  judgment  can  never 
err,  and  His  declaration  is  always  ett'ective.  More 
of  thi.s,  ad  ii.  13  and  iii.  21-31.  Now  for  the  par- 
ticular explanation  of  Otxaiocri'u'^  &tov  in  our  pas- 
sage. 

dix  cc/m  at^'  (/.oyKT/<os  t^s  dtxaioavvrni)  jutfi' 
ficatio,  the  act  of  putting  a  man  right  with  the  law, 
or  into  the  state  of  dtxaioavvrj. 

dixaio)/ta,  a  righteous  decree,  judgment,  ordi- 
nance.— P.  S.] 

In  view  of  the  widely  divergent  explanations,  it 
is  necessary  to  make  close  distinctions.  The  right- 
eousness of  God,  understood  absolutely  in  its  com- 
plete New  Testament  revelation,  or  anoxdh'ifii;, 
cannot  apply  immediately  to  righteousness  be/ore 
God  {ivii'iTtiov  ToT  Ofor),  in  which  case  the  geni- 
tive is  taken  objectively  in  a  wider  relation  (thus 
Luther,  Fritzsche,  Baur,  Philippi).  For  this  right- 
eousness of  faith  presupposes  justification.  Nor  can 
the  word  of  itself  denote  the  act  of  justification, 
even  if  we  connect  with  it  the  result,  the  righteoius- 
ness  of  faith,  the  genitive  being  taken  in  this  case 
subjectively*  in  this  sense:  "the  rightness  which 
proceeds  from  God,  the  right  relation  in  which  man 
is  placed  by  a  judicial  act  of  God"  (.Meyer,  after 
Chrysostom,  Bengel,  De  Wette,  and  others). f  For 
the  justification  presupposes  the  atonement  (chap, 
iii.  2.')),,  and  the  atonement  is  founded  on  the  exer. 
cise  of  (iud's  righteousness.  To  this  exercise  the 
Apostle  evidently  refers  in  chap.  iii.  25,  20,  and  he 
therefore  does  it  here  also  in  the  theme,  which,  from 
its  very  nature,  must  encompass  the  whole  idea  of 
the  Epistle.  Absolute  righteousness,  like  al)solute 
grace  and  truth,  is  first  revealed  in  ('hristianity.  It 
is  the  righteousness  which  not  only  institutes  the 
law  of  the  letter,  and  re(iuires  rigliteousiuss  in  man, 
and,  in  its  character  of  judge,  pronounces  sentence 

*  [Or  as  genitive  of  origfin  and  proceBuion.  See  Meyer. 
—P.  8.] 

t  (.So  also  Alford  :  "  God's  rit'litcousness— not  llis  at- 
tribute of  riKlit<>uusnc8s,  '  the  righteousness  of  God,'  but 
righteousness  fUiwing  frnm  nnd  ncci plitbU  I"  Him."  Ha 
then  suljjoias  be  Wette's  note.  Hodge  :  "  The  right<iou8- 
ness  which  God  gives,  iiiid  winch  He  appiovcs."  lie  uisc 
quotrs  the  remark  of  De  Wette:  "All  uitirpretutioiu 
which  overlook  the  idea  of  imputaiion,  as  is  done  in  the 
oxpl;iuations  given  by  the  Uomnuist^,  :ind  also  in  that  of 
Grotius,  are  fiilse."  M.  Stiiurt  cxjiifnunds  6txaioj^vi'i)  with 
SutaiuKnt,  and  explains:  " £ucaio<rv»nr)  0fov  is  the  ju^iiiiou- 
tioii  whieli  God  bestows,  or  the  juntiiicalloa  uf  which  Uud 
h)  the  author."— r.  S.] 


CHAPTER  I.    16,   17. 


75 


and  kills,  but  which  at  last  reveals  itself  in  union 
with  love,  or  as  grace  in  the  form  of  righteousness, 
and  produces  righteousness  in  man.  It  accomplish- 
es all  this :  1.  As  law-giving — that  is,  establishing 
the  right — it  institutes  the  law  of  the  Spirit ;  that  is, 
it  reveals  it  in  the  life  of  Christ  as  the  personal 
power  of  the  atonement.  2.  In  the  power  and  suf- 
fering of  this  personal  righteousness,  it  satisfies  the 
demands  of  the  righteousness  of  the  law,  and  thus 
changes  the  symbolical  i/.aarr^i-ov  into  a  real  one. 
The  atonement.  3.  It  communicates  to  believers  the 
work  and  efficacy  of  Ciirist's  righteousness,  by  the 
spirit  of  His  righteousness,  as  a  gift  of  grace  and 
principle  of  the  new  life  in  creative,  operative  justi- 
fication. 

Or  briefly  :  The  righteousness  of  God  is  the  self- 
communication  of  the  righteousness  which  proceeds 
from  God,  which  becomes  pereonal  righteousness  in 
the  person  of  Christ,  which,  in  His  passion  as  pro- 
pitiation, satisfies  the  righteousness  of  the  law  (in 
harmony  with  the  requirement  of  conscience),  and, 
by  the  act  of  justification,  applies  the  atonement  to 
.  the  believer  for  the  sanctification  of  his  life. 

As  the  ()6Sa,  which  avails  before  God,  can  be 
none  other  than  the  ()6|«,  which  proceeds  from  God, 
and  became  personal  in  Christ,  so  can  the  righteous- 
ness which  avails  before  God  be  none  other  than  a 
righteousness  which  comes  from  God.  It  is  the 
dr/.ui.oai''v^  ix  &iovy  in  opposition  to  the  di.x.  rj 
ijiiti,  Phil.  iii.  9;  and  therefore  the  dixaioa t'vtj 
ivMTtiov  &fov,  Rom.  iii.  21,  in  opposition  to  the 
di,/.ai.o(Tvvi]  ex  toT  r6/(0i',  chap.  x.  5.  There- 
fore it  is  God's  righteousness  also  in  this  sense,  that 
man  can  never  make  out  of  it  a  righteousness  of 
his  oum,  though  the  Divine  justification  becomes  the 
principle  of  his  new  life.  Tholuck  likewise  allows  a 
combination  of  the  objective  and  subjective  mean- 
ings, but  decidedly  rejects  the  inteipretation  of 
di.xai.oavvrj,  as  an  attribute  of  God,  which  he  consid- 
ers iucompatible  with  the  prophetic  passage  adduced. 
But  this  quotation  does  not  explain  righteousness, 
but  faith.  The  statement  of  Tholuck,  that  Hof- 
mann  {Schriftbeweis,  i.  625  f.)  describes  the  (Jtzaio- 
ai'vi]  &iov  as  an  attribute  of  God,  is  not  exact ;  he 
declares  it  only  as  a  righteousness  existing  on  the 
part  of  God.*  We  go  so  i'ar  as  to  imderstand  by 
righteousness  here  a  synthesis  of  righteousness  and 
of  love — a  synthesis  which,  as  grace  according  to  its 
dififerent  relations  under  the  supremacy  of  righteous- 
ness, and  as  the  grace  that  establishes  the  new  and 
the  absolute  right  of  the  Spirit,  is  called  righteous- 
ness, but  which,  under  the  supremacy  of  love,  as  the 
fountain  of  the  new  life,  is  called  love.  This  impar- 
tial righteousness  is  revealed  to  believers  as  grace, 
and  to  unbelievers  as  wrath.  When  Tholuck  says  that 
dt,x.  is  not  the  righteousness  of  God  in  fulfilment  of 
the  promises  (Ambrose),  nor  retributive  justice  (Ori- 
gen),  nor  the  essential  righteousness  which  belongs 
to  God  (as  Osiander  once  taught,  and  recently  Hof- 
mann),  nor  the  goodnees  of  God  (Morus),  nor  impar- 
tiality toward  Jews  and  Gentiles  (Scmler),  he  has 
collected  into  one  all  the  disjecta  membra  of  the 


•  [Hofmann  .says,  I.  c,  p.  626  :  "  Einerseits  lezeichnet 
iKdioavvr)  9€ov  eine  Grrecht'ifkeit,  wilch':  Qnltts  ist; 
andfierseiU  muss  nach  dem  Ziisnmmeiihange  etwus  gemeint 
sein,  diis  uns  zu  Tliei!  wird."  He  takes  the  word  to  mean, 
not  an  attribute  of  God,  but  a  righteousness  which  God  has 
established,  and  which  constitutes  tlie  subject  of  the  gospel 
preaching,  and  makes  it  a  power  ot  God  unto  snlvation  to 
every  believer.  Hence  the  apostolic  office  is  called  17  Sia- 
Kovia  T^5  Si.Kaio<Tvvr)^ .  in  opposition  to  the  SiaKovCa  t^s 
Karoxpicreut,  2  Cor.  iii.  9. — P.  6.] 


central  idea,  that  the  dt^xaioai'v?]  (from  dl/a,  a  re. 
lation  between  two,  according  to  the  Aristotelian 
derivation  of  the  word),  establishes,  maintains,  and 
restores  the  relation  between  the  personal  God  and 
the  personal  world  according  to  their  respective 
character  (for  the  protection  of  personality).  The 
omission  of  the  article  does  not  justify  us  in  reading 
here,  a  righteousness  of  God;  being  inseparably 
connected  with  dtoT;  it  means  rather  Ike  proper 
righteousness  of  God  (see  Winer's  Gramm.).* 

[Upon  the  whole,  I  agree  with  this  interpreta- 
tion. The  majority  of  evangelical  commentatora 
restrict  the  dixaioavvrj  &foii  to  God's  justifying 
righteousness ;  some  even  ungrammatically  identify 
it  with  justification  (()t/.a/w(7K,),  or  God's  "  method 
of  justification."  The  fundamental  idea  of  the  Epis- 
tle as  set  forth  in  the  theme,  every  expression  used 
in  vers.  16  and  17,  and  the  contrast  presented  in 
ver.  18,  point  to  a  more  comprehensive  meaning, 
answering  to  the  definition  of  the  gospel  as  "  the 
power  of  God  unto  salvation,"  full  and  final,  from  | 
"  all  ungodliness  and  unrighteousness  of  men."  This  ' 
implies  a  righteousness  impartable  as  well  as  imput- 
able, or  sanctifying  as  well  as  justifj-ing — a  right- 
eousness inherent  in  God,  and  manifested  in  Christ, 
which,  by  a  living  union  with  Christ,  is  to  become 
the  personal  property  and  higher  nature  of  the  be- 
liever,  so  that,  at  the  final  judgment,  no  trace  of 
unrighteousness  will  remain.  Wordsworth  (an  An- 
gUcan)  and  Forbes  (a  Scotch  Presbyterian  LL.D.) 
independently  arrive  substantially  at  the  same  view 
with  Lange.  Wordsworth  in  loco  says  :  "  This  sig- 
nificant phrase,  the  righteoustiess  of  God,  is  not  to 
be  lowered,  weakened,  and  impaired,  so  as  to  mean 
only  the  method  of  justification  by  which  God  ac- 
quits and  justifies  mankind.  But  it  is  the  very  right- 
eousness of  God  Himself,  which  is  both  imputed  and 
imparted  to  men  in  Jesus  Christ  '  the  Righteous ' 
(John  ii.  1),  who  is  '  the  Lord  our  righteousness ' 
(Jer.  xxiii  6  ;  xxxiii.  16),  and  who,  being  God  from 
everlasting,  and  having  also  taken  the  nature  of 
man,  is  made  righteousness  to  us  (1  Cor.  i.  30),  and 
does  eftectually,  by  His  incarnation,  and  by  our  in- 
corporation into  Him,  justify  us  believing  on  Him, 
and  making  Him  ours  by  faith,  so  that  we  may  not 
only  be  acquitted  by  God,  but  may  become  the  right- 
eousness of  God  in  Him  (2  Cor.  v.  21).''  Forbes,  in 
a  long  and  able  dissertation  {Anal.  Com.,  p.  102  fl'.), 
combines  here  the  three  Scripture  meanings  of 
dixai-oavvt],  when  used  of  God,  viz. :  "  1.  God's 
retributive  righteousness  or  justice  (now  manifested 
in  God's  condemnation  of  sin,  shown  in  giving  His 
Son  to  die  for  man's  sin  on  the  cross — to  induce 
thereby  the  believer  to  concur  cordially  in  its  con- 
demnation in  himself);  2.  Godi's  juslifyivg  right- 
eousness (now  manifested  in  Christ's  exhibiting  in 
the  character  of  man  a  perfect  righteousness — im- 
putable to  and  appropriable  by  the  believer,  for  hia 
pardon  and  acceptance  with  God) ;  3.  God's  sancti- 
filing  righteousness  (also  manifested  in  Christ  as 
"  the  Lord  our  righteousness,"  changing  the  believ- 
er's heart  the  moment  he  is  united  by  iaith  to  Christ, 
and  progressively  mortifying  within  him  all  sin,  and 
imparting  eventually  to  him  universal  righteousness 
— appropriable  in  like  manner  through  Iaith  by  the 
behever)."    For  further  information,  comp.  the  JExeg. 

*  [Seventh  ed.  by  Lunemann,  §  19,  Ko.  26,  p.  118.  The 
article  is  often  omitted  before  such  substantives  as  are  fol- 
lowed by  a  j;enitive  of  possession,  e.  g.,  eij  tuayye'AiOf  Beov, 
Kom.  i.  20  ;  cjrl  irpoaufnov  ai/Ttov,  Matt.  xvii.  6  ;  vovy  Kvpiovt 
1  Cor.  ii.  16,  &c.— P.  S.] 


76 


THE    EPISTLE   OF   PAUL   TO   THE    ROMAXS. 


Notes  on  chaps,  ii.  13,  and  iii.  21-31 ;  Doctrinal 
and  Eth'ual  on  iii.  21-31,  No.  5  ;  also  the  following 
works:  W'lnznv,  I'l-itgr.  de  voce.  t)iy. a i,Oi;,  di.y.ai,o- 
avvtj  et  dixdioTv  in  P.  ad  Rom.  Ep.,  Leipzig, 
1831  ;  Rauwenhoff,  DUquisitio  de  loco  Paulino, 
Qui  est  de  di Kaio'xT n,  Lugd.  Bat.,  1S52  ;  Lipsius, 
JHe  Paulinische  Recl'tfcrtignng.slehre,  tnit  Vorwort 
von  Liebner  (wlio  ditters  from  Lipsius),  Leipzig, 
1853  (22't  pp.);*  Schniid,  Biblivhe  Theologic, 
Stuttg.,  1853,  vol.  ii.  p.  331  If.;  Wieseler,  Corn, 
ou  Gal.  ii.  16,  Giitt.,  1859,  p.  176  ff.  (who  very 
leainedly  and  ahly  defends  tlie  orthodox  Protestant 
view) ;  llodge,  on  Romans,  iii.  20  (new  cd.,  Piiilad., 
1866,  p.  126  S.)\  Forbes,  on  Romans  (Edinb.,  1868), 
pp.  102-144.  The  doctrinal  treatises  on  justification 
oy  faith  will  be  mentioned  below,  ad  iii.  21-31,  Doc- 
trinal awl  Ethical,  No.  5,  pp.  138  f. — P.  S.l 

Is  revealed  [^artoy-ali' Trrftai,  is  l,eing  re- 
vealed; the  present  tense  marks  the  continuous,  pro- 
gressive revelation  of  lighteousness. — P.  S.].  The 
nnoxnlv  jtxh,v  is  distinguished  from  the  qavt- 
(jorv  by  being  God's  revelation,  which  proceeds  from 
God,  and  addresses  itself  to  the  inward  spiritual  world 
(Gal.  i.  16)  ;  while  the  qanooriv  denotes  the  same 
revelation  as  manifested  in  the  outward  life  from  the 
inward  spiritual  world  (Jolm  ii.  11).  The  revelation 
of  wrath  is  also  an  a,To;:«/.r>/ts'  (ver.  18),  although 
the  wrath  is  revealed  in  external  manifestation  ;  for 
it  is  only  by  the  conscience,  that  the  facts  connected 
therewith  are  first  recognized  as  the  phenomena  of 
wrath,  and  it  is  only  in  the  light  of  the  New  Tes- 
tament truth  that  they  are  recognized  completely. 
tv  nl'To).     The  gospel  is  the  medium. 

From  faith  to  faith.  [It  is  connected  with 
the  verb  uno xa/.i'i ttt irai,  by  De  Wette,  Meyer, 
Tholuck  (ed.  5),  Alford  ;  with  the  noun  i)ixaio(Tiivtj 
(sc.  oiaa  or  ytvo/dvtj)  by  Bengel,  Philippi,  Hodge, 
Forbes.  The  former  agrees  better  with  the  position 
of  the  words,  and  with  fit;  nitTTiv,  the  latter  with 
I/.  7Ti(TTn<ij,  comp.  Rom.  ix.  30;  x.  6. — P.  S.] 
The  idea  of  faith  appears  here  in  accordance  with 
the  comprehensive  idea  of  righteousness,  and  there- 
fore iis  a  hearty,  trustful  self-surrender  (to  rest  and 
lean  upon,  T-xn  ),  which  includes  both  knowledge 
and  belief,  assent  and  surrender,  appropriation  and 
application.  [Faith  is  neither  the  efficient  cause 
nor  the  objective  ground  of  justification,  but  the  in- 
Btrumental  cause  and  subjective  condition  ;  as  eating 
is  the  condition  of  nourishment.  As  the  nom-ishing 
power  is  in  the  food,  whi(;h,  however,  must  be  re- 
ceived and  digested  before  it  can  be  of  any  use,  so 
the  saving  power  is  in  Christ's  person  and  work,  l)ut 
becomes  personally  available,  and  is  made  our  own, 
only  by  the  appropriating  organ  of  faith.  This 
appropriation  and  assimilation  must  be  continually 
renewed;  hence  tx  71  la t tut i;  tit;  ninriv. — 
P.  S.]  The  distinction  between  fr<ym  faith  and  to 
faith  is  variously  ex|)lained.  Origcn  refers  it  to 
Old  Testament  and  S'ew  Testament  faith. f  (Ecu- 
menius  [Olshausen,  Do  Wette,  Alford,  Philippi]  : 
unit  TTiiTTHiii;  fii;  TTiarfvovTa  [/or  the  believer ; 
comp.  iii.  22,  where  the  dix.  Ofor  is  said  to  be  d^ 

•  [LijIsinR  fwiys,  p.  22,  without  proof:  "The  poncrnl 
Oreok  siimififanoe  of  tlio  wonl  iixaiou  romains  jn.ilum  fa- 
fri,  and  must  th'Tpforc  liave  tlie  i)rofi>r(.'nre  licfon- .;«.»- 
torn  tmberi ."  To  this  T)r.  Lii-hncr,  ami  Wirsolcr,  on  Gal. 
ii.  16,  p.  179,  justly  o'ljoot.  Lipsius  adinifH,  howpvcr,  that 
Stxeu<S<i>  iji  I'aul  mt'nu^juslum  liab'i-';  only  not  always,  nor 
excluaivxly.  — I*.  S.] 

t  jSo  also  Chrj'gostom  and  Thcodorot.  A  niodiflcalion 
of  thiH  view  is  Tortullian's  :  Exfidi  Ugit  in  Ad  -^  evanaelii. 
-P.  8.J  .^—    V         J 


nd\'ra(i  rovi;  niaTtvovrcti;. — P.  S.].  Theophylaet^ 
and  others:  For  the  promotion  of  faith.  Luther; 
From  weak  to  strong  faitli.*  Baumgarten-Crusius : 
From  faith  as  conviction  to  faitli  as  sentiment.  De 
Wette  :  1.  Faith  as  conditional ;  2.  faith  as  recep- 
tive.  For  other  meanings,  see  Tholuck  (also  the 
view  of  Zwingli,  that  the  second  niiTTn;  means  the 
faithfulness  of  God).  [Meyer :  The  revelation  of 
righteousness  proceeds  from  faith  and  aims  at  faith, 
nt  fides  habeainr  (similarly  Fritzsche,  Tholuck). 
Bengel  and  Hodge  connect  t/.  niaxHo.;  tU  nianv 
with  ()i,xaio(Trvtj,  and  take  it  as  intensive,  like  the 
phrase,  "  death  unto  death,"  "  life  unto  life,"  so  as 
to  mean  fidcm  vieram,  entirely  of  faith,  without  any 
works.  Ewald  understands  ix  nidTtnn;  of  Divine 
faith  (?),  fi'i,-  niari,v  of  human  faith,  which  nnist 
meet  the  former. — P.  S.]  It  may  be  asked,  if  the 
key  to  the  passage  may  not  be  sought  in  clrap.  iii. 
22,  since  the  second  half  of  that  chapter  is  in  gen- 
eral  a  connnentary  on  this  passa-re.  Comp.  Heb.  xiL 
2  :  "  The  author  and  finLsher  of  our  faith."  At  all 
events,  the  Apostle  acknowledges,  like  the  author  of 
the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews,  the  difference  between  a 
degree  of  faith  which  receives  the  revelation  pro- 
phetically and  apostolically,  in  order  to  proclaim  it, 
and  a  niore  general  degree  of  faith,  which,  through 
the  agency  of  preaching,  extends  into  the  world. 
Comp.  Ilel).  xi.  1  ff. 

As  it  is  written.  The  same  quotation  from  Hab. 
ii.  4  is  found  in  Gal.  iii.  1 1  and  Heb.  x.  38.  The  Apos- 
tie  will  here  (as  in  ver.  2  and  chaps,  iv.  and  x.)  prove 
the  harmony  of  the  gospel  with  the  Old  Testament. 
The  passage  in  the  Prophet  Habakkuk  declares:  The 
just  shall  live  by  his  confidence,  his  faith  (Is.  xxviii. 
16).  Therefore  the  most  of  the  elder  expositors, 
and  some  of  the  recent  ones  (Philippi,  and  others), 
thus  explained  the  maxim  of  the  Apostle :  The  just 
shall  live  by  his  faith.  But  according  to  Beza, 
Meyer  [Hodge],  and  others,  the  Apostle's  expression 
must  be  construed  thus :  The  man  who  is  justified 
by  faith,  shall  live.  Meyer  pr6pcrly  says  :  Paul  had 
a  good  rea.son  to  put  this  meaning  into  the  prophetic 
expression :  since  the  just  man,  if  he  would  live  by 
faith,  must  have  been  justified  by  faith.  We  read 
in  Habakkuk  two  concrete  definitions :  "  Behold, 
puffed  up  [  nbos'  T^lp  ],  not  upright  is  his  soul 
[his  life]  within  him  [13  ViE?  n^r^-XP].  But 
the  just  man,  he  shall  live  by  his  faith."  That  is, 
as  the  puffed-up  soul  is  puffed  up  because  it  is  not 
upright,  and  has  no  sound  life,  so  is  it  the  mark  of 
the  just  man  that  he  acquires  his  life  by  faith.  The 
additional  profundity  which  the  New  Testament 
gives  to  this  Old  Testament  expression,  does  there- 
fore not  really  change  even  the  expression,  much  less 
the  sense.  [I  prefer  the  connection  of  ix  niuTH'ti; 
with  L.ii<Tf-rai.,  which  is  more  agreeable  to  the  He- 
brew (although  the  other  is  favored  liy  the  Masoretic 
accentuation),  and  this  is  adopted  also  by  Tholuck, 

•  (This  is  oi^Iy  a  modification  of  the  preceding  explnna- 
tion,  and  is  suhstantinlly  hold  also  liy  Krnsinus,  Melanch- 
thon,  Calvin,  Hcjia,  Wordsworth,  Fiirbos.  The  Rt-n'*  is  : 
BcifinninK  and  endlnp  witli  fiiith,  from  one  dcitrcc  "f  faith 
to  anotlicr  ;  faith  Is  a  vital  priijcipU- and  constant  ltowiI', 
rcccivinp:  sracc  for  (n^icc,  KoinR  from  slreupth  to  stn-ntrth, 
till  It  is  tninsformcd  from  plory  to  ploi-j-.  Development  is 
the  law  of  spiritual  as  well  a»  physical"  life  ;  but  m  all  the 
stnpos  of  (fvowtli  of  Chri»ti.m  lifp.'lhe  vital  |.rii.oij)le  Is  the 
B:ime  ;  hence  ««  niv-rti-K  «it  irioTii',  from  or  iml  ••f  failh  an 
tho  root,  uiilo  /iiilti  OH  the  blo.-som  and  fniit ;  faitn.aH  Ben- 
(rel  says,  tlie  prora  it  puppit,  the  fore-deck  anil  hind-deck 
of  a  shiii— I.  «•.,  all  m  all.  Comp.  anb  irifijf  «i«  io^av, 
"from  (flory  to  (flory,"  2  Cor.  Iii.  18,  and  "Horn  strength 
to  strength,"  I's.  Irzxiv.  7.— 1'.  S.\ 


CHAPTER   I.    16,    17. 


77 


De  Wette,  Philippi,  Delitzsch  (ad  Hab.  ii.  4),  Ewald, 
Forbes.  See  Textual  Note  *  above.  The  sense,  how- 
ever, is  not  essentially  altered.  The  emphasis  lies,  at 
all  events,  on  niariq,  which  is,  of  course,  livinff  faith. 
Ltjairai,  is  to  be  taken  in  the  full  sense  of  the 
uorj  aliln-ios,  as  revealed  in  Christ.  The  Apostle, 
as  Delitzsch  remarks,  puts  no  forced  meaning  into  the 
words  of  the  prophet,  but  simply  places  them  into 
the  light  of  the  New  Testament.  Habakkuk  ends 
where  Paul  begins. — P.  S.] 

DOCTBINAIi  AND  ETHICAL. 

1.  The  f-undamental  theme.  The  joyfulness  of 
the  Apostle  in  anticipation  of  preaching  the  gospel 
without  shame  even  in  Rome,  the  central  seat  of  the 
conceit  of  human  wisdom.  The  source  of  this  cheer- 
fulness :  The  gospel  is  the  power  of  God,  &c.  The 
heroic  spirit  of  faith,  philanthropy,  and  hope,  ele- 
vates him  above  all  hesitation.  But  how  far  is  the 
gospel  a  power  of  God?  See  ver.  17,  and  the  Exeg. 
Kotes  thereon.  Especially  on  the  righteousness  of 
God,  and  the  two  fundamental  forms  of  faith  (the 
faith  which  has  established  preaching,  and  the  faith 
which  is  established  by  preaching). 

[2.  St.  Bernard  :  Justus  ex  fide  sua  vivef,  uiique 
si  vivat  et  ipsa  :  alifer  quomodo  vitam  dabit,  si  ipsa 
sit  mortua  (The  just  man  shall  live  by  his  faith,  if 
his  faith  itself  live ;  otherwise  how  shall  that  which 
is  itself  death,  give  life  ?).— P.  S.] 

[3.  "  If  the  subject  of  the  Epistle  is  to  be  stated 
in  few  words,  these  should  be  chosen :  to  ivayyihov, 
dvvafnq  QioTi  (iq  aonijQiccv  navri  tw  niarfvovrt,. 
This  expresses  it  better  than  merely  ^justification  by 
faith,^  which  is,  in  fact,  only  a  subordinate  part  of 
the  great  theme — only  the  condition  necessitated  hy 
man's  sinfulness  for  his  entering  the  state  of  salva- 
tion :  whereas  the  argument  extends  beyond  this,  to 
the  death  un'o  sin  and  Ife  unto  God  and  carrying 
forward  of  the  sanctifying  work  of  the  Spirit,  from 
its  first  fruits  even  to  its  completion;"  Alford. 
Forbes  {Anal.  Com.,  p.  vii.)  likewise  denies  that 
justification  by  faith,  especially  if  presented  in  a 
bare,  forensic  form,  is  the  leading  doctrine  of  the 
Epistle.  "  The  grand  truth  here  enunciated  is  the 
warm,  living  reality  of  a  personal  union  with  Christ 
(contrasted  with  the  previous  union  with  Adam),  by 
which,  in  place  of  the  sin  unto  death  communicated 
by  the  first  head  of  humanity,  Christ's  righteous- 
ness and  LIFE  are  communicated  to  the  believer, 
and  become  the  inward  quickening  mover  of  every 
thought,  feeling,  and  action.  Thus  is  the  distinction 
preserved,  yet  the  indissoluble  connection  clearly 
evinced,  between  justification  and  sanctification,  as 
being  but  two  aspects  of  one  and  the  same  union  of 
the  believer  with  Christ — ^just  as  the  dying  branch 
ingrafted  into  the  living  vine  is  then  only  reckoned, 
and  may  justly  be  declared  to  be,  a  sound,  living 
branch,  when  the  union  has  taken  place — because 
the  assurance  is  then  given  of  its  being  made  so 
finally  and  fully,  the  vital  juices  of  the  vine  having 
idready  begun  to  circulate  within  it." — P.  S.] 

HOiULETICAI,  AND  PBACTICAL. 

Whence  is  it  that  many  are  ashamed  of  the  gos- 
pel of  Christ?  Either,  1.  They  do  not  know  it 
fully ;  or,  2.  if  they  know  it,  they  have  not  the 
courage  to  confess  it. — ^Why  do  we  not  need  to  be 


ashamed  of  the  gospel  of  Christ?  Because,  1.  It  ^^ 
is  of  Divine  origin  ;  2.  of  Divine  import ;  3,  of 
Divine  operation. — He  who  is  ashamed  of  the  gos- 
pel, is  also  ashamed  of  the  Lord.  True  shame  comes 
from  God,  false  shame  from  the  devil.  Shame  and 
shame. — Christianity  the  universal  religion. — The 
shades  of  the  law  vanish  ;  the  stars  of  Greece  grow 
pale  at  the  rising  sun  of  the  gospel. — The  righWou*. 
ness  which  God  approves  is  the  chief  import  of  the 
gospel. — The  fundamental  thought  of  the  Epistle  to 
the  Romans  is  also  the  fundamental  thought  of  the 
Reformation. 

Luther  :  The  power  of  God  is  such  a  force  as 
to  elevate  man  from  sin  to  righteousness,  from  death 
to  life,  from  hell  to  heaven,  from  the  kingdom  of  the 
devil  to  the  kingdom  of  God ;  and  gives  him  eter- 
nal ^Ivation. 

Starke  :  As  the  gospel  is  a  power  of  God,  he  , 
denies  it  who  constantly  appeals  to  his  weakness, 
and  presents  it  in  opposition  to  the  gospel. — Though 
the  gospel  is  the  power  of  God,  no  one  will  be  com- 
pelled to  be  saved,  but  every  one  possesses  his  own 
freedom  to  resist,  and  is  therefore  responsible. — 
Hedinger  :  Who  would  be  ashamed  of  medicine 
when  he  is  sick  ?  or  of  light  when  he  is  blind,  and 
would  like  to  see  ?  Wo  to  those  who  are  ashamed 
of  the  words  and  oflBce  of  Christ ! 

Lange  :  Many  a  person  is  not  ashamed  of  the 
gospel  of  Christ ;  but  yet,  if  he  is  ashamed  to  follow 
Christ,  he  is  in  reality  ashamed  of  the  gospel  itself 
in  its  true  application  and  appropriation. — Faith  is 
like  a  bucket,  by  which  we  draw  grace  for  grace 
from  that  fulness  of  Jesus  which  contains  the  gos> 
pel. 

Spener  :  Faith  in  Christ,  confidence  in  the  grace 
of  God  in  Christ,  is  the  beginning  of  our  salvation, 
and  will  remain  its  instrument  to  the  end.  There- 
fore, faith  must  always  endure  and  increase,  and  will 
thus  grow  from  faith  to  faith — from  one  degree  of 
light  and  power  to  another. 

Bengel  :  No  one  need  be  ashamed  of  what  ia 
mighty  and  Divine  (ver.  16). 

Gerlach  :  There  is  something  in  the  gospel  of  i 
which  the  natural  man  is  ashamed ;  therefore  the 
Apostle  confesses  that  this  shame  is  conquered  in  his 
own  case. — The  effective  power  of  God  is  not  merely 
in  the  gospel,  but  it  is  the  gospel  itself.  It  is  not 
merely  a  strength,  from  God,  but  it  is  His  own 
strength.     He  works  in  and  through  the  gospel. 

Lisco  :  The  gospel  is  a  power  of  God  ;  that  is, 
a  power  in  which  He  operates  Himself.  Therefore  L^ 
it  is  a  holy,  mighty,  creative  force,  capable  of  saving 
all  who  believe  it.  On  our  part,  faith  is  the  con- 
dition that  we  must  fulfil,  the  way  to  which  we  must 
conform,  in  order  to  obtain  real  salvation  and  de- 
liverance from  temporal  and  eternal  destruction  by 
the  gospel, 

Heubner  :  The  danger  of  being  ashamed  of  the 
gospel  is  easily  incurred.  Yet  it  is  a  shame  which 
is  very  repreliensible ;  for,  1.  It  is  a  miserable  .: 
weakness  and  want  of  principle  to  be  ashamed  of 
what  is  best ;  2.  It  is  the  grossest  contempt  of  God 
to  place  the  world  higher  and  fear  it  more  than 
Him ;  and,  3.  it  is  the  meanest  ingratitude  toward 
God. 

Fr.  a.  Wolff  :   The  more  the  world  boasts  of 
its  unbelief,  the  less  should  true  Christians  be  ashamed 
of  their  faith.     This  is  required :  1.  For  the  honor    ^ 
of  the  truth ;    2.   the  conversion  of  unbelievers ; 
3.  the  salvation  of  our  own  souls. 

J.  P.  Lange  :  How  sad  the  contrast  between  the 


78 


THE   EPISTLE   OF   PAUL   TO   THE   ROMANS. 


felse  shame  of  Christians  and  the  boldness  and  shame, 
lessness  of  the  world. — Who  should  be  ashamed  of 
the  gospel  ?  /.  <'.,  1.  Of  God's  power  and  honor  ;  2. 
of  the  deliverance  of  men  for  their  final  salvation  ; 
8.  of  the  grand  task  of  uniting  Jews  and  Greeks 
(the  law  and  culture)  into  a  higher  life. — The  twofold 
confirmatory  power  of  the  gospel :  1.  The  first  for : 
its  Divine  operation  (ver.  16);  2.  the  second  for: 
its  Divine  import  (ver.  17). — The  tlireefold  for 
(vers.  Ui,  17),  or  tlie  three  grounds  of  joyous,  evan- 
gelizing activity. — The  righteousness  of  faith:  1. 
Very  old  (llabakkuk) ;  2.  eternally  new  (Paul,  Lu- 
ther) ;  3.  always  confirmed  by  true  life. 

[BuKKiTT  :  Tlie  power  of  the  gospel  is  not  from 
the  preachers  of  the  gospel ;  tiierefore  do  not  idol- 
ize them.  But  they  are  God's  instruments,  and  their 
words  are  the  organ  of  the  Spirit's  power ;  ther^'fore 
do  not  tliink  meatdy  of  them  — A  justified  man  lives 
a  more  holy,  useful,  and  excellent  life  than  all  oth- 
ers ;  but  the  life  that  a  justified  man  lives  is  always 
one  of  faith. — Henry  (condensed) :  The  reason  wliy 
the  Apostle  made  such  a  bold  profession  was,  that 


sinners  might  be  saved  and  believers  edified. — Mac. 
knight:  The  Apostle  insinuates  with  great  propriety 
that  the  gospel  is  not  an  institution  like  the  heathen 
mysteries,  which  were  concealed  Irom  all  but  tha 
initiated.  The  precepts  of  the  gospel,  being  honor- 
able  in  themselves  and  beneficial  to  society,  cannof 
be  too  openly  published. — Hodok  :  The  salvation  of 
men,  including  the  pardon  of  their  sins  and  the 
moral  renovation  of  tlieir  hearts,  can  be  effected  by 
tlie  gospel  alone. — The  power  of  the  gospel  does  not 
lie  in  its  pure  theism,  or  perfect  moral  code,  but  in 
the  cuoss — in  tlie  doctrine  of  justification  by  faith 
in  a  crucified  Redeemer. — Whether  we  be  wise  or 
unwise,  orthodox  or  iieterodox,  unless  we  are  believ- 
ers, and  receive  "  the  righteousness  which  is  of 
God  "  as  the  ground  of  acceptance,  we  have  no  share 
in  the  salvation  of  the  gospel. — Sermons  on  ver.  16, 
by  B.  WiiiciicoTK,  John  Owkn,  Bishop  Ward,  G. 
EsTY,  J.  EasKiSK,  Bishop  Gilbert,  Isaac  Watts, 
Bishop  Stillingflekt,  Zollikofer,  E.  Bracken- 
BLRY,  Geo.  Burder,  W  E.  CnASxiNG,  R.  McChetke, 
and  Thomas  Arnold. — J.  F.  H.] 


PART     FIRST. 

The  Doctrine  of  Justification  by  Faith  as  the  Restoration  of  the  true  Glorification 

of  God. 

CHAPTERS   L-XL 


FIRST     DIVISION". 

SIX  AND  GRACE  IN  THEIR  FIRST  ANTITHESIS,  THE  REALLY  RELIGIOUS  AND  MORAL 
LIKE.  THE  ACTUAL  ENTRANCE  OF  CORRUPTION  AND  SALVATION.  GOD'S  WRATH 
AT  ALL  HUMAN  UNRIGHTEOUSNESS;  THAT  IS,  THE  WORLD'S  REAL  CORRUPTION 
MATURING  FOR  DEATH,  AND  HASTENED  BY  THE  JUDGMENT  OF  GOD;  AND  THE 
OPPOSING  JUSTH-'ICATION  OF  SINNERS  THROUGH  THE  MERCY-SEAT,  OR  PARDON  IN 
CHRIST  m  RESPONSE  TO  FAITH.      THE  RIGHTEOUSNESS  OF  FAITH. 

Chapters  L  18-V.  11. 

First  Section. — The  bfiriinvivrf  of  all  the  real  corr\ipt'wn  of  the  world,  and  of  the  Gentiles  in  particular^ 
torjethrr  with  the  judf/ment  pronowiced  on  it.  The  verilect  of  the  general  revelation  of  Ood  in  crea- 
tion 1)1/  the  neglect  of  the  real  worBhiji  of  Ood  in  thanksgiving  and  praise  (chap.  i.  18-21). 

Second  Skction. —  The  development  of  Gentile  corntption  under  God^s  judicial  abandonment  (the  de- 
parture of  His  Hpirit,  and  the  decree  of  ripeness  for  judgment).  From  arhitrarg  sipubolism  to  the 
worship  of  images  ami  beasts  ;  from  theoretical  />  practical  corruption  ;  from  natural  to  unnatural 
and  abominable  sins,  to  the  comjiletinn  of  all  kinds  of  crimes  ana  iniquities^  and  to  the  demoniacal 
hist  of  evil,  and  even  of  evil  maxims  (chap.  i.  22-32). 


18  For  the  wrath  of  God  [God's  wrath]  is  revealed  [in  opposition  to  that  roTointion  of 
God's  ripht<ousne«8,  ver.  1"]  from  lioaveu  iii^ain.st  all  untjodliness  [frodlessness]  and  un- 
righteousness [iniquity]  of  men,  who  hold  [hold  back] '  ilie  truth  in  unrightcourt- 


CHAPTER  I.    18-32.  79 


19  ness  ;  Because  '  that  which  may  be  known  [which  is  known]  '  of  God  is  manifest 

20  in  them  ;  *  for  God  hath  shewed  [God  manifested]  *  it  imto  [to]  them.  For  the 
invisible  things  of  him  [his  unseen  attributes]  fi'ora  the  creation  of  the  world 
are  [are,  since  the  creation  of  the  world,] "  clearly  seen,'  being  understood  by 
the  tilings  that  are  made  [by  means  of  his  works],  even  his  eternal  power  and 
Godhead    [Divinity,*  ■OttoTi^i;,   »<>*   i>toT;/s"]  ;    so   that °  they  are   without   excuse 

21  [inexcusable,  uruTzoloy/izov^J.  Because  that,  when  they  knew  God  [because, 
knowing  God,  or,  although  they  kneAV  God,  dioti  yvovTtg  tov  d^tov],  they  glorified 
hbn  not  as  God,  neither  were  thankful  [they  did  not  glority  Jnni  as  God,  nor 
give  thanks  to  him  as  God^  ;  but  became  vain  in  their  imaginations  [thoughts], 
and  their  foolish  heart  was  darkened. 

22,  23  Professing  themselves  to  be  wise,  they  became  fools,  And  changed  [ex- 
changed] the  glory  of  the  uncorruptible  God  into  an  image  made  like  to  cor- 
ri;ptible  man  [for  a  likeness  of  an  image  of  corruptible  man],  and  to  [of]  birds, 
and  fourfooted  beasts  [quadrupeds],  and  creeping  things  [reptiles]. 

24  Wtierefore  God  also  "  gave  them  up  to  uncleanness,  through  the  lusts  of 
their  own  hearts  [God  delivered  them  over,  in  the  lusts  of  their  hearts,  to 
micleanness],  to  dishonor  their  own  bodies  between  themselves  [so  that  their 

25  bodies  were  dishonored  among  them]."  Who  changed  [They  who  exchanged]  '' 
the  truth  of  God  into  [for]  a  lie,  and  worshipped  and  served  the  creature  more 

26  [leather]  than  the  Creator,''  who  is  blessed  forever.  Amen.  For  this  cause 
God  gave  them  up  [delivered  tliem  over]  unto  [to]  vile  affections  [shameful 
passions]  :  '^  for  even  their  women  did  change  [exchanged]  the  natural  use  into 

27  [foi-]  that  which  is  against  nature :  And  likewise  also  the  men,  leaving  the 
natural  use  of  the  woman,  burned  in  theii*  lust  [lustful  excitement]  one 
toward  another  ;  men  with  men  working  that  which  is  unseemly  [working  the 
(well  known)  indeccucy,  t^v  aloiri[ioavviiv\,  and  receiving  in  themselves  that  recom- 
pense of  their  error  which  was  meet  [the  due  reward  of  their  error]. 

28  And  even  as  they  did  not  like  [And  as  they  did  not  deem  it  worthy,  or  worth 
while,  ova  idoxififiGuvl  to  retain  God  in  theii'  knowledge,  God  gave  them  over  to 
a  reprobate  [worthless,  ddoxifiovl  '^  mind,  to  do  those  things  which  are  not  con- 

29  venient  [becoming]  ;  "  Being  filled  with  all  unrighteousness,  fornication,"  wick- 
edness [malice],  covetousness,  maliciousness   [badness]  ;   full  of  envy,  murder, 

30  debate  [strife,  eQidog],  deceit,  malignity ;  whisperers.  Backbiters  [slanderers], 
haters  of  God,'*  despiteful  [insolent],  proud,  boasters,  inventors  of  evil  things 

31  [villanies],  disobedient   to   parents.   Without   understanding,  covenant-breakers 

32  [truce-breakers],  without  natural  affection,  implacable,"  unmerciful :  Who,  know- 
ing [although  they  well  know]  the  judgment  [just  decree]  of  God,  that  they 
which  [who]  commit  [practice,  TZQaooovTsgl  such  things  are  worthy  of  death,  not 
only  do  the  same,  but  have  pleasure  in  them  that  do  them  [approve  of  those 
who  practise  them^  ovvtv8oy.ovaiv  loTg  nQ(ca6ovoiv\. 

TEXTUAL. 

1  Ver.  18. — [Or  hinder.  So  Lange  and  Meyer  :  aufhnlten.  This  is  the  meaning  of  fcaT^x*""  here,  as  in  2  Thess.  ii. 
6,  7  ;  Luke  iv.  42.    Comp.  the  Exeg.  Nnteg,  as  also  the  note  of  Alford  in  Inc. — V.  S.] 

*  Ver.  19. — [SioTi,  contracted  from  Si  0,  ti,  means  (like  610^  originally,  propter  quod,  quam  oh  rem,  qua  re,  on 
account  of  which,  wherefore,  and  draws  an  inference  from  the  preceding  sentence  ;  but  in  the  N.  T.  it  is  alwiiys,  and  in 
the  classics  occasionally,  used  in  the  sense  of  fiid  toCto  oti.  proplerea  quod,  quia,  becuuse  that,  because,  and  assigns  n  riason 
for  a  preceding  assertion,  like  yap,  for.  ll  m:iy  here  give  the  reason  why  the  wrath  of  God  is  revealed  (Meyer),  or  it 
may  expl:iin  the  words  Toii' Tjji' oA.  .  .  .  icareijfdcTwv  (De  Wette,  Tholuck,  A'ford).  i^ee  Exig.  Notes.  Lachmann,  Xischen- 
dorf,  Meyer,  Alford  separate  6toTi  from  ver.  IS  simply  by  a  comma  ;  Xholuck,  Fritzsche,  Thcile,  Philippi,  by  a  period. — 
P.  S.] 

'  Ver.  19. — [r})  yvoxTTOf  toS  0eov,  quod  notum  est  Dei  (Vulg.).  This  is  the  sense  of  yvunnoi;  in  the  N.  T.,  the 
Sept.,  and  the  Apocrypha  (Luke  ii.  44  ;  John  xviii.  1 5,  16 ;  Acts  1 19  ;  ii.  14 ;  iv.  IG,  iSrc),  as  ayi/coo-ros  means  unknown  (Acts 
xvii.  23)  ;  while,  in  the  classics,  yvoia-ro':  usually  sit'iiifies  knownble,  erkeniibar,  as  distinct  from  ■yviuTos,  Imotm  (which 
word  docs  not  occur  in  the  Greek  Testament).  The  authoxized  version,  therefore,  is  inconsistent  with  the  liiblical  (though 
not  with  the  clas-ical)  usage  of  the  term,  and  conveys  a  false  idea  ;  for  the  heathen  did  not  know  all  tlnit  may  lie  known 
of  God,  bxit,  as  clearly  appears  from  what  follows,  they  knew  only  that  which ;n:iy  be  learned  from  the  genLial  revelation 
in  the  book  of  nature  and  reason,  as  distinct  frnm  the  special  revelation  in  the  Bible  and  in  the  person  of  Christ.  To  re- 
tain the  E.  v.,  and  to  supply  (with  KoVdnsnn,  sub  vvuxtto?),  without  revelation,  is  arbitiary.  Lange  translates  Kenntniss, 
knowledge ;  but  yvuiTTOv  is  objective,  yvoia-ii  is  subjective,  and  does  not  suit  (f>av€p6v  icrriv  iv  ovrots.  There  is  no  war- 
rant in  the  usrts  hiquendi  for  identifying  the  two,  unless  it  be  Gen.  ii.  9,  LXX. :  yvcoo-Toi'  koAoC  koX  novripov.  The  Apostle 
purposely  avoided  the  term  yvSxrit  or  eniyvuxrn  toO  6eov,  which  is  used  in  the  N.  T.  of  the  true  knowledge  of  God  in 
Christ  (comp.  John  xvii.  :i),  and  chose  the  more  general  and  objective  term  yvua-Tov,  that  which  is  patent  to  all  men  in 
the  works  of  creation. — P.  S.] 

*  Ver.  19. — [<^ai'epd>'  ia-rtv  iv  avTois,  in  illis  (Vulg.),  i.e.,  iv  raU  KopSiait  avTutv,  in  their  hearts ;  comp,  ii> 


60 


THE    EPISTLE    OF   PAUL   TO   THE   ROMANS. 


IS  •  Onl.  i.  16.    It  refers  to  the  inborn  oonsciousnefB  of  God  which  is  Inseparable  from  our  reason,  and  it  contains  the  ffem 

of  the  o'ntol')^^*!!  armnncnt  of  AiiKflni.     Dr.  Lunge,  however,  renders,  with  Krasmns  and  others:  uuUr  ilmen,  among 

them.    See  £xeg.  N"les.    Luther's  version  (ilmei,)  ignore-  the  rreposition  iv.—V.  ».] 

*  Ver.  \i).—[e4>avipu><rti',  the  historii:  aorist,  rolorrinj;  to  the  ori|,'inal  creation.— r.S.] 

a  Ver.   iO.— [to  yap  aopara  avToii  anh  KTiVtuis  Koa/j-ov  Tois  iroiqjiacrii'  yoovfitVa  KaOoparai.     xTt'o'it  liere  means  the 

act     "  "  '  .-.  .^.^    .. .  »„-i   ....  ~ .-  .  ~ 

would  ' 


of  cre.ition,  n-oiijno<ri  {d.ilhuis  iistrttmenli),  the  things  created,  or  creatures,  and  lence  orrd  is  here  not  =  eic,  which 
aid  Iw  tautolofrical,  but,  like  the  Hebrew  TZ,  f'"m  the  lime  of,  or  since,  a  condilo  mui,do.—l'.  S.] 
'  Ver.  •JO.— [Alfonl  objects  to  the  E.  V.  and  triinslates  areperci-iveJ  ;  but  thi.s  destroys  the  striking  oxjTnoron,  dtSpara 
KoBopaTai,'  i'lii-ii.ibitia  vidmlur,  das  Untchnubjre  wird  •rachnul,  the  invisible  hcanvs  visihle,  or  the  uns-i:n  is  S'tn,  viz  ,  by 
the  mind'rt  eve  {voovix(va).  The  compound  Kadopav  (oiraf  \ty6iievov  in  the  N.  T.)  means  to  look  down  from  a  higher 
place,  to  t:ike  a  survey,  and  hence  often  intin>ihes  the  simple  verb  =  dicpi^ws  bpav,  jptrvidtre,  pKispiorvy  tu  «.<;  clearly,— 

•:0.— r  e<idTij9,  GdUHcltkeit,  from  fleios,  diviiius,  refers  to  the  Divine  attributes,  such  as  majesty,  power,  wis- 
ness,  wliii-u  arc  manifest  in  creation  ;  wliile  Oeorrii ,  diilns,  DkHij,  Godhead,  GMheit,  from  dtot,  refers  to  the 


f-.S.] 

8  Ver. 

dom,  goodne— ,  —  .    . 

Divine  Bcini;  itself,  who  created  the  world  and  dwell  in  Christ.— P.  S.J 

»  Ver.  20.— (eis  to  with  the  infinitive  (used  by  I'aul  seventeen  times  in  the  Romans  alone),  like  the  Latin  ad  ^ith 
the  gerund.',  iiidicutes  properly  the  inb'nlion,  in  hoc  lit,  in  ordir  thai  (comp.  Kom.  i.  11  ;  iii.  26 ;  iv.  11,  1(!,  18,  &c.)  ;  but 
here  it  must  indicate  the  (lulecded)  resatl,  =  (oore,  ila  itl,  so  thai  (vi.  12;  vii.  i,o;  2  Cor.  i.  4;  comp.  the  Exrg.  Jfntes,  and 
Buttmnnn,  iV   T.  Gr.,  p.  227).— P.  S.] 

»"  Ver.  24.— Kat  is  retained  by  Meyer  on  account  of  its  adaptation.  [It  indicates  the  correspondence  between 
men's  guilt  and  Uods  judfjment ;  but  the  external  authorities,  iX .  A.  13.  C,  Vulgate,  Orig.,  &c.,  are  against  it.— 
p.  y.] 

"  Ver.  24.  [toO  oTtpid^ecrflai  Ta  (TuipLara  avrijiv  iv  oiTot9.  The  reading  iv  ouTots  is  sustained  by  N.  A.  B.  C.  D*.| 
ngainst  the  t.xt.  rec.,  iv  eavTots,  among  Ihemsilvis,  reciprocally.  Meyer  defends  th'^  latter  reading  (referring  it 
to  the  persons,  avTutv),  in  view  of  the  frequent  neglect  of  the  relie.x  pronoun  by  the  transcribers  ;  i .  g.,  ver.  27.— 
aTi/xo^eo-flai  is  passive  (licza,  De  Wette,  Meyer,  Lange,  Alford),  and  not  middle  (Erasmus,  Luther,  E.  V.);  and 
hence  a\>Tu>vU  irofcrable  to  avrutv,  and  iv  avroi<:  to  ei*  eauTois,  which  may  have  arisen  from  imagining  that  "they," 
instead  of  to  (rw/j^oLTa,  was  the  subject  to  iTtfta^. -The  genitive,  roO  iTt/uaf ,  may  be  taken  simply  as  g.  n.  appositionis, 
explaining  aKaOapaia,  which  consisted  in  their  bodies  being  dishonored  ;  or  as  implying  the  purpose  of  God  :  in  order 
Uial  (  =  «is  to)  ;  or  as  denoting  the  consequence  :  so  that.     I  prefer  the  last.— P.  t;.] 

la  Ver.  25. [o'tTt»'«?  is   used  oiTtoAoyutus,   quippe  qui,  seeing  that  thfy,.  such  as,  indicating  the  class  to  which 

one  belongs,"  and  implying  the  reason  of  tlae  preceding  statement.     neTri\\a(av,   umtauschh  n ;  the  compound  is 
stronger  than  i^AAofaf,  InuschUn  ;  ver.  22.— P.  S.]  ,,.,„.„., 

'=<  Ver.  2.5.— [TTapo  70V  KfiaavTa,  hiijoiid,  rather  than,  so  as  eventually  to  exclude  the  Creator  altogether;  comp. 
irop'  iK€ivov,  Luke  xviii.  14,  and  napi.  <I>v<tiv,  ver.  20.  Tlie  nature  of  the  case  here  decides  for  the  exclusive  rather  than 
the  comparative  sense  of  Tropd,  sinee  idolatry  is  incompatible  with  the  worship  of  the  true  God,  who  shares  His  honor 
with  no  creature.     See  the  Jireg.  JVoks.—V.  S.]  _  .        -'     ,    .t 

14  Yc).  2C.— [Or  shameful  lusts,  lusts  of  dishonor,  naBri  aTtjuias,  "stronger  than  arijuia  iraOr),  as  setting  forth  the 
ttatus,  oTtjii'a,  to  which  the  Trder;  belonged"  (Alford).  Luther:  schdndliche  Lusle.  Lange:  LeidcnschafLen  dcr 
Schaiiilr.     Meyer:  schandbare  Lridnischa/tca.—V.  S.] 

'*  Ver.  iS.— [The  paronomasia  between  6o(ci/id^(o  and  dfid»ctftos,  which  strikingly  brings  out  the  adjustment 
at  the  punishment  to  the  t^in,  is  lost  in  the  E.  V.  The  Vulg.  renders  it  imperfectly  :  A'on  probaverunl—reprobrum  S'ji- 
tum.  Lange:  A'lChl  wurdig  hi'Uen—imivurd:ge  (nichtsnutz.g')  Shtmsart.  Conybeare  and  Howson  :  "As  they  thought 
fit  to  C'isl  out  the  acknowledgment  of  God,  God  gave  them  over  to  an  outcasl  mind."  Alford  :  "  Because  they  r./jro- 
bat  d  the  knowledge  of  God,  God  gave  them  over  to  a  reprobate  mind."    But  both  Conybeare  smd  ..Uford  omit  the 

10  Ver.  28. — [to.  fii)  (caflijico  vTo,  not  becoming,  or  unbecoming,  indecent,  immoral.  The  E.  V.  follows  the  Vulg.  :  ea 

gute  noil  conveniunt.  But  convmivnt  is  one  of  those  words  in  the  E.  V.  which  have  changed  or  moditied  their  meaning, 
ke  prevent,  let,  &c.,  and  are  apt  to  bewilder  the  reader,  and  to  mislead  him  by  a  false  light.  Comp.  to.  oiuc  aviJKOvTa, 
Jfiph.  V.  4  ;  and  on  the  ditference  between  juij  and  ovk,  Winer,  §  55,  5,  p.  44!"  (7th  ed.).— P.  S.] 

"  Ver.  29.— As  nopveia  has  already  been  tnentioncil,  it  is  here  probably  inserted  for completcness'sake  by  Cod.  L. 
and  others,  or  substituted  for  irovTipla.  See  Tischeudorf.  [It  is  omitted  by  X.  A.  B.  C.  K.,  Lachmann,  Tischondorf, 
Alford,  Meyer,  Lange.  It  may  have  arisen  from  novripCa,  hut  may  as  easily  have  been  overlooked  on  account  of  the 
similar  ty.  Where  the  unnatural  Tropvcio,  which  was  mentioned  before,  prevails,  the  ordinary  nopveCa  abounds  also. 
Upon  the  whole,  I  would  retain  it.— P.  S.]  _  ,  .     „  ^  ,  ■        ,     ,  ■  .     ^  . 

'8  Ver.  .lO.— [9»oo-TU7er?.  alwavs  used  in  the  passive  sense:  eeontoTjToi,  hated  by  God  (meanmg  the  highest  de- 
gree of  reckless  wickedness),  and  so  taken  here  by  Fntzschc,  De  Wette,  Philippi,  Meyer,  Alford  ;  while  the  majority  of 
commentators  (Theodoret.  Oicumenius,  Luther,  Calvin,  Grotius,  Tholuck,  Ewald,  Wordsworth,  Hodue)  and  versions 
(Synac,  LutJi.,  E.  V.)  inciine  to  the  active  sense:  /oticrdetoi,  Dei  osor(.<i,  nnmifs  of  G-d,  GilVsfeiud.-.^  i^a  Suidas  : 
tfeoo-Tuyeis  9eo(xioT)Toi,  oi  dn-b  e<oO  fiKTOii/nej'oi  /cal  oi  Btov  ixKrovvrei  ■  irapa  Si  ria  diroo-ToAo)  Oeoa-Tvytlt  oii^i  ot_  uirb 
0eov  /unffov/iefoi,  dAA'  oi  ixKrouvTti  Toi'  deov.  The  advocates  of  the  active  sense  refer  to  flfop-to-^s  and  ^poroaruyij*  as 
analogies:  but  Meyer  insists  that  these,  too,  have  the  passive  meaning,  especially  9«oAit<r>?«  =  eroaTuy^t,  tiie  opposite 
of  fleoi^tA^s.  Usage  is  undoubted  y  in  favor  of  the  pas-ive  ;  but  the  connection,  and  the  Scripture  idea  of  God,  are  in 
favor  of  the  active  sense.  The  Apostle  here  describes  the  sins  of  the  heathen,  and  not  their/ju/iiiViHie/i/  ,•  and  God  hates 
«(■«,  but  loves  the  smn'c.     See  the  £x'flr.  iVoi'S.— P.  S.]  .      .  ,     ^    , ,    ^    .r^       ,         , 

'»  Ver.  ai.— dffjrdf  Jovs  [in  the  I'xl.  rec.  after  do-Topyovs]  is  not  sufficiently  sustained  by  Codd.  C.  T>.,  at.  and 
sounds  rather  weak  between  these  strong  terms.  [Omitted  by  N  .  A.  B.  D*.  G.,  and  cancelled  by  Mill,  Lachmann, 
Tischendorf,  Meyer.  Alford  regards  it  as  a  gloss  in  margin  to  explain  aavvOirovt ;  Meyer  as  an  insoitiou  from  the  simi- 
lar catalogue,  2  Tim.  iii.  3.— P.  S.] 


Gkneral  Rkmauks. — The  whole  section,  in  its 
progress  to  the  entl  of  the  chapter,  relates  more  par- 
ticularly to  tiie  heathen  world  (Tholuck,  Meyer). 
Yet  it  (lcscril)es  the  corruption  iti  its  original  lonn 
as  a  general  corruption  of  humanity.  The  antithe- 
sis :  Ilcathendom  and  Judaism  was  a  subsequent 
development.  Ver.  21,  with  its  causality  in  vers. 
22  and  23,  constitutes  the  more  defitiite  beginning 
of  iieatlieni.sm.  Tlioluck  recommends  the  treatise 
of  Adam,  Ezercitationca  £xe(/ctic(C,  1712,  pp.  501- 
738,  on  tlie  section  vers.  18-32.  Tlioluck  remarks: 
"Wiiat  the  Apostle  says  of  the  relations  of  the  Gen- 
tile world,  and  afterwards  of  the  Jews,  to  God,  natu- 
rally ii|ii>lics  to  their  univcr.sality,  but  to  individu- 
als oidy  in  a  greater  or  less  degree."  We  add  :  So 
that  a  1  dative  opi)Osition  is  embraced  within  the 
general  j  idgmeut  (see  chap.  ii.  C  ff.). 


EXEGETICAL  AND  CEIXICAL. 

First  Section,  vers.  18-21. 

Ver.  18.  For  God's  wrath  is  reveaJed.    Tho 

(x/roxrtAi'i/'K,-  of  the  o^iyij  &to~',  as  the  revelation 
which  was  liistorically  earlier,  is  contrasted  witii  the 
revelation  of  tlie  rigiiteousness  of  God  from  faith.  It 
is  therewith  intimated  that  that  righteousness  denotea 
grace,  or  justifying  righteousness  ;  but  that  the  OQyn 
&tov  is  an  exercise  of  penal  righteousness  which  pre- 
cedes it.*    The  icraih  of  God,  as  an  emotion  of  God, 

•  [The  wrnth  of  God  is  an  nnthropopathic  but  most 
trufhuil  expression  of  the  punitive  justice  ainl  holiness  of 
God  over-agalnst  sin,  and  iierfectlj'  bannonizes  with  Hts 
love,  which  is  holy,  and  repels  tho  evil  with  the  same  enev> 


CHAPTER   I.    18-32. 


81 


18  His  personal  displeasure  at  sin  as  aaipua,  as 
conscious  transgression,  as"  apostasy,  as  unbelief,  and 
therefore  as  the  limitation  of  His  personal  revelation 
in  the  world.  It  is  a  displeasure  which  is  revealed 
by  such  decrees  of  penal  justice  as  death  and  the 
terrors  of  death,  especially  in  retriVjution  for  ob- 
structions placed  in  the  way  of  the  divine  life  (Exod. 
iv.  14,  24 ;  Ps.  xc.  7,  8),  by  a  decree  of  blindness 
in  retribution  for  the  hinderances  to  His  truth  (the 
present  passages ;  Is.  vi.  10 ;  Rom.  ix. ;  2  Cor.  iii. 
14  ;  Malt.  xiii.  14  ;  John  xii.  40 ;  Acts  xxviii.  26), 
by  the  abandonment  to  the  lusts  of  the  flesh  in 
retribution  for  the  general  resistance  to  His  Spirit 
(Eph.  ii.  3),  and  finally,  by  a  decree  of  reprobation 
and  condemnation  in  retribution  for  the  hinderances 
to  salvation  by  apostasy  and  unbelief  (Matt.  iii.  7  ; 
xxii.  13  ;  John  iii.  36  ;  Rom.  v.  9).  Comp,  my  arti- 
cle, Zorn  Gottes,  in  Herzog's  Realencyklopcedie.  This 
h^yrj  &fov  has  its  anoy.d/.ru'ti;  immediately,  so  far 
as  it  is  declared  to  the  conscience  of  man  as  God's 
decree  from  heaven ;  but  it  becomes  especially  an 
aTToxa/.i'i/'n;  by  the  witness  of  the  law,  and  is  per- 
fected in  the  light  of  the  gospel.  It  is  revealed  in 
a  real  manner  from  heaven,  as  a  message  from  the 
height  of  the  holy,  supernatural  world,  and  from  the 
throne  of  Divine  government.  And  it  is  revealed  in 
an  ideal  way  by  the  light  of  righteousness,  which, 
like  a  flame  of  wrath  from  the  kingdom  of  the  Spirit, 
shines  down  into  the  realm  of  consciously  guilty 
human  life,  and  explains  its  dark  fate.  The  older 
writers  understood  by  o^y/;,  punishment  alone,  tak- 
ing metonymically  the  operation  for  the  cause  [»«ero- 
nymia  caiisce  pro  effectu  =.  y.6).aai<;,  Ti-uM(jia\.  But 
we  must  unite  both.  The  opposite  of  oQytj  is  not 
merely  uyaTrrj  (Tholuck),  but  t/.toi;  (see  my  Positive 
Dogmaiik,  p.  109).  According  to  De  AYette  [and 
Alford],  wrath  is  only  an  anthropopathic  conception 
of  the  righteousness  of  God  in  punishment;  but  by 
this  interpretation  its  procession  an  ovitavov  is  ob- 
literated. The  internal  aTrozaAii/'n,-  of  wrath  in- 
Tolves  its  external  qavfQoian;,  but  it  is  one-sided  to 
confine  it  to  the  punishment  which  God  has  deter- 
mined for  the  heathen  world  (De  Wette),  or  the 
wretched  condition  of  the  world  at  that  time  (KiJll- 
ner),  or  to  the  manifestation  of  the  punishment  in 
the  conscience  (Tholuck),  or  in  the  gospel  (Grotius). 
From  the  beginning,  the  deeds  of  wrath  have  ever 
succeeded  the  d(Tifi!-i,a  in  its  opposition  to  God's 
government  and  revelation.  But  the  complete  dno- 
xa/.i'i/'tt;  thereof  does  not  appear  before  the  New 
Testament  a;roz«/.i'V'tc  of  grace.  The  reason  of 
this  is,  that  the  world's  guilt  reaches  its  climax  in 
the  crucifixion  and  death  of  Christ.  The  dalfifia — 
the  rebellion  of  unbelief  to  the  revelation  of  the 
divine  light  and  life  (chap.  ii.  4,  5  ;  viii.  6,  7) — sums 
up  the  whole  idea  of  sin  which  incurs  the  guilt  of 
God's  wrath.  The  idea  of  the  oftyt'i  itself  is  God's 
abandonment  of  man  to  the  judgment  of  death. 
And  the  idea  of  the  dnoy.d/.(nci,(;  of  this  o^yr]  is  the 
entire  revelation  of  the  judgment  of  God  in  the  cor- 
ruption of  the  world  amid  the  light  of  the  gospel, 

gy  with  which  it  attracts  the  good.  No  man  can  love,  who 
cannot  hate.  "Wrath,  or  hatred,  is  inverted  love.  But 
while  the  wrath  of  man  is  a  passion,  and  destroys  the  siu- 
ner,  God's  wrath  is  a  calm  and  holy  energy,  and  restores 
the  sinner  hy  destroying  sm.  Meyer  in  he. :  '"  Dnr  Zorn  Gol- 
tes  ist  die  Liebe  des  heiligen  Gotles  zu  allem  Gulen  in  Hirer 
tntgtgeng'SttzUn  Encrgie  gegen  altes  Base."  He  quotes  Lac- 
tantius,  De  ira  Dei,  v.  9  :  "  Si  Deus  non  irascilur  impiis 
et  injustis,  ntopios  jtistosque  diligit;  in  rebus  enim  diversis 
aut  in  utriimque  pnrlem  moveri  necesse  est,  aul  in  neulram." 
Comp.  also  Tholuck  on  Matt.  v.  22,  and  Harless  on  Eph.  iii. 
3.-P.  S.] 

6 


for  the  conscience  of  humanity,  especially  the  body 
of  believers.  The  idea  of  the  oi\;or6c;  is  the  heav- 
enly world  in  its  ideal  laws,  which  lie  also  at  the 
foundation  of  the  earthly  world,  and  react  agains/ 
all  abnormal  conduct  with  punishment  and  death 
The  present,  dno/.a).vnrtrcu,  must  be  empliasized , 
it  is  neitlier  merely  a  historical  reference  to  the  mis- 
ery of  the  old  world  (Kidlner,  and  others),  nor  (with 
Chrysostom,  and  others)  a  reference  to  the  future 
day  of  wrath.  It  means,  rather,  a  progi'essive  reve» 
laiion  of  the  judgment  in  opposition  to  which  the 
progressive  revelation  of  the  righteousness  of  salva- 
tion in  the  gospel  acquires  its  perfect  significance 
and  clearness.  The  dn  ol()avoTi  certainly  refers 
chiefly  to  dno/.ah'iTiTirai,,  but  it  is  indirectly  de- 
clared thereby  that  the  oi>yij  Ofov  is  from  heaven, 
although,  as  a  judgment  inmiaiient  in  life  itself,  it 
breaks  forth  from  its  internal  state,  or  is  caused  by 
it.  Special  interpretations  of  the  oijytj :  The  religion 
of  the  Old  Testament  (Bengel) ;  storms  and  natural 
disasters  (Pelagius) ;  external  and  internal  necessi- 
ties of  the  times  (Baumgarten-Crusius). 

Against  all  ungodliness  and  unrighteous- 
ness. The  d(Ttpn,a  [godlessness,  impiety]  is  the 
fundamental  form  of  pergonal  misconduct  toward 
God  ;  but  the  word  is  more  especially  significant  in 
that  it  describes  ungodliness  as  the  absence  of  rever- 
ence for  God.  See  ver.  21.  The  ddr/.la  [unright- 
eousness, iniquity]  is  the  correspondent  fundamental 
form  of  misconduct  toward  God's  law  in  life,  and 
therefore  not  toward  our  neighbor  alone.  Theo- 
phylact,  Tholuck,  and  many  otliers :  Profanitas 
in  Deum,  injuria  in  proximnw.  [So  Hodge  : 
dfFt/jfva,  impiety  toward  God  ;  d()'ixici,  injustice 
toward  men. — P.  S.]  Meyer,  on  the  contrary  :  Irre- 
ligiousness  and  innnorality,  which  is  supported  by 
the  following  description.  ['.//(Tf,9fta  is  the  fount- 
ain of  d()t./.ia,  but  both  act  .".nd  react  upon  each 
other. — P.  S.] — Of  men.  Antithesis  of  oiiyl;  &foi>. 
The  word  signifies,  first,  the  universality  of  guilt ; 
second,  the  weakness  of  man's  enmity  against  Al- 
mighty God. 

Who  hold  back  the  truth.  Description  of 
ythe  obstructions  which,  as  the  wicked  reaction  against 
the  revelation  of  God,  cause  the  reaction  of  Divine 
displeasure  in  the  form  of  the  o^j'ij.  The  tt-nth  is 
tlie  revelation  of  God  in  its  most  general  sense,  as 
the  unity  and  harmony  of  all  the  single  Divine  acts 
of  revelation,  with  a  special  reference  here  to  the 
natural  revelation  of  God  (vers.  19,  20);  although 
the  doctrines  of  the  gospel  (of  which  Ammon  ex. 
plains  d/.t'jOfia)  must  not  be  excluded  from  the  gen- 
eral  idea,  nor  must  the  natural  knowledge  of  God 
be  substituted  for  the  revelation  of  God.  The  xar- 
iyft,v  (to  grasp,  to  hold,  here  with  the  acces- 
sory idea  of  holding  back)  strikingly  denotes  bin- 
derance,  keeping  hack  (Meyer,  improperly,  keeping 
down) ;  as  is  the  case  with  y.ara}.c(fij3drfiv  in  John 
i.  5.*  An  odd  explanation  is  this :  "  Who  possess 
the  truth  with  unrighteousness ;  that  is,  sin  against 
better  knowledge"   (Michaelis,  Koppe,   Banr). — In 

*  ["Wordsworth  in  Joe. :  "  Hrilding,  keeping  down,  the 
truth  in  ungndliness,  as  in  a  prisin-house.  Men  have  in- 
carcerated the  truth,  and  hold  her  a  captive  under  resti-aiiit 
and  durance,  with  the  bars  and  bolts  of  a  depraved  will 
and  vicious  habits,  so  that  she  cannot  go  forth  and  breathe 
the  air  and  see  the  light,  and  do  works  suitable  to  her  own 
nature."  The  passage  implies,  however,  that  man  has  th€ 
remnants  of  the  Divine  image  in  liim,  and  that,  thong' 
fallen  in  Adam,  ho  may  fall  still  deeper  by  obscurincr  a^^" 
suppressing  the  elements  of  truth  in  his  reason  and  c{ct, 
science.  The  reference  to  KaroAaii-Paveiv,  John  i.  oing 
questionable.    But  see  Lange  in  loc. — P.  S.]  ImvI 


82 


XnE    EPISTLE    OF   PAUL    TO   THE   ROMANS. 


unrighteousness.  Not  adverbial  (Reiche,  et  a!.), 
but  iiistiimuMital  (Mcyor).*  The  worJ  must  he  un- 
derstood here  in  llie  wide  sense,  according  to  wliicli 
ail  sin  is  ni)n(la.  See  1  John  iii.  4.  Tiie  sentence 
must  be  understood,  however,  in  its  general  force, 
thougli  with  special  rercrenee  already  to  the  Gen- 
tiles. The  history  of  this  xari/nv  is  the  history  of 
the  kingdom  of  darkness  in  humanity,  wliich  is  con- 
Bummatid  in  the  avTixflan'o^,  2  Thess.  ii.  8  ;  comp. 
especially  also  2  Thess.  i.  8.  According  to  I)e 
Wette,  the  nari/nv  operates  so  a.s  not  to  let  the 
truth  come  to  appearance  and  development.  But  it 
also  so  operates  as  to  pervert  the  individual  elements 
of  the  truth  into  distortions,  errors,  and  strong  de- 
lusions, and  thereby  calls  down  the  wiatli  of  God. 
We  must  observe  how  decidedly  the  Apostle  here 
views  the  a/rKTr/a  ethically  as  ctTTfiOna  ;  and  how 
he  derives  the  errors  of  unbelief  from  unrighteous- 
ness, and  from  misconduct  toward  the  ethical  laws 
of  tiie  inner  life. 

Ver.  19.  Because  that  which  is  known  of 
God.f  The  iiori.  in  ver.  19  may  be  regarded  as 
an  explanation  of  the  statement  in  ver.  18,  with 
special  reference  to  the  holding  back  of  the  truth  of 
God;  the  fViort  in  ver.  21  as  the  explanation  of 
the  preceiling  ai'ct7ro/oy//Tois-  fivat.',  and  the  f)Kj 
in  ver.  24,  as  well  as  the  i)ia  toTto  in  ver.  26,  as 
the  explanation  of  the  revelation  of  God's  wrath. 
Though  the  (Vtori  of  ver.  19  is  not  to  be  regarded 
exactly  the  same  sxa  ydQ,  it  does  not  serve  specially 
as  a  proof  of  the  motive  for  Divine  wrath.  For 
more  particular  information,  see  Thohu^k  and  Mey- 
er.:^ 

The  knowledge  of  God.§  Tholuek  distin- 
guishes tin-ce  meanings  of  ynofrrov  :  1.  That 
which  is  known  of  God  (Itala,  Vulg.,  De  Wette 
[Meyer,  Philippi,  Alford,  Wordsworth.— P.  S.]  ) ; 
2.  what  maji  be  known  (Photitis,  and  many  others ; 
Riickert);  3.  know/edge  [  =  yvoxjK;.  Fritzsche,  Tho- 
luek, Hodge. — P.  S.].  He  shows  that  jtoxttoc,  ac- 
cording to  the  classical  use  of  the  language,  means, 
w/iat  mat/  bi;  knoion  ;  while  yvmro^  means,  what,  in 
known.  But  in  the  Septuagiiit  and  New  Testament 
the  signification,  known,  is  undoubted.  Neverthe- 
less, many  expositors,  from  the  time  of  Origeri  down 
to  the  present  [Theophylact,  O-k-umetuus,  Erasmus, 
Calvin,  Bcza,  Grotius,  Ewald],  have  pronounced  in 
favor  of  the  translation,  wfial  mai/  be  known.  But 
this  signification  does  not  make  good  sense,  since  it 
is  dillicult  to  distinguish  between  what  may,  ami  what 
may  not  be  known  of  God,  and  since  every  thing 
that  may  be  known  of  (Jod  Wiis  l)y  no  means  re- 
vealed at  the  beginning  to  the  nations  (see  Meyer). 
We  understand  wliat  is  known  of  (Jod  concretely  as 
knowledffc  \_Kenntnisx,  yviorrn;],  tio/i/ia  Jii — which 
should  become  true  knowledge  [J'JrkennCniss,  Ini- 
yvwfftv]  by  living  appropriation.    Luther  has  made  the 

*  [Alio  Alforil,  who  justly  remarks  that  the  preprnant 
iv,  "ill  and  hi/."  implies  that  their  aiixia  is  the  iitat\i8 
wherein,  and  the  instrument  whereliy,  they  hold  hack  the 
truth  It  up  in  their  consciences. — P.  S.l 

t  [Ver.-(.  1!),  20,  as  also  vers.  20-2tJ,  nnd  ver.  27  of  this 
chapter,  an-  quoted  hy  Hippolytus,  in  his  reccntlv  discov- 
ered Philiiimphumrnn,  or  Rr/nl.  nmnium  fiiri-in.,  lih.  ix.  c. 
B,  p.  4-14,  ana  v.  7,  p.  140,  ed.  Duncker  nnd  Srhnoldcwin.— 
ti.    P.  S.) 

1         t  (These  two  commentnt^>rs,  however,  differ  in  their  ex- 

,    Dosition  of  SiAti.     See  T(!Xt\Ml  Note  '.     The  Apostle  proves 

ftls  I'rst  that  men  hiil  the  aA^fltio  (I'.t,  20),  and  then  tlint  they 

that     '<i  •!■  h'ich-,  iind  perverted  it  into  a  lie  (21-23),  and  that 

„„„„_, T'foro  (tii)    God's  wrath  cumc   upon  them  (24  ff.). — 

fSo  Dr.  LiinRO  translates  rh  yvitxrriv  to«  tfcoO,  but  I 
>.  leree     See  TcxtUJil  Noi^"  '  —P.  8.' 


untenable  distinction,  that  the  reason  of  man  can  know 
that  God  is,  but  cannot  know  wlio  or  what  He  ia. 
Tholuek  justly  remarks  that  the  Apostle  immediately 
afterward  speaks  of  a  certain  knowledge  of  the  nature 
of  God.  [The  book  of  nature  is  a  7r«tf)fiTf/^<to» 
(yfoyviixTtai;,  as  Basil  ' Hexaemernn,  i.)  calls  it,  a 
school  of  the  general  knowledge  of  God,  and  ther> 
is  no  nation  on  earth  which  is  entirely  destitute  oi 
this  knowledge. — P.  S.] 

Is  manifest  among  them.*  Erasmus,  Grotiu.<^ 
KiiUner,  and  Baumgarten-Crusius,  adopt  this  expla* 
nation. I  On  tlie  contrary,  Tholuek,  Meyer,  and  De 
Wette — with  reference  to  chap.  ii.  15  ;  (ial.  i.  16— 
strongly  advocate  Calvin's  interpretation,  cordibut 
inscul plum .  [So  also  Beza  :  "  In  i/monim  animis, 
quia  hcec  Dei  notitia  rccondita  e.it  in  intiniin  tnentia 
pntetralibux  ;  "  and  Hodge :  "  It  is  not  of  a  mere 
external  revelation  of  whicli  the  Apostle  is  speak- 
ing, but  of  that  evidence  of  the  being  and  perfec- 
tion of  God  which  every  man  has  in  the  constitution 
of  his  own  nature,  and  in  virtue  of  which  he  is  com- 
petent  to  apprehend  the  manifestations  of  God  in 
His  works." — P.  S.]  But  ci/roza/.i'i/af.  stands  in 
Gal.  i.  If) ;  and  in  Rom.  ii.  15,  tiie  question  is  God's 
manifestation  by  conscience,  and  not  by  creation. 
De  Wette  suys :  If  the  knowledge  of  God  had  been 
something  common  among  them,  it  would  not  have 
been  suppressed  {/.ur t/Qntvov).X  But  this  ia 
not  conclusive.  We  could  say  with  more  propriety : 
If  there  had  been  no  general  knowledge  of  God 
among  them,  there  would  have  been  no  conmion 
guilt.  We  must  admit,  however,  tliat  among  Ihem 
presupposes  in  i/wm,  or  the  existence  of  a  knowl- 
edge of  God  in  their  hearts. — God  manifested  it 
to  them.  This  was  not  fii-st  of  all  ano/.d/.rii'i^,  but 
qavi()ii)(n4 — manifestation  through  creation.  An^ 
thus  there  arose  from  individuals  a  manifest  knowl. 
edge  of  God — a  ijarf^or.  The  reference  of  this 
qavtijov  to  the  gnosis  of  the  philosophers  (Erasnnis, 
(irotius)  is  too  contracted.  But  there  was  a  tradition 
of  the  knowledge  of  God  among  men  which  pre- 
ceded  the  development  of  heathenism.  (It  is  hardly 
worth  while  to  mention  the  explanation  of  Luther, 
Koppe,  Flatt,  that  iv  tti'Tott;  is  the  mere  dative.) 
[There  is  a  threefold  revelation  of  God  :  1.  An  in- 
ternal revelation  to  tlie  resison  and  conscience  of 
every  man  (comp.  ii.  15  ;  John  i.  9) ;  2.  an  external 
revelation  in  the  creation,  w^hieii  ])rocl:iiiiis  God's 
power,  wisdom,  and  gooiiness  (Rom.  i.  20) ;  .3.  a 
special  revelation,  tlirough  the  Holy  Scriptures,  and 
in  tlie  person  and  work  of  Christ,  which  eonfirraa 
and  completes  the  other  revelations,  and  exhibits  the 
justice,  holiness,  and  love  of  God.  The  first  two 
are  here  intended. — P.  S.] 

Ver.  2(».  For  his  invisible  attributes  [rot 
rtO(>aTrt  arror].  Explanation  of  the  declara- 
tion: "God  manifested  it  to  them."  Meyer:  '^  That 
mat/  not  be  seen  of  Him  (scin  Unschaubare.i),  the  in- 
visible attriljutes  which  constitute  His  essence,  not 
aclioiies  Dei  invi.nbHr.i.''''  (Theodoret  and  Fritzsche: 
In  relation  to  both  creation  and  providence.)  The 
pictures  of  creation,  however,  are  also  permanent 


•  [So  Ttr.  Ijnnjfo  translates  tv  avrott,  unler  rhnrn, 
amoH^  Ih'in,  instead  of  m  llirm.     8eo  Text.  Note  *. — P.  S.] 

t  (Erismu-i  nnd  Orotius,  with  the  restriction  to  tha 
superior  knowIed(re  of  honthen  philosinihors,  ns  P.vthapo- 
ras,  .Siierntes,  I'lato  ;  others  in  the  sense  that  the  knowledR* 
of  (5od  wan  a  common  revelation,  nccessihle  to  all.  Dr. 
Lnneo  takes  the  latter  view,  as  aiipoors  from  what  follows. 
—P.  S.l 

t  [Precisely  the  snino  remark  Ir  made  by  Alford,  whfl 
often  follows  I'te  Wetto  very  eJo«fllv.— P.  3.1 


CHAPTER  I.    18-82. 


mcfhnes,  and  so  far  providence  is  at  least  indicated. 
[Tlie  cco^ara  is  subsequently  explained  by  dvva- 
fiK:  and  df^orfji;,  and  the  re,  tbllowed  by  r.ai, 
as  Tlioluek  remarks,  does  not  annex  a  new  idea  {and 
also),  but  it  partitions  the  «o^<«Ta  into  the  two  ideas 
of  di'vatii^  and  &fu')Ttj^.  Paul  has  in  view  simply 
Bome  of  the  Divine  attributes,  not  the  whole  Divine 
being  (which  would  rather  require  to  dotiarov);  the 
pagan  knowledge  of  God  is  only  partial  and  frag- 
mentary, though  sufficient  to  leave  those  who  pos- 
sess it  witliout  excuse. — P.  S.] 

From  the  time  of  the  creation  of  the 
world.  Not  "ut  of  the  creation  (Luther,  and  oth- 
ers). This  idea  is  contained  in  rolq  novriu. 
(De  Wette).  Kr/ffic,  moreover,  is  here  equal  to 
xaTafjo/.t'i  (Fritzsche). — Being  understood  by  the 
things  that  are  made.*  An  oxymoron,  Arist., 
J)e  mundo  C.  [vi.]  :  [ndaT]  Ovijtr^  (pvan,  y*j'o,«f»'oc] 
aO-i-DiSJ tjTOi;  dn'  avxiJiv  tmv  iyfrnv  O-i-inQflrcti-  6 
&i6i;.{  Meyer  thus  paraphrases  the  voov/tfva  xaO^o- 
^cirat. :  It  is  beheld  by  being  perceived  with  the  rea- 
son. We  might  ask  :  Should  the  sentence  read,  The 
iuvisiljle  becomes  visible  by  knowledge,  as  the  means  ; 
or,  it  becomes  visible  as  something  known,  percep- 
tible to  the  reason  ?  The  latter  thought  is  prefer- 
able here,  since  it  is  better  adapted  to  the  parti- 
ciple, and  presupposes  the  import  of  the  power,  the 
thought-life  of  man.  Philippi  also  limits  himself  to 
the  middle  form :  "  The  invisible  is  seen ;  an  oxy- 
moron which  is  explained  and  qualified  by  the  ad- 
dition of  rooi'fifva.  It  is  not  seen  by  the  bodily 
eye,  but  by  the  eye  of  the  Spirit,  the  rort-,  the  rea- 
son." Our  view  is  favored  by  the  original  sense  of 
xa&oQciv,  a  conception  which  passes  through  looking 
down  and  looking  over  into  looking  at. — By  the 
things  that  are  made  [by  and  in  {his)  works, 
toli;  noil]  aa(Ti,v^  instrumental  dative. — P.  S.]. 
These  are  therefore  signs  of  the  attributes  of  God. 
Schneck  en  burger  (after  Episcopius,  and  others)  in- 
cludes among  them  the  government  of  God  in  his- 
tory. But  the  conception  of  niysis_,  creature,  is 
against  this  view.  Baumgarten-Crusius,  following 
the  Syriac  and  other  versions,  takes  noi>]iia<Ti,  in 
an  al^lative  sense — bji  the  creature — which  is  quite 
untenable. — His  eternal  poTver  and  divinity. 
[«'('() toe,  from  tiff,  ever-enduring,  eternal,  belongs 
to  both  nouns.  Here  is  the  germ  of  the  physico- 
theological  argument  for  the  existence  of  God,  as  in 
ver.  19  the  ontological  argument  is  intimated. — 
P.  S.]  Here,  as  in  the  Creed  [I  believe  in  God  the 
Father  Almighty],  omnipotence  serves  as  the  repre- 
sentative of  the  attributes  of  God.  Tholuck  :  "  In 
the  contemplation  of  nature,  the  first  thing  which 
strikes  man  with  overpowering  weight  is  the  impres- 
sion of  an  infinite,  supernatural  omnipotence  (Book 
of  Wisdom  xiii.  4).  All  religion  has  its  root  in  the 
feeling  of  dependence  on  supernatural  powers  (?). 
To  the  patriarchs  God  first  revealed  Himself  as 
■^■n'r,  as  the  Almighty  ;  Ex.  vi.  3"  (Gen.  xvii.  1).% 


*  [Lange :  Die  UnschoubnrTcnten  werdrn  alu  Erlcanntea 
av.gi>schnut.    Comp.  Textual  Note  ''. — P.  B.] 

t  [Simil.ar  passages  are  quoted  from  Cicero,  De.  Divin., 
ii.  72  :  "  E.<sr.  p>!esl<int-:m  aliqunm  seteriiamqiK  naturorn 
,  .  ].'xlchr,tud»  mundi  ordnque  rerum  caslestlum  cngit  confi- 
teri;"  and  Qusest.  Tusc,  i.  29:  "  D-'uin  non  v'd'g,  iomcn 
Dum  ngn'isc's  rx  ejus  operibus."  Comp.  also  Bengel  in 
UiC. :  "  Ltci'mparabilc  oxymoron,  Tnvisibilia  Dei,  si  un- 
qwrm,  CfWe  in  creatione  fncta  essent  visibilia :  sed  turn 
quoque  non  nisi  per  intelligentiam  videri  coeperunl." — 
P.  S.] 

t  [Alford  :  "  Eternal,  and  Almiarhty,  have  always  been 
recognized  epithets  of  the  Creator."— P.  S.] 


— And  his  Divinity.  &fi,6ri]q,  from  ^{("oc,  i( 
the  summary  of  the  divinities,  or  divine  excellen* 
cies,  and  must  be  distinguished  from  ^jotiji;,  the 
term  which  denotes  the  Divine  Being  itself.  The 
omnipotence  is  completed  by  the  remaining  Divin* 
attributes,  through  which  it  really  becomes  omnipo- 
tence  in  the  full  ethical  as  well  as  metaphysical 
sense.  It  is  onesided  if  Schneckcnburger  refers  it 
only  to  God's  goodness.  Reiche's  thought  is  better^ 
that  wisdom  and  goodness  are  chiefly  meant. 

So  that  they  are  w^ithout  excuse.  Meyet 
does  not  regard  the  f  I  q  as  expressing  a  consequence 
— as  most  commentators  do  [Vulg.  :  Ita  ut  sirit  in- 
ezcusabiles  ;  Chrysostom,  Luther,  Reiche,  De  Wette, 
Fritzsche,  Tholuck,  Philippi,  Ewald,  Alford,  Words 
worth,  Hodge] — but  a  purpose  (in  harmony  with 
Calvin,  Beza,  and  others)  :  In  order  that  they  may 
be  without  excuse.  But  this  rendering  leads  to  a 
monstrous  view  of  the  purpose  of  the  creation  of 
the  world.  It  is  too  fatalistic  even  for  the  concep- 
tion of  predestination,  which  it  was  once  designed 
to  support.  Meyer  urges  in  its  defence  that  ili;,  in 
the  Epistle  to  the  Romans,  Avhen  used  with  to  and 
the  infinitive,  has  always  a  teleological  sense,  against 
which  [De  Wette  and]  Tholuck  (p.  67)  protest. 
Then  he  insists  that  the  results  must  also  be  deter, 
mined  beforehand.  But  this  would  be  a  kind  of 
predestination  which  is  self-contradictory  :  Predesti- 
nated — to  have  no  excuse ;  that  is,  predestinated 
for  guilt.  The  other  explanation  implies  by  no 
means  a  s»fficientia  religionis  riaiuraUs  ad  salutem, 
but  it  permits  the  possibility  of  another  form  of  the 
course  of  development  from  Adam  to  Christ.  [The 
object  here  is  to  show  man's  guilt,  not  God's  sov- 
ereignty. Comp.  on  tlq  TO  the  Textual  Note  *, 
Hodge :  "  Paul  does  not  here  teach  that  it  is  the 
design  of  God,  in  revealing  Himself  to  men,  to  ren- 
der their  opposition  inexcusable,  but  rather,  since 
this  revelation  has  been  made,  they  have  in  fact  no 
apology  for  their  ignorance  and  neglect  of  God. 
Though  the  revelation  of  God  in  His  works  is  suffi- 
cient to  render  men  inexcusable,  it  does  not  follow 
that  it  is  sufficient  to  lead  men,  blinded  by  sin,  to  a 
saving  knowledge  of  Himself."  Wordsworth  :  "  It 
can  hardly  be  thought  that  the  convicuion,  confu- 
sion, and  condemnation  of  men  was  any  part  of  the 
Divine  plan  in  creation,  although  it  followed  as  a 
conseqvevce  from  it." — P.  S.] 

Yer.  21.  Because,  although  they  knew 
God,  &c.  The  f)toTt  explains  first  of  all  how  far 
they  are  without  excuse  ;  then,  indkectly,  how  their 
guilt  of  holding  back  the  truth  in  unrighteousness 
commenced.  Incorrect  construction  i  cum  cognos- 
cere  potu'ssent  (OEcumonius,  Flatt).*  Meyer  has  no 
ground  for  opposing  the  solution  of  the  participle 
yi'oi'Tf?  into  the  sentence:  allhongh  they  knew 
God  (not,  perceived  Him).  The  contradiction  be- 
tween knowing  God  and  the  designated  neglect  of 
Him  is  obvious  indeed  ;  but  heroin  precisely  consists 
the  inexcusnbleness.  The  ignorance  {ayvoM)  of  the 
Gentile  world,  Eph.  iv.  18,  &c.,  is  improperly  k- 
garded  by  Tholuck  as  an  apparent  contradiction ; 
for  the  Gentile  world  was  not  such  at  the  outset,  and 
its  ignorance  is  the  result  and  punishment  of  its 
great  sin  of  neglect.  They  lost  even  their  imperfect 
knowledge  (ynTjo-ie),  because  they  did  not  raise  !t  to 


♦  [Alford:  "yvovTes,  '  willi  the  knnwledge  above.  sla» 
ted.''  This  participle  testifies  plninly  that  matter  oi  fact, 
and  not  o{  pussiiility,  has  been  the  subject  of  the  forepoinf 
verses.  From  this  point,  we  take  up  what  they  might  Itavt 
done,  but  did  not." — P.  S.] 


84 


THE   EPISTLE   OF  PAUL   TO   THE   ROMANS. 


full  knowledge  {iTiiyvuKTK;)  through  the  labor  of  the 
heart,  [tov  ;!>f6v,  the  one  true  God,  in  oppo- 
Biiion  to  the  false  &toi  whom  the  heathen  wor- 
shipped.—P.  S.] 

They  glorified  him  not  as  God.  According 
to  His  divinity  (John  iv.  24).  They  were  not  want- 
ing in  worship,  but  in  worship  suitable  to  God. 
Melanchtiion  refers  (yoi«^^^v  to  theoretical,  and 
fl/cti>t(TrfTv  to  practical  conduct  toward  God  (as 
recognition  and  reverence);  but  Tholuck  very  justly 
rejects  such  an  interpretation,  and  regards  cJoictiTfiv 
as  the  general  term  for  worship,  and  fv^-  as  the 
special  designation  of  that  species  in  which  the  feel- 
in"-  of  dependence  exhibits  itself  in  the  most  tender 
and  truly  human  way.  In  our  opinion,  the  former 
denotes  "rather  all  worship,  so  tar  as  it  should  be 
preeminently  the  glorification  of  God  ;  the  latter 
denotes  the  same  worship  as  the  grateful  recog- 
nition of  the  Divine  government  for  human  wel- 
fare.* 

But  became  vain  [ t ,11  arm, <!> .9  ?/ ff a v ].  They 
became  idle,  foolish,  in  devising  vanities  (Is.  xliv. 
9),  vain  idols,  fidraia  (Acts  xiv.  15).  [/(aratoT//,-, 
b^n,  va?iitas,  is  a  characteristic  term  for  idol-wor- 
ship; Dent,  xxxii.  21  ;  2  Kings  xvii.  5  ;  Jer.  ii.  5  ; 
Acts  xiv.  15.— P.  S.]  "  As  man,  so  his  God."  The 
axiom  may  also  be  reversed  :  As  his  God,  so  man 
himself  (Ps.  cxv.  8) :  They  that  make  them  are  like 
unto  them.  The  human  mind  is  made  dumb,  wood- 
en, and  stone-like,  by  dumb,  wooden,  and  stone  idols 
(eomp.  Acts  xvii.  29).  But  that  v.anity  began  in  the 
inward  life. — In  their  imaginations  [thoughts, 
reasonings,  specitlations,  rU«^.  oytfT/f  oti,].  Tho- 
luck :  "  We  can  scarcely  coincide  with  the  Vulgate, 
Fritzsche,  Meyer,  and  Fhilippi,  in  translating  ()t,a- 
/oyKT/tot  aiinply  hy  cor/itata.  But  since  the  word 
is  used  usually  malo  xemtu,  and  the  antithesis  is  more 
expressive,  we  may  translate  it,  with  Luther:  'In 
their  imagining;'  Beza:  rationibns  mm.  We  need 
not  thinK  exclusively  of  the  reasonings  and  conclu- 
sions of  the  philosophers  (Philippi)."  Mythology  was 
complete  with  its  growth  of  ideals  and  images  long 
before  philosophy  proper  was  conceived. 

And  their  foolish  heart  -was  darkened. 
The  supposition  that  "foolish"  (affi'' rf roc,)  is 
used  proleptically  in  the  sense  that  their  heart  was 
darkened  so  as  to  lose  its  underst.anding  (De  Wette), 
is  not  only  unnecessary  (Tholuck),  but  altogether 
irrelevant  (Meyer :  "  because  it  destroys  the  cli- 
max ").f  Positive  darkness  was  the  result  of  the 
negative  neglect  of  the  heart  to  regard  the  Divine 
tokens,  and  to  weigh  them  understandingly.  The 
X «()()» a,  the  centre  of  life,  is  lir.st  darkened  ;  then 
the  ()tMvota,  the  developed  thought-life  (Eph.  iv. 
18).  Tholuck  :  In  this  section  the  Apostle  coin- 
cides so  fully  in  word  and  thought  with  the  Book 
of  Wisdom,  chaps,  xiii.-xv.,  that  Nitzsch  regards  it 
"  almost  impossible  "  to  ascribe  perfect  originality  to 
him.  Yet  he  himself  admits  that  the  fundamental 
tliought — the  tracing  of  idolatry  back  to  sin — was 
unknown  to  the  Alexandrine  author,  &c.  (comp. 
5itzsch,  DentKche  Z>:itxchrift,  1850,  p.  387  ;  Bleek, 
Stud,  iind  KrUiken,  185.3,  p.  340). 

♦  [  Ben  gel :  "Gratias  aokre  (tvxap.)  debemus  ob  bene- 
ficia  :  OLOiiiFiCAiiE  (Sotai.)  <ib  ipsas  virtul'S  dhnnai." — 
P.  H.] 

t  [Alford  :  "Thkiu  hkaut  {KopSia  of  the  whole  Inner 
man,  the  sp;it  of  knowledge  ami  fi'ding)  df.imo  poolksh 
(unintclliKCiit,  not  retaining  Ood  m  its  knowledge)  brcame 
DAEK  (lost  tlie  little  lieht  it  had,  and  wandered  blindly  in 
the  mMCB  of  folly)."— P.  8.1 


Secowd  Sectiow,  vers.  22-31.  ' 

Ver.  22.  Professing  themselves  [i.  e.,  while 
not  because,  they  professed  themselves,  (fdaxov 
rn;,  or  pretended]  to  be  vrise.  De  Wette:  "Tliig 
is  referred  by  many,  and  also  by  Tholuck,  to  the 
philosophers  of  ancient  Greece  and  Kome.  BvU 
these  were  above  idolatry,  and,  besides,  were  later 
than  the  origin  of  idolatry,"  &c.*  The  latter  re- 
mark  requires  special  attention.  The  question  her« 
is  concerning  the  very  ancient  origin  of  heathen, 
dom,  as  cliaracterized  by  the  far-fetched  ingenuities 
of  symbolical  mythicism.  Nor  could  Paul  have  had 
in  thought  merely  the  pride  of  Grecian  wisdom. 
But  in  contemplating  it,  he  could  also  judge  con- 
cerning the  origin  of  heathenism.  Comp.  1  Cor.  i. 
19-26;  iii.  19.  Calvin:  ^^ Neque  enini  id  propria 
in  philosophos  competit,  etc.,  sed  ceque  commune  est 
gentium  ordinumque  omnium.  Nemo  enim  fuit, 
qui  non  voluerit  Dei  inajentaiem  sub  captum  auum 
includerc,  ac  talem  Deum  favere,  quahni  percipere 
poxsei  suopte  sensu.^^ — ^They  became  fools.  Not, 
they  have  by  this  means  shown  themselves  to  be 
fools  (Kollner),  which  weakens  the  thought.  [Their 
folly  was  in  proportion  to  their  boast  of  wisdom. 
There  can  be  no  greater  folly  than  to  worship  a  beast 
rather  than  God.  Wordsworth  in  loc. :  "  Intelli- 
gence is  no  safeguard  .igainst  superstition.  Knowl- 
edge  puifeth  up  (1  Cor.  viii.  1).  It  often  engenders 
pride,  and  pride  is  punished  by  God  with  spiritual 
blindness,  which  is  the  mother  of  idolatry." — P.  S.] 

Ver.  23.  And  exchanged,  &c.  They  have 
abandoned  the  real  doia  [  nin7  ni'S  ] — the  eon- 
templation  of  God's  glory — which  was  commimi- 
cated  to  them  through  the  spiritual  contemplation 
of  the  creation,  which  was  manifested  to  the  Israel- 
ites in  the  Shekinah  in  the  exalted  moments  of  vis- 
ion, and  which  was  finally  connnunicatcd  to  Chris- 
tians in  the  I'ighteousness  of  Christ  for  faith.  They 
exchanged  this  glory  for  their  religious  images — 
that  is,  for  vanity,  folly,  and  darkness.  "  The  iv 
cannot  be  taken  "for  hi;  (Reiche  [E.  V.] ),  but  ia 
instrumental "  (Meyer).  It  denotes  the  external  ele- 
ment of  their  exchange.  [The  verb  d/./.drrnnv, 
when  it  means  to  exchange,  ia  usually  construed  with 
ri  TH'ov  or  dvri  th'oc,  permutare  rem  per  rem  or 
re,  but  in  the  LXX.  with  iv,  after  the  Hebrew 
3  "i^^n,  as  in  Ps.  cvi.  20:  jjA^.MirtrTO  T/;r  i)6iav 
ai'Tior  iv  o/iono/iaTi'  fi6(T/or,  x.t.A.  Tiioluck  quotes 
also  S>ophocles,  Antig.,  ver.  93(i,  for  tiie  same  con- 
struction. The  contrast  of  civ  .•>«(<  TO  I' and  <//>«/)- 
ToTi  sets  forth  the  folly  of  such  an  exchange. — P.b.] 
Grotius :  ofioimfici  tly.ovoi;,  Jigura,  qua:  apparet  in 
simulacro.  Meyer  (piotcs  Rev.  ix.  7  in  favor  of  this 
view.  But  the  expression  seems  to  indicate  that  the 
worship  of  images  proceeded  from  an  arbitrary,  self- 
created  symbolism.  They  believed  that  they  wisely 
expressed  and  maintained  the  iiu'ici  of  God  in  the 
symljol  or  likeness  of  a  human  image.  For  this 
purpose  they  naturally  made  use  of  the  image  of  the 
external  and  therefore  perishable  form  of  man.  This 
was  specially  the  case  among  the  Greeks.  There 
were  also  the  Egyptian  images  of  beasts :  of  birds 

♦  [In  like  manner,  Meyer  and  Alford  refer  the  wordi 
not  so  much  to  the  schools  of  philosophv,  as  to  the  assump- 
tion of  wisdom  l«y  the  Oreeks  in  poneralO  Cor.  i.  21),  which 
is  alwavs  connected  with  an  ulieniition  from  the  truth  of 
Ood.  Tholuck,  also,  in  his  /{flh  edition,  refers  the  pHssagt 
exi)res8ly  to  the  whole  civilized  heathen  world  which  looked 
down  upon  the  rest  of  mankind  us  outside  borbarinns  (i.  14). 
—P.  8.] 


CHAPTER   I.    18-32. 


85 


—the  bird  Ibis  ;  of  four-footed  beasts — the  Apis, 
the  dog  and  the  cat ;  and  of  c  eeping  things — 
the  crocodile  and  the  serpent.  Tholiuk  :  The  Egyp- 
tian worship  was  at  that  time  domesticated  at 
Rome  ;  *  and  the  expression  of  Paul  relates  as  well 
to  the  adoration  of  the  symbol,  generally  practised 
ty  the  cultivated  classes,  as  to  the  adoration  of  the 
image  itself,  as  a  real  idol,  which  prevailed  among 
the  great  masses  (see  Tholuck).  [The  common  peo- 
ple saw  in  the  idols  the  gods  themselves,  the  culti- 
vated heathen,  symbolical  representations,  or,  at 
best,  only  the  organs  through  which  the  gods  oper- 
ated. A  similar  difference  of  a  gross  and  a  more 
refined  superstition  is  found  in  the  Roman  Catholic 
Church  with  regard  to  the  images  of  saints.  The 
Scriptures  make  no  account  of  this  distinction,  and 
denounce  all  image-worshippers  as  idolaters. — P.  S.] 
The  Apostle  traces  the  downward  tendency  of  hea- 
thendom, by  passing,  first,  from  the  likeness  to  the 
image,  and,  second,  from  the  image  of  man  to  the 
images  of  creeping  animals.  [Wordsworth  :  "  xal 
—rxai — y.ai — observe  this  repetition,  marking  suc- 
cessive stages  of  their  moral  and  intellectual  degra- 
dation :  ending  in  the  transmutation  of  the  living 
God  of  heaven  into  the  likeness  of  unclean  reptiles 
crawling  upon  the  earth  !  " — P.  S.] 

Ver.  24.  Wherefore  God  also  gave  them 
up  to  uncleanness.  The  Apostle  evidently  distin- 
guishes two  degrees  of  this  abandonment ;  ver.  24 
and  ver.  26.  As  the  unnatural  sins  of  lust  are  not 
mentioned  before  ver.  26,  so  may  we  understand 
vei\  24  as  referring  to  the  natural  forms  of  sensual- 
ity. But  lewdness  is  the  sin  common  to  both  de- 
grees of  corruption.  That  the  Apostle  should  re- 
gard sins  of  lust  as  the  immediate  result  of  religious 
apostasy,  rests :  1.  On  the  Hebrew  idea  of  whore- 
dom, .according  to  which  religious  whoredom — that 
is,  idolatry — leads  to  moral  whoredom  as  its  most 
immediate  result  (Num.  xxv.  ;  Ezek.  xxiii.) ;  just 
as,  reversely,  moral  unchasiity  leads  to  religious 
lewdness  (Solomon,  Henry  IV.  [of  France] ).  The 
heathen  forms  of  worship  are  therefore  connected  in 
various  ways  with  the  practice  of  lust,  or  they  are 
even  the  worship  of  lust.  2.  On  the  ethical  law, 
that  moral  principles  stand  in  reciprocal  connection 
with  religious  principles.  The  image  of  corruptible 
man  is  an  image  of  the  natural  man,  who,  like  Jupi- 
ter, indulges  in  love  intrigues.  The  image  of  the 
bull  likewise  indicates  the  deification  of  the  genera- 
tive power  of  nature. 

Wherefore  God  gave  them  up  [;ra^£fV(.)- 
xfv,  delivered  theiit  ocer\  The  abandonment  must 
not  be- regarded,  with  the  Greek  expositors  [since 
Origen],  as  a  mere  permission  ■)■  {(Ti'y/(f')(ti-aii: — see 
Chrysostom's  remarks,  quoted  by  Tholuck  [who  dis- 
sents Jrom  him]  ),  nor,  on  the  other  hand,  as  refer- 
ring to  a  Divine  predestination  of  abandonment  to 
the  judgment  of  condemnation.  (Tholuck,  the  edi- 
tor of  Calvin's  Commentaries,  calls  this  the  Calvin- 
istic  view,  according  to  which  God  is  the  effective 
author  of  sin ; — but  this  he  could  certainly  not  prove 


*  [Tholuck  quotes  froiri  Lucan  (Phars.  viii.  83) : 
N'lS  in  temp!a  tuam  Jinmana  recipimus  Isim 
Seinideiisque  canes. —  P.  S.] 

t  [jrope'StoKe  =  eiaire  (Chrysostom),  or  =  avvexiapyiire 
(Theodoret).  This  interpretation  of  the  Greek  fathers  was 
followed  by  the  rationalists,  and  is  contrary  to  the  mean- 
ing of  the  word  (see  Meyer).  It  explains  "nothing,  for  if 
God  permits  the  sinner  to  sink  deeper  into  vice,  He  doen  it, 
of  course,  with  wise  intention  as  a  sovereign  and  righteous 
Judge.— P.  S.] 


from  Calvin's  exposition  of  the  present  passage. 
The  abandonment  is  rather  the  first  stage  in  the  ex 
ercise  of  pimitive  authority  (see  my  Positive  Dog 
inalicx,  p.  4G8).  God  executed  this  punishment  o» 
a  grand  scale  in  the  origin  and  growth  of  heathen- 
dom.  He  allowed  the  Gentiles  to  walk  in  their  own 
ways  (Acts  xiv.  16  ;  Ps.  Ixxxi.  lo  ;  cxlvii.  20).  The 
perinittere  in  this  punishment  becomes  an  cjffec  eve 
operation  by  God's  withdiawal  of  His  Spirit ;  which 
measure  His  holiness  requires.*  Paul  has  already 
said  that  this  withdrawal  is  retributive  ;  but  he  now 
makes  it  especially  prontinent :  in  the  lusts  of 
their  hearts,  tv  rai(;  tnuO  I'/i  lait;,  &.c.  The 
IV  must  not  be  understood  as  instrumental  [6//  or 
ihrouijh]  (Erasmus  [E.  V.],  and  others),  nor  like  d(i 
(Piscat.,  Estius,  and  others)  [but  signifies  the  ele- 
ment or  moral  condition  in  wliich  they  were  already 
when  God,  by  a  judicial  act,  delivered  them  over  to 
a  still  worse  condition. — P.  S.].  The  negative  puni- 
tive judgment  becomes  positive  in  this,  that  they 
can  no  longer  control  the  lusts  of  their  heart  after 
God's  Spirit  is  withdrawn  from  them.  It  is  in  har- 
mony with  God's  righteousness  tl.at  sin  should  be 
punished  by  sin. — To  uncleanness.  The  sins  of 
thought  and  heart  became  sins  of  deed.  The  ex- 
pression Jilth'mess  ( Unjidtherei,  Meyer)  seems  too 
strong  lor  the  beginning  of  the  development  of  un- 
tleanness.  In  Gal.  v.  19  (to  which  Meyer  refers), 
the  description  passes  from  the  grosser  to  the  more 
subtle  forms. 

So  that  their  bodies  were  dishonored.  De 
Wette  and  Tholuck  [Meyer,  Alford,  «/.]  maintain 
that  atifid'CtaOai,  does  not  occur  in  the  middle 
(Erasmus,  Luther  [E.  V.]  ),  but  only  in  the  pa.ssive 
voice.  The  bodies  were  already  dishonored  by  natu- 
ral lewdness,  by  which  they  lost  their  dignity  aa 
temples  of  God,  and  were  degraded  into  instrnnienta 
of  sensual  lust  (and  not  merely  "  woman  ;  "  Tho- 
luck). See  1  Cor.  vi.  16. — Between  themselves. 
Three  explanations  :  1.  The  iv  is  instrumental  (Theo- 
phylact,  Kollner).  Then  the  moral  subject  is  want- 
ing. 2.  The  iv  alroio,  has  a  reciprocal  signification 
equal  to  iv  al'/.ij'/.oii;,  reciprocal,! y  (Erasmus,  De 
Wette,  Tholuck,  and  others).  Meyer :  One  dishon- 
ors the  oth.er.  This  construction  is  favored  by  the 
reciprocal  sexual  intercourse  which  disappears  in  the 
uimatural  lewdness  described  in  ver.  26.  8.  Re- 
flexive (Vulgate,  Luther,  Calvin,  and  others).  Tho- 
luck remarks  on  this,  that  to  ihemsdves  does  not  give 
clear  sense.  Comp.,  on  the  contrary,  1  Cor.  vi.  16. 
We  may  adopt  the  second  explanation,  and  yet  the 
third  need  not  be  given  up — namely,  that  in  natural 
lewdness  not  oidy  does  one  dishonor  the  other,  but 
each  dishonors  himself. 

Ver.  25.  They  who  exchanged  the  truth  of 
God.     According  to  Meyer  and  Tholuck,  Paul  re- 


*  [Calov  :  "  Traditi  sunt  a  I>ro  nnn  effective,  nee  solum 
PKRMissiVE,  »fc /an/Mm  ex/SaTKcis,  S' d  St/cacTiKw?  e( 
judicialUer."  So  Tholuck,  Philippi,  Alford  ("not  inert 'y 
permissive,  but  judicial").  Meyer,  stioiiger  :  "  jrapc^wice 
expresses  the  reo/  active  (ibandimm'tit  (die  wiikliche  uci^iie 
Pieisgehung)  on  the  part  of  God."  Both  the  Bible  and 
daily  experience  teach  that  sin  is  punished  by  sin,  as  virtue 
is  rewarded  by  virtue  ;  and  this  is  a  Divinelv  instituted  law 
in  perfect  hannony  with  our  personal  freedom  and  moral 
accountability  ;  for  man's  will  is  in  every  act  of  sin  as  well 
as  of  obedience,  and  1  ence  what  is  represented  in  one  pas- 
sage as  the  woik  of  God,  is  in  another  passage  just  as  prop- 
erly repiesentcd  as  the  work  of  man,  comp.  Eph.  iv.  19: 
otTii'€s  iavTotx:  napiBiaKav  TQ  aa^Kytia,  k.t.X..  God  liardened 
Pharaoh's  heart,  Exod.  vii".  13  ;  ix.  12  ;  x.  1,  20,  27  ;  xi.  10 ; 
Rom.  ix.  18,  but  Pharaoh  first  hardened  his  own  heart, 
Exod.  viii.  15,  32  ;  ix.  34,  35,  so  that  God  i>unished  him  bj 
his  own  ein.    Comp.  Doctrinal  and  Elkical  Ko.  •. — P.  B.l 


S6 


THE   EPISTLE   OF   PAUL   TO   THE   P.OMANS. 


turns  expressly  to  the  cause  of  the  abandonment. 
But  by  this  they  overlook  the  definite  pro^i-ess  of 
thought — namely,  the  argument  for  the  abandon- 
ment of  the  second  degree  which  i'ollows  in  ver  26. 
As  a  punishment  of  the  heathen  (or  squandering  the 
ioia  of  God  for  the  paltry  sum  of  images,  their  own 
bodies  have  lost  their  doia.  But  they  are  further 
chaifjed  with  bartering  the  truth  of  God  for  the  lie 
of  idolatry,  since  they  have  served  the  creature  naiia 
Tov  KTiaavTa.  Therefore  God  gave  them  up  to  a  lie 
of  sexu<d  lust,  to  a  lust  7r«^«  (/ifrnv.  It  is  from  this 
parallel,  which  the  commentators  have  overlooked, 
that  exact  exegetical  definitions  on  this  passage 
arise. — They  who  exchanged,  Oi'ru'fs',  Qidppe 
qui.  The  expression  denotes  them  as  the  same,  l)ut 
characterizes  them  more  fully.  The  sense  is,  they 
excUan'ii- 1  for  {sic  tauschien  uin\  /itt/jU.aiav,  which 
is  not  merely  "  more  emphatic  "  (Meyer)  than  ipj.a- 
iav.  It  includes,  with  the  exchange,  a  very  strong 
conception  of  change,  of  variation. — The  truth  of 
God.  Explanations  :  1.  The  truth  revealed  to  the 
Gentiles  (Camerarius,  Reiche,  and  others).  2.  O-tao 
is  geni'.  object.  ;  therefore  the  true  knowledge  of 
God  (Piscat.,  Usteri.  [Alford :  the  true  notion  of 
Him  as  the  Creator]).  3.  OfoT  is  gmit.  subject.; 
the  truth  or  reality  of  God,  the  true  Divine  essence, 
according  to  the  analogy  t/jv  doiav  roT'  OtoT'  (Tho- 
luck,  Meyer).  Tholuck  (with  Theophylact,  Luther, 
and  others)  takes  it  exactly  as  u/.tjOn'ot;  Otoi;  [and 
^<tT'i)o4  l^or  01  xpn'()Hq  i>fot'.  So  also  Hodge  :  a  peri- 
phrase  for  the  true  God — P.  S.].  The  i)6ia  of  God 
is  God's  revelation  in  glory,  and  so  is  God's  trutii 
the  (fuvt(j(t><Ti.i;  (see  ver.  19)  of  his  essential  truth  in 
the  truthful  relations  of  creation.  The  name  of  God 
is  the  revelation  of  His  nature  ;  not  His  nature  in 
and  of  itself.  But  this  revelation  divides  itself  into 
the  f)oict  when  we  have  in  view  the  whole  majesty 
of  His  name,  and  into  the  a/./jfl-fta  when  we  look  at 
the  real  harmony  of  its  antitheses.  Tliey  have  for- 
saken the  general  manifestation  of  this  truth  of  God. 
They  have,  indeed,  utterly  S(iuandered  it  for  the 
gain  of  a  mere  lie — for  the  lying  idols.  [v^rtJo,-  = 
"'P.^! ,  is  used  emphatically  for  idols  in  the  Scrip- 
tures;  Jer.  xiii.  25;  xvi.  19;  Isa.  xxviii.  15;  xliv. 
20 ;  because  the  heathen  gods  do  not  even  exist, 
and  yet  they  are  worshipped  in  the  place  of  the  only 
true  God,  who  is  the  Cause  of  all  existence,  and  the 
Author  of  all  truth. — P.  S.]  Idols  are  lies  not  sim- 
ply as  (lii  iiiiaf/inarii  (Grotius).  They  are  embodied 
lies.  Man  must  make  them,  and  they  preteml  to 
represent  Him  who  made  man  (Isa.  xl.  19,  20). 
They  have  mouths,  but  they  speak  not ;  eyes  have 
they,  but  they  see  not  (Ps.  cxv.  5;  cxxxv.  16;  Wi-*- 
dom  XV.  15).  The  worship|)er  of  idols  has  a  dark 
consciousness  of  this  contradiction.  p]ven  his  wor- 
ship is  mendacious.  Tholuck  quotes  Philo,  De  Vita 
JIosU,  i.  3  [where  it  is  siid  of  the  Israelites  who  had 
made  the  golden  calf],  Moses  wondcreil  onnv  \ft7i)(ii; 
ciyO-  oTc;s  fO.tji^fiu^  hnrf/.'/.di'xvTo.  Coiii[).  also  Isa. 
xliv.  20;  Jer.  iii.  lO;  xiii.  25;  xvi.  19. — And  \iror. 
shipped.  ^ffJd'^ofini,  [only  once  in  the  X.  T.]  do- 
notes  religious  reverence  in  general  ;  /.mt^ui'oj  de- 
notes worship  [with  sacrifice,  and  other  acts  and 
rites].  The  conception  of  the  (Tt,-}.  pxsses  from  fear 
and  reverence  to  worship.  Of  kindred  but  not  of 
identical  character  is  the  distinction  (jf  Tlieo|)hylact, 
and  otheis  :  internal  and  external  worship. — The 
creature  rather  than  the  Creator,  [xt inn, 
anif  created  biituj  or  tliinri,  belongs  to  both  verbs, 
but  is  cfjiiformed  to  ).aT(in''f)  as  the  nearest,  while 
0tfiu'^o/tai,   would    require   the   accusative. — P.  S.] 


The  71  a  (J  ct  tov  xriaavza  has  been  interpreted 
in  three  ways :  1.  More  than  the  Creator  [in  the 
relative  sense],  (Vulgate,  Erasmus,  Luther  [E.  V., 
Grotius],  and  others) ;  2.  against  the  Creator  [co;*- 
tra  creutorem  ;  comp.  ncitici  (f:t'><Ti,v,  ver.  26],  (Ham- 
mond,  Fritzsche,  and  others) ;  3.  In  the  sense  of 
comparison  [and  exclusion],  prce  creatori,  pruterito, 
or  relicto  creafore  illilariiis,  Theophylact,  Beza,  Tho 
luck,  Meyer  [Olshausen,  De  Wette,  Philippi,  Alford, 
Wordsworth,  Hodge],  and  others).  The  third  ex- 
planation is  correct  in  the  sense  that  it  includes  the 
second :  Piussing  by  one  with  the  disregard  and 
rejection  of  the  same  (see  Luke  xviii.  14).  The 
na(jd  qvmv  in  ver.  26  perfectly  corresponds  to  this 
rendering.  In  both  cases,  the  statement  must  not 
be  understood  absolutely ;  otherwise  heathendom 
would  have  been  the  negation  of  ail  religion,  and 
unnatural  lust  the  negation  of  all  propagation  of  the 
human  race.  It  denotes  the  outbreaking  sovereignty 
of  a  religious  vice,  which  is  conqjleted  in  a  sensual 
one.  [Wordsworth  derives  from  this  text  an  argu- 
ment against  the  Arians,  who  assert  Christ  to  be 
a  creature,  and  yet  profess  to  worshij«  Him  ;  and 
against  those  who  pay  religious  worship  to  any  crea- 
ture, since  no  one  is  to  be  worshipped,  according  to 
the  Scrijjtures,  who  is  not  God  by  nature,  an<l  since 
there  is  no  middle  between  Creator  and  creature. — 
P.  S.  J 

Who  is  blessed  forever.  Tholuck  :  "  The 
doxology  is  added  to  the  name  of  God  by  Jews  and 
Mohammedans  when  they  must  state  something  that 
is  unworthy  of  Him,  as  though  the  writer  would  re- 
move all  suspicion  of  any  share  in  the  statement," 
&c.  It  is  more  natural  to  seek  the  explanation  of 
this  custom  in  the  indignation  of  rehgious  feeling, 
and  in  its  confidence  that  God  is  exalted  above  the 
profanation  of  His  name.*  Tholuck  informs  us  that 
an  Arabian  writer  added,  after  every  heresy  which 
he  mentioned  :  "  God  is  exalted  above  all  that  they 
say  !  "  The  Apostle's  expression,  at  all  events,  nmst 
not  be  regarded  as  a  mere  form,  but  as  candid 
emotion  (Meyer) ;  which  yet  does  not  exclude  the 
thought  indicated  above  (Clirysostom,  Grotius). — 
fvloytjTot;,  Tp"'3  .f  Who  is  blessed,  with 
reference  to  all  future  eternity,  is  likewise  an  ex- 
pression of  the  confident  expectation  that  he  sltall 
be  blenned  (Meyer  therefore  rejects,  without  good 
reason,  the  explanation  of  Fritzsche  :  irlibminli/s). 

Ver.  26.  For  this  cause  God  gave  them 
up.  The  (K«  toTto  refers  specifically  to  ver.  25, 
and  takes  its  place  with  the  i)i6  of  ver.  24  and  the 
()i6tl  of  ver.  21  as  a  subdivision  under  ver.  18. 

Unto  shameful  passions.  The  druiiu  was 
already  in  ver.  24,  but  now  it  becomes  a  passion. 
Meyer:  ndOti  dn./!..  genit.  qiial.  Since  wlioredota 
is  also  a  shameful  pa.ssion,  the  substantive  must  be 
retained :   Passions  of  the  shameful  and  degraded 

*  [So  also  Meyer  (Erffuitt  drr  errnjlcn  Pietut),  Alfortf, 
iind  DthiTS.  Tlie  doxoloifV  i->  the  natural  outliui-st  of  ;i  lioiy 
iniliimation  whicli  ])ut«  the  sin  of  idolutry  in  n  mom  striking 
li^rht  and  hoUlx  it  up  lo  (he  abhorrence  of  all  ]iona  miiui:!. 
t'omp.  similiir  tloNoluuics  ix.  .5  ;  1  Tim.  i.  17  ;  2  Tim.  iv.  IS; 
comp.  (k'H.  Ix.  2(i ;  xiv.  20  ;  x.xiv.  27.— P.  S.] 

t  jit  is  in  tho  Uihio  only  Mpplied  to  God,  while  fuutaptot 
and  the  corrcspondiiii;  Ilclircw  ""TH'X,  happy,  is  apjilicd  lo 
iii'in,  very  rarely  to  God  (only  in  two  pnssiiROS  of  the  N.  T., 
1  'I'ini.  i.'  II  ;  v"i.  l.i).  The  "E.  V.  renders  e0Ao>i|TO9  (and 
tvKoyr\ij.ivo^ ,  ahviiys  iiiul  properly  blisteil,  hut  vanes  in  ltd 
Ir.unliitirtu  of  fiaitapio?  lietween  /i"W'.'/  "I>''  blessed:  Using 
the  latter  in  those  piissiiKO-i  where  sitiriliml  haiipiucs>  er  the 
future  ulory  of  Siiints  or  the  blessedness  of  God  is  iDtt-nded, 
as  I's.  i.  1  ;  xxxi  .  I  ;  l.iiko  I.  48;  Matt.  v.  3-11;  1  Tun.  i 
11 ;  vi.  15  ;  Titus  u.  13.-1'.  S.j 


CHAPTER  I.    18-32. 


SI 


condition.  There  was  first  a  departure  from  honor 
to  simple  dishonor ;  then  still  further  downward,  to 
a  passionate  course  of  dishonor,  which  might  almost 
be  described  as  passion  for  vileness.  The  unnatural 
sins  of  lust  rest  upon  unnatural  passions,  and  these 
spring  from  the  root  of  the  unnatural,  lying  deifica- 
tion of  creatures  and  images.  Man  is  for  God  in  a 
religious  sense,  as  the  man  and  woman  are  for  each 
otlier  in  a  moral  point  of  view :  this  is  the  natural 
condition,  the  truth  of  the  relations  (Eph.  v.  25). 
Therefore  the  perversion  of  nature,  unnaturalness, 
or  the  lie  of  the  service  of  the  creature  and  of  the 
idols,  is  punished  by  the  perversion  of  nature,  un- 
naturalness, or  the  lie  of  sexual  gratification.  Tho- 
luck  praises  the  modest  reticence  of  the  Apostle  in 
the  expression,  although  his  expi-ession  is  clear 
enough.  He  also  says  :  "  The  self-degradation  and 
eelf-condemnation  of  man  appears  most  strikingly 
in  tlie  peculiarly  (?)  Grecian  sin  of  pederasty  {aotif- 
voxoirai,  1  Cor.  vi.  9),  which,  at  the  time  when  Paul 
wrote,  was  largely  practised  also  in  Rome.  After 
Xenophon,  De  Lacedcem.  Repvbl.^  ii.  14,  has  men- 
tioned that  this  vice  was  forbidden  by  Lycurgus,  he 
adds,  that  this  is  not  beheved  by  some,  iv  noy./.ai^ 
ya^  r(7)v  no/.fov  ot  vofioi'  ovx  ivavnovvtai,  xaTs' 
n()6i;  roix;  naldai;  t.jn&t'fiia.i.c.  Even  the  most  dis- 
tinguished men  have  incurred  grave  suspicions  in 
this  matter,  some  justly,  others  unjustly.  Comp. 
Gessner,  De  pcederastia  Socratis  in  vet.  dixs.  Got  . 
ii.  p.  125.  Seneca,  a  contemporary  of  Paul,  writes 
in  Rome,  £p.  35 :  Transeo  putrorum  iufericii/nt 
greges,  quos  post  transacta  convivia  alice  cuhiadi 
contuwelice  exxpeciant ;  transeo  ogmiiia  exGletoruin 
per  nationes  coloresque  descripta.  The  most  hide- 
ous and  yet  the  most  accurate  picture  of  Roman 
licentiousness  at  that  time,  is  given  by  Petronius,  a 
contemporary  of  the  Apostle.  Even  women  (called 
trihades)  committed  the  same  outrage,  which  was 
called  by  a  smoother  term  after  a  famous  predeces- 
sor in  the  crime,  "  Sapphic  Love."  [Seneca  writes, 
Ep.  95  :  "  Libidine  vera  ne  maribus  quideni  cedunt, 
pati  natcB  ;  dii  illas  de(zque  male  perdant,  adeo  per- 
vei'sum  coDimeiitce  genus  impudicitce  viros  ineunt."^* 
For  even  their  'nromen.  &  rj/.n,ai,  and 
aQO fvf<;,  instead  of  yivai/.ii;  and  arcJ^fc,  on  ac- 
count of  the  sexual  reference.  Reiche  says  errone- 
ously :  In  a  contemptuous  sense,  for  description  of 
the  bestial.  The  expression  /^^at?  is  euphemis- 
tic for  us  us  venereus,  and  therefore  we  must  not  sup- 
ply Tov  c(ij(Tfvoq,  or  T/'c;  0  tjhiac  (P^ritzsche).  Tlio- 
luck  explains  thus :  The  Apostle  places  the  female 
sex  first,  because  the  abomination  of  the  crime  is 
most  horril)le  in  that  sex,  whose  noblest  ornament'  is 
modesty  (1  Tim.  ii.  9)  [similarly  Hodge],     It  may 

*  [Comp.  the  fearful  and  yet  trnthfal  description  of  the 
horrible  vice  of  TratSepooria  among  the  highly  civiiized 
Greeks,  in  Bollinger's  learned  work  :  H'-identhum  und 
Jud'iilhum,  1S57,  p.  684  £f.  "  BeA  den  Griechen,"  he  says, 
"  tritl  das  Luster  der  Pdderastie  mit  alien  Symptomen  einer 
grossen  nulionahn  Krnnklieit,  gleichsam  emfS  ethischen  Mi- 
asma auf ;  es  z-igt  sick  nls  e.in  GJuhl,  das  sldrl-rr  und  hef- 
tigi  f  wirkti',  ah  die  Weibirlietjn  6'  i  andiren  Volkcru,  mass- 
loser,  leideiischa/tlicker  in  seinen  Ausbruchen  war.  liasende 
Eifersucht,  unhidingle.  Hingehung,  siniiliche  G'ulh,  zdrlliclie 
Tdfielri,  ndclithclns  Wr.ihn  vor  der  TIture  dig  G'!i(bten, 
Alles,  U)i'S  zur  Caniclur  der  nalurlich>n  Geschlichsliebe 
gehoit,  fiitdi't  sich  dahci.  Auch  die  e.msles/en  JUoralisten 
waren  in  der  Bturlheilung  d>:s  Verhdltnisges  ho^hst  nach- 
tichUg.  m.ltinter  Trnhr  als  nachsichtig,  sit  behandeiU'n  die 
Sachr  hdufig  mehr  mil  lichlfertigrm  Schcrze,  und  duldeten 
die  Schuldigeii  in  i/irer  GeseUschii/t.  Jn  der  gauze n  Lile.ra- 
tur  der  vorckristlichen  Periods  isl  kaum  cin  Schriftstelhr 
gu  finden,  der  sich  evschieden  dagigcn  erkldrl  lidUe,  Viel- 
mehr  war  die  ganze  GescUschaft  dnvon  angesteckl,  tind  man 
athmeie  dot  Miasma,  so  su  sagen,  mit  der  Lufl  ein." — P.  S.] 


be  observed,  on  the  contrary,  that  the  Apostle  hera 
generally  passes  from  the  less  to  the  more  abomina 
ble  crime.  He  probably  alludes,  in  ver.  26  (as  Tho« 
luck  remarks),  to  the  debauchery  of  the  tribudet 
{/riclrices,  " the  Lesbian  vice,"  /f ff,-jial'f n),  where 
women  commit  abuses  with  women,  but  perliaps  he 
included  the  more  secret  sin  of  onanism.  This  ap- 
pears from  the  antithesis  in  ver.  27  :  Men  icit/i  men. 
This  sin  is  referred  in  a  two-fold  way  to  the  deifica- 
lion  of  the  creature  :  by  /(fT/j/./.a^ai-  and  by  na^a 

Ver.  27.   And  likevrise  also  the  men.     The 

construction  indicates  that  the  unnatural  burning 
{t/./.ah<T Oai,  =  no(JoT<T{}ai,,  1  Cor.  vii.  9)  was  in. 
flamed  by  unnatural  excitement  in  the  shamelul  act 
itself.  The  y.aTi()yau6,ufvoi'  means  the  com- 
plete  perpetration  of  the  abomination.* — Receiv- 
ing in  themselves  the  due  reward  of  their 
error.  According  to  Ammon  and  otiiers,  the  de- 
structive consequences  of  lust.  According  to  Tho- 
luck,  the  self-degradation.  According  to  Meyer,  the 
designated  lusts  themselves,  as  the  punishment  for 
the  nXcivtj,  vers.  21-23.  [Alford  and  Hodge  like- 
wise refer  the  n/.dvrj  to  their  departure  from  God 
into  idolatry. — P.  S.].  But  the  n'/.dvt]  is  certainly 
the  godless  aberration  into  unnaturalness — that  is, 
into  a  lie  against  nature,  and  we  must  tliink  of  the 
punisliment  as  proportionate  thereto  ;  therefore  not 
only  the  aljsoluto  self-deception,  but  also  the  shame- 
ful perversion  of  the  sexual  character  (a  man  in  a 
horrible  way  "  the  woman  of  all  men  ").  There- 
fore, in  themselves  not  through  themselves  (Tho- 
luck) ;  nor  "  reciprocally"  (Meyer).  Meyer  errone- 
ously excludes  here  from  consideration  the  destruc- 
tive results  of  debauchery. 

Yer.  28.  And  as  they  did  not  deem  it  worth 
while  [oi'z  tfioz/'/'cto-K)']  to  retain  God.  A  fur- 
ther and  more  general  development  of  moral  cor- 
ruption, based  on  a  further  and  more  general  un- 
folding of  religious  corruption.  KuOiIk.  The  com- 
parison is  at  the  same  time  causal — which  Tholuck 
denies.  On  the  correspondence  between  the  dark- 
ening of  knowledge  and  practical  corruption,  see 
the  quotations  from  the  heathen  writers,  in  Tho. 
luck  [and  Wetstein.  Cicero  says,  De  Nat.  Deor. 
12  :  "  //({  d  scio,  an,  pietate  advtrsus  Deos  sublata, 
fides  etiarn  et  socutas,  et  una  excdlehtissima.  virtus 
justitia  tol  aiur."  The  assertion  of  modern  deists, 
rationalists,  and  infidels,  that  morality  is  indepen- 
dent of  religion,  is  an  idle  delusion.  The  wise  hea- 
then knew  better.  Religion  is  the  backbone  of 
morality,  and  irreligion  the  mother  of  immorality 
and  vice.  He  who  is  most  true  to  God,  is  most  true 
to  himself  and  his  fellow-men  ;  and  he  who  denies 
God,  is  not  likely  to  recognize  any  binding  obliga- 
tion to  man,  except  on  purely  selfish  and  utilitarian 
grounds.  Immoral  religionists  and  moral  irieligiun- 
ists  are  exceptions,  and  confirm  the  rule. — P.  S.l 
The  f5o/'.v(ai'nv  =-.  do/.i/iov  i^yilffdao  [here,  to  think 
it  worthy,  or  uwth  uh  le  ;  comp.  1  Tiicss.  ii.  4 ; 
1  Cor.  xvi.  3]. — To  retain  God  in  (their)  knowl- 
edge [tv  iniyvM<sn-^  Erkenntniss^  Tholuck 
makes  the  lni.yivM(jMt,v  e(i'Jial  to  the  j'uviW/.fn'  in 
ver.  21.  But  here  the  question  is  concerning  per 
ception — that  is,  the  reception  of  knowledge  into  the 
inner  life.  Besides,  the  s/tuv  iv  imyvo'xrxft 
is  stronger  than  yiroiaxfn'.     Here  again  the  punish. 


*  [Meyer  :  Karepya^eadat  is  used  in  the  good  as  well  at 
the  bad  sense,  but  in  distinction  from  (pyd^eaOai  it  p.Iwayi- 
expresses  the  idea  of  canning  out,  or  completing.— P.  S.] 


88 


THE   EPISTLE    OF   PAUL    TO    THE   ROMANS. 


ment  corresponds  to  the  guilt;  therefore  tlie  ado- 
xi/iot;  vors-  is  not  a  mind  incapable  of  judgment 
or  discernment  [Judiiil  ejyvtz-s],  (Beza,  Piscat.  [Ben- 
gel]  ),  but  the  adjective  is  passive,  according  to  the 
use  of  language  :  worthless  (good-for-nolliing)  mind. 
[«)6xi./ios-,  from  dt/ofiui,  receivible,  worth ij  of  reap- 
tion;  ai)o/!u(os',  irorth/ens,  worlhii  if  rejection.  The 
heathen  did  not  lose  the  moral  faculty  of  discerning 
between  right  and  wrong,  gooii  and  bad,  but  in  spite 
of  it  they  practised  the  bad,  and  encouraged  its 
practice  in  others  (ver.  32),  thereby  incrciising  their 
guilt.  "  It  is  the  video  meliora  proboc/iic,  which 
makes  the  dttoriora  sequor  so  peculiarly  criminal." 
— P.  S.]  The  ov/.  liio/.iiiaaav  and  at)6/.vnoi;  vols 
are  a  paronomasy.  The  i-ocs-  is  the  perceiving  and 
deciding  intelligence,  and  mediates  all  the  impres- 
Bions  for  moral  self-determination  and  action. — 
Things  which  are  not  becoming.  The  /<  ij 
xaf)ij/.ovT(i,  in  the  technical  sense  of  the  philo- 
sophical schools,  are  things  contrary  to  duty,  or  im- 
moral ;  but  in  a  more  popular  sense  here,  they  are 
an  expression  of  moral  abhorrence. 

Vers.  29-32.  Being  filled  with  all  unright- 
eousness. Tholuck  :  "The  aeeusiitives  7Tt2r?.ij- 
^w/i  ivoii;,  fif(TTor^,  kc,  depend  on  noi-flv, 
as  Erasmus  has  already  remarked:  beeaiis'  their 
thoughts  are  so  impure,  they  also  commit  unbecom- 
ing things."  [Some  connect  the  following  accusa- 
tives with  al'Toi's  of  the  preceding  verse,  so  as  to 
express  the  state  in  which,  and  the  reason  why,  God 
abandoned  them  ;  but  it  is  better  to  connect  them 
with  the  subject  of  ttouTv,  understood,  so  as  to  ex- 
press the  consequences  of  such  abandonment,  and 
the  various  forms  of  ret  iitj  /.uf) i]/.i>vTa  wiiich  they 
practised,  nana  aiii/.ia.,  all  manner  of  immorality, 
is  general  ;  the  following  terms  are  specifications. 
Similar  catalogues  of  sins :  2  Cor.  xii.  20  ;  Gal.  v. 
19-21  ;  Eph.  V.  3  ;  1  Tim.  i.  9,  10 ;  2  Tim.  iii.  2-4. 
— P.  S.]  De  Wette  remarks  that  the  following  cata- 
logue of  sins,  like  a  similar  one  in  Gal.  v.  19,  is  un- 
systematic ;  though  «()«('«  stands  fii-st,  as  the  princi- 
pal conception.  Likewise  Tholuck  (against  JJengel's 
and  Gliiekler's  attempts  at  cla.ssification)  maintains 
that  the  Apostle  states  a  *^  (TrvciO(ioi(Tii()^  [rhetorical 
accunmlation]  of  manifestations  of  sin,"  and  cites 
the  paronomasies  if^florov  and  r/oi-oe,  aorj'trori;  and 
anrvOiTuts.  But  the  paronomasies  are  no  proof, 
and  so  we  attempt  the  following  construction  :  * 

L  I 'tees.  The  chief  vice,  ai)i,/.ia,  unright- 
eousness, at  the  head.  This  is  divided  into  novij- 
(tla,  malice  [disposition  to  inflict  evil],  wicked- 
ness— bold  form  ;  and  into  n/.fovtiia,  avarice, 
covetousness  ;  xaxla,  badness,  malice — pusillani- 
mous form.     On  the  addition  of  iroitrtia  to  the 

*  [The  classification  of  T)r.  LanKC  is  certainly  oriu^nal 
and  inRcnioiLs,  and  decidedly  profcriihlfl  to  any  other,  al- 
thou(;h  perhaps  sorai'what  artiucial.  The  ne.\t  best  cliis.si- 
fication  is  that  of  I?(:n^,'i,'l  in  lloin.  i.  29  :  "  T'da  intinv  ratio 
ordifum  linh't  sup'eiili  in,  jn-r  nftnbrn  noveni,  in  nfftclihus : 
dun,  in  ttim'ini' :  tria,  np'Clu  Di'i,  it  tui,  it  prnximi  ;  rt  dun, 
in  nhiu  yinndis:  S'X,  rispiclu  nicissiticduiuin."  He  also 
remarks  that  aSmia,  tho  opposite  of  justitin,  is  put  first, 
immm-ric'iidii  last;  justice  hiis  life,  injus!icc  death;  vcr. 
82.  llu!  it  seems  to  me  that  the  Apostle,  in  this  catalo(fue 
of  vices,  had  regard  not  so  much  to  syst<'tii:itii-  order,  lis  to 
rlictorical  effect,  with  the  \'iow  to  bring  out  mure  slrikincly 
the  abptolute  necessity  of  redemption.  It  if  a  rn\ni\  iiccu- 
Binlatioii  and  risiii);  climax  to  the  crisis  of  the  diseaHc, 
which  was  the  tuminsr-point  of  the  cure.  M.in's  extretnily 
was  Ood's  opportunity.  Christ  appeared  "  ii  the  fulness  of 
time."  just  when  lie  w;ib  most  needed,  and  when  the  way 
for  His  comlntt  was  fully  prep;iri'<l,  biith  negatively  by  the 
hopeless  coiTUption  of  society,  and  positively  by  the  mission 
of  the  law  and  the  promise  in  Israel,  aud  the  aspirations  of 
the  better  class  of  heathen.— P.  S.] 


above,  see  Textual  Note  ["].  The  expression  nf 
n  ).  >j  (J  ID  fi  ivo  V  I,-  means,  that  every  wieked  person 
had  not  merely  one  crime.  By  the  vices  are  here 
meant  permanent  and  cold  traits  of  character,  in 
distinction  from  deeds  ol  impulse,  in  which  the 
guilty  persons  appear  as  /niiToi,  full  and  drunken. 

II.  Evil  deeds,  or  criminal  acts.  The  chief  sin, 
(fiOovo^,  envy,  at  the  head  ;  divided  into  (f,6voii, 
murder;  t^jn,-,  strife,  contention;  f)<>/.  os',  de- 
ceit, or  fraud  ;  xa/.oijOn.a,  malignity,  treach- 
erous  conduct.  The  chief  source  is  if'Joroi;;  but 
in  all  these  evil  deeds  they  appear  as  drunken. 

III.  Wicked  characters  according  to  their  deeds. 
i/'tO^r^KTTai,  whisperers,  backbiters  [one  who 
slanders  secrelly'\  ;  /.  a  t  a  /.d /.  o  t,  slanderers,  car 
lumniators ;  &foaTryflc,  haters  of  God,  de- 
spisers  of  God,  scorning  God  {G"ttverdi-htcr).  Tho- 
luck :  Promethean  characters.  In  the  classic  litera- 
ture,  and  especially  the  tragic  department,  the  woi'd 
occurs  oidy  in  the  passive  meaning :  hated  by 
Gcd,  hateful  to  God  [see  the  quotations  of  Meyer 
in  /oc]  ;  but  the  context  plainly  declares  in  favor 
of  the  active  rendering,  which  has  been  adopted  by 
most  commentators  from  Thcodoret  down  to  the 
present,  and  which  alone  is  in  harmony  with  the 
Ciiristian  siiirit.  Classic  usage  also  favors  the  ac- 
cessory thought:  ungodly,  wicked.  rp'^Kxrai, 
insolent,  overbearing,  those  who  perpetrate  crimi- 
nal i'j^Vui; ;  V  7t  I-  ()  t]((i  avo  !■ ,  those  who  are  proud, 
self-conceited,  those  who  conduct  themselves  arro- 
gantly above  others  ;  a.lu'lovfi;,  boasters,  who 
do  not  design,  like  the  previous  class,  to  crush  oth- 
ers Ijy  the  force  of  their  greatness,  but  make  a  lying 
show  of  it;  itfi  f  t' ^1 1  r  al  /.a/.t'iv,  inventors  of 
villanies,  or  crimes  swindlers,  and  adventurers; 
yovtT'fuv  d.TTfiO'fti;,  disobedient  to  parents ; 
apostasy  from  the  piety  and  affection  due  to  parents 
is  a  fountain  of  corruption  (see  Malachi  iv.  (> ;  Luke 
i.  17).  [Hodge  :  "  That  such  should  be  included  in 
this  fearful  list,  shows  the  light  in  which  filial  dis- 
obedience is  regarded  l)y  the  sacred  writers." — P.  S.] 

IV.  (Ver.  31.)  Wickel  characters  according  to 
their  tienti.mentx,  in  leading  psychological  types, 
d  (T  I'  v  f  T  o  t ,  wthout  understanding  [or  in- 
sight into  moral  things,  blinded,  besotted^  ;  corruj^ited 
intellirjence  ;  a  a  r  v  f)  f  t  o  i ,  according  to  Philii)pi, 
and  others,  quarrelsome,  implacable  ;  according 
to  Meyer,  covenant-breakers  [perfidious]  ;  we 
construe  the  expression  psychologically :  uimlatde, 
unreliable  —  cnrniiited  will.  aa  t  o  (<  j'o  t,  desti- 
tute of  affection,  heartless  ;  wanting  even  in  natu- 
ral feeling  and  natural  love — corrupted  feeling, 
{dan o  I' .'/ o (. ,  implacable,  irreconeilal )le.  Proba- 
bly an  insertion),  ri  »■  f  /  f /; .// o  i-f -:,  unmerciful, 
without  pity  and  compassion  :  a^  totally  corrupted 
state  of  feeling  (.Mati.  xxv.  31  ft'.). 

V.  Wicked  iniixitnt  (ver.  32).  Demoniacal  pleas- 
ure in  wickedness  on  the  part  of  those  who  are  con- 
scious of  the  deadly  guilt  of  sin  (for  example,  hea- 
then philosophers,  magistrates,  judges,  etc.) ;  and 
who  not  oidy  commit  sins  worthy  of  death,  lint  also 
approve  them  in  others  l)y  their  endorsement  and 
principles.  —  The  o/rn-ft,-  amioimces  a  new  ele- 
ment, a  new  degree.  This  degree  was  of  course 
not  reached  or  thoroughly  accomplished  by  all,  but 
the  generality  were  guilty  to  this  ilcgree — a  fact 
which  is  shown  by  the  crucifixion  of  Christ.  Gro- 
tins  ha.s  alluded  to  the  defence  of  many  crimes  by 
the  philosophers  [e.  g.,  the  defence  of  hatred,  re- 
venge, even  pederasty  and  sodomy]  ;  and  Ileumaur 
[and  Ewald]  to  lax  criminal  justice.     The  Jixa* 


CHAPTER  \.    18-32. 


8S 


V  /A,a  of  God  in  the  knowledge  of  the  Gentiles  is  in 
part  the  institution  of  law  and  in  part  God's  puni- 
tive dealing,  so  far  as  the  latter  is  referred  by  the 
heathen  conscience  to  Divine  justice.  [  ()  t  z  a «' «)  /<  a 
(comp.  Luke  i.  6 ;  Rom.  ii.  26 ;  viii.  4 ;  Apoc. 
iv.  6,  m  the  Septuagint  often  for  the  Hebrew 
pn ,  npn ,  n^S^ )  is  here  the  righteous  decree 
or  sentence  of  God  as  the  Lawgiver  and  Judge,  de- 
claring what  is  right  and  wrong,  and  connecting 
death  with  sin,  and  life  with  righteousness.  Mejer: 
MecJitsbestimmung  ;  Lange  :  Kevhfsurtheil ;  Alford  : 
sentence ;  W^ordsworth  and  Hodge  :  decree.  This 
decree  is  inscribed  not  only  on  the  revealed  law  of 
the  Old  Testament,  but  also  on  the  conscience  or 
moral  sense  of  every  man.  The  latter  is  here 
meant. — P.  S.] 

Ver.  82.  Are  worthy  of  death.  Photius : 
According  to  the  Mosaic  law.  The  Socinians  :  Civil 
punishment  by  death.  Meyer :  Eternal  death,  by 
which  Paul  has  in  mind  the  heathen  notion  of  the 
state  of  punishment  in  Hades.*  Fritzsche  and  De 
Wette  :  The  misery  of  sin,  and  similar  results.  But 
the  meaning  is  the  general  idea  of  death  in  the  Gen- 
tile consciousness  of  guilt,  as  the  punishment  of  the 
most  varied  forms  of  sin.  [Alford  :  Odvaroi;,  a 
general  term  for  the  fatal  consequence  of  sin  ;  that 
such  courses  lead  to  ruin.  Hodge :  All  evil  inflicted 
for  the  Satisfaction  of  justice.  Tiiis  passage  shows 
that  the  judicial  abandonment  of  God  does  not  de- 
stroy the  free  agency  or  responsibiUty  of  men.  The 
stream  which  carries  them  away  is  not  without,  but 
within  ;  it  is  their  own  corrupt  nature.  Umbreit : 
Life  and  death  are  ever  set  over  against,  one  another 
in  the  Old  and  Xew  Testaments,  the  one  as  including 
all  good,  the  other  as  all  evil. — P.  S.]  The  n^da- 
fff  tv  is  a  stronger  expression.  [It  brings  out  more 
clearly  the  idea  of  repetition  and  continuance  of 
action  than  nonlv. — P.  S.] 

The  progress  is  very  apparent  from  wicked  pas- 
sions to  wicked  acts  ;  from  tliese,  to  wicked  charac- 
ters, according  to  the  positive  methods  of  action ; 
from  these,  to  wicked  characters  in  whom  the  incli- 
nation for  what  is  good  is  extinguished ;  and  from 
these,  finally,  to  wicked  maxims.  Tins  progress  is 
also  expressed  by  the  change  of  the  forms.  The 
same  sins  are  not  described  throughout  these  differ- 
ent categories.  According  to  the  fundamental  con- 
ception of  unrighteousness,  the  first  category  may 
be  regarded  as  the  general  category.  Tlie  second 
describes  sins  against  our  fellow-men  in  their  indi- 
vidual relation  ;  the  third,  those  against  human  soci- 
ety ;  the  fourth  passes  on  to  settle  the  character  of 
self-corruption  in  its  psychological  forms  of  senti- 
ment ;  and  the  fifth,  to  the  complete  demoniacal 
consciousness  and  approval  of  sin. 

[This  dark  picture  of  heathen  corruption  (which 
does  not  exclude  honorable  exceptions ;  comp.  Rom. 
ii.  14,  26)  is  by  no  means  overdrawn,  and  can  be 
fully  verified  by  testimonies  from  the  first  writers 
of  the  classical  age  of  ancient  Greece  and  Rome, 
such  as  Thucydides  (iii.  82-84,  on  the  moral  state 
of  Greece  during  the  Peloponnesian  war),  Aris- 
topiiiines,  Horace,  Catullus,  Juvenal,  Persius,  Sal- 
lust,  Seneca,  Tacitus,  Suetonius.  Comp.  my  Church 
Histori/,  vol.  i.  p.  302  ff.,  and  the  works  quoted 
there.  I  shall  only  refer  to  a  passage  from  Seneca, 
the  philosopher  and  contemporary  of  Paul,  De  Ira, 

*  (Philippi  likewise  refers  to  the  lieathen  myth  of  Hades 
with  its  puaiphments,  and  quotes  from  ^Kscliylus,  Eume- 
nid.  w.  259-265.— P.  S.] 


ii.  8  :  "  All  is  full  of  crime  and  vice  ;  there  is  mor* 
committed  than  can  be  healed  by  punishment.  A 
monstrous  prize  contest  of  wickedr.ess  is  going  on. 
Tiie  desire  to  sin  increases,  and  shj».me  decreases  daj 
by  day.  .  .  .  Vice  is  no  longer  practised  secretly, 
but  in  open  view.  Vileness  gains  in  every  street 
and  in  every  breast  to  such  an  extent,  that  inno- 
cence has  become  not  only  rare,  but  has  ceased  to 
exist."  It  is  true,  the  history  of  Christian  countriea 
often  presents  a  similar  picture  of  moral  corruption 
(with  tlie  exception  of  those  unnatural  vic<^-i  de- 
scribed  vers.  26  and  27,  which  have  almost  disap- 
peared, or  greatly  diminished  within  the  pale  of 
Christian  civilization).  Think  of  the  sl<»,tc  of  the  Latin 
Christians  in  the  fitth  century  a?  described  by  the 
priest  Salvianus,  who  charges  them  with  every  vice, 
and  puts  them,  in  a  moral  point  of  view,  beneath  the 
barbarians  ;  of  the  condition  of  Catholic  France  un- 
der Louis  XIV.  and  XV.  ;  and  of  the  large  capitals 
of  Europe  and  America  in  our  days.  Yea,  in  somo 
respects  the  most  diabolical  forms  of  sin  are  brought 
out  by  contrast  under  the  Christian  dispensation,  and 
apostasy  from  Christianity  is  worse  than  heathenism 
(comp.  2  Tim.  iii.  1-9).  But  there  remains  this  radical 
ditt'erence :  the  heatlien  corruptions  were  produced 
and  sanctioned  by  the  heathen  mythology  and  idola- 
try ;  while  Christian  nations  are  corrupt  in  spite  of 
and  in  direct  opposition  to  Christianity,  which  raises 
the  highest  standard  of  virtue,  and  acts  continually 
on  the  world  as  a  purifving  and  sanctifying  power.— 
P.  S.] 


DOCTEINAL  AND   ETHICAL. 

1.  The  revelation  of  God's  salvation  is  at  the 
same  time  a  revelation  of  God\s  zcrath.  One  con- 
ception is  eclipsed  by  the  other.  It  is  a  vain  delu- 
sion to  imagine  that  we  can  separate  the  doctrine  of 
redemption  from  that  of  wrath.  The  conception  of 
wrath  is  the  conception  of  the  absolute  and  personal 
enerfi}!  of  the  Divine  government  of  love  in  puni- 
tive righteousness.  Redeeming  love  is  the  absolute 
and  personal  enei-gy  of  Divine  rigliteousness  in  the 
saving  exercise  of  love.  Can  a  soul  enjoy  the  expe« 
rience  of  salvation  by  faith,  without  passing  through 
an  internal  judgment,  and  feeling  of  Divine  displeas- 
ure ?  For  further  information,  see  the  Exeg.  Notes  ; 
Tlioluck,  pp.  56,  57  ;  Meyer,  p.  49 ;  the  article  Zorn 
Gottes,  in  Heizog's  Reatcncyklopadie  [vol.  xviii.  p. 
657  ft".],  together  with  the  literature  on  the  subject 
enumerated  there  [especially  the  monograph  on  the 
Wrath  of  God  by  Ferdinand  Weber,  with  prole- 
gomena on  the  doctrine  of  the  atonement  by  Franz 
Delitzsch,  Erlangen,  1862.— P.  S.] 

2.  The  essential  characteristic  of  all  forms  of 
unbeiief  consists  in  men's  holding  back  or  hindering 
the  truth  in  unrighteousness.  "  Modern  culture  " 
attempts  to  separate  the  ideas  dnvaTia  and  dnuOfi-a 
utterly  from  each  other.  But  the  biblical  view  will 
not  allow  such  a  separation.  Unbelief  is  miscon- 
duct toward  the  moral  claims  within  the  horizon  of 
the  internal  life.  This  misconduct  has  its  degrees. 
The  germ  and  principle  is  sin  as  transgression 
{naQcijiaffii:)  in  general.  The  definite  determina- 
tion is  apostasy,  which  manifests  itself  also  as  oppo- 
sition to  Divine  truth.  Therefore  the  two  funda- 
mental forms  of  specific  unbelief  are  :  apostasy,  and 
hostile  attack.  The  third  degree  is  hardness  of 
heart.  But  the  measure  of  power  in  human  obsta. 
cles  to  the  revelation  of  God  is  related  to  the  powei 


90 


THE  EPISTLE  OF  PAUL  TO  THE  ROMANS. 


of  Divine  reaction  against  these  obstacles,  just  as  the 
power  of  man  (as  weakness)  is  related  to  the  omnipo- 
tence oF  God. 

3.  The  idea  of  the  revelation  of  God  bif  nature 
pervades  the  entire  Bible.  See  Ps.  viii.,  xix.,  civ., 
and  others  ;  Isa,  xl.  According  to  Schneckenburger 
{JBeitrdge  zur  Einleituny  in^s  Keue  Ttxtaineiit,  10th 
essay :  Paid^s  Natural  Theology,  and  its  Sources), 
Philo  was  Paul's  source.  See  thereon,  Tholuck,  p.  64. 
The  pamphlet  of  Hebart  also  belongs  here :  Die  xatiir- 
liche  Tlieologic  des  Apostels  Faulus  (Niirnb.,  18G0) ; 
likewise  Zockler's  Theologia  Naturaiis,  or  Entwurf 
einer  systematisclten  Naturlheoloyie.  [Frankfurt  a. 
M.,  1800,  2  vols.]  The  latter  has  viewed  natural 
theology  in  a  more  primitive  than  usual  sense.  We 
must  bear  in  mind  that  natural  theology,  since  the 
revelation  of  salvation,  has  assumed  a  dillerent  form 
from  what  it  had  before  the  revelation  of  salvation, 
and  especially  as  the  basis  of  the  original  revelation. 
The  symbolical  natural  religion  which  prevailed  down 
to  Abraham  is  distinguished  from  the  revelation  of 
salvation  herein,  that  God  revealed  Himself  there 
specially  by  symbols  and  signs,  but  here  by  the 
Word.  See  also  the  article  Raymond  of  Sabunde, 
in  Herzog's  ReaUcncyklopddle  [vol.  xii.  p.  571  J. 

4.  According  to  Paul,  as  according  to  all  the 
Holy  Scriptures,  humanity  has  fallen  from  its  original 
ideal  height ;  but  according  to  the  majority  of  those 
who  set  themselves  up  as  the  advocates  of  "  modern 
culture,"  it  has  risen  from  a  rough,  beast-like  state. 
Wherefore  Reiche  also  (p.  157)  has  expressed  the 
opinion  that  the  Apostle  has  here  expressed  only  a 
cotemporary  opinion  of  the  Jews.  The  testimony 
of  history  is  against  the  view  of  "  modern  culture." 
It  proves  the  gradual  decay  of  the  Hindus,  the  Ara- 
bians, the  Ethiopians,  the  Indians,  and,  finally,  even 
of  the  Greco-lloman  world,  with  all  its  relative  glory. 

5.  It  is  improper  to  regard  the  description  of  the 
Apostle  as  a  description  only  of  the  corruption  of 
the  heathen  world.  It  shows  us  first  how  the  Gentile 
world  arose,  and  then  what  became  of  it;  but  it 
does  not  commence  with  a  Gentile  world.  Therefore 
it  goes  back,  fundamentally,  to  the  genesis  of  sin  in 
the  fall  of  man  ;  but  then  it  shows  how  the  fall  of 
man  in  its  second  form  (with  the  self-boasting  of 
man  after  the  flood)  became  the  genesis  of  real  hea- 
thendom. The  corruption  arose  from  the  original 
symbolical  religion  which  prevailed  from  Adam  down 
to  Abralium.  For  men  magnilicd  the  simple  sym- 
bolism of  nature — wliich  (iod  had  given — by  tiieir 
own  arbitrary  symbolizations,  and  then  mytldcized 
the  symbols ;  that  is,  they  deified  them.  Thus  my- 
thology arose  from  symbolism,  and  idolatry  and  then 
image-worship  aro.se  from  the  symbolical  view  of 
nature.  Recent  research  htis  commenced  to  exhume 
from  the  ruins  of  myths  the  gold  of  the  original 
symbolism.  Comp.  my  treatise  On  the  Relation 
between  General  and  Ecclesiastical  Symbolism,  in  the 
Deutsche  Zeitschrift  fur  Christliche  Wissenschaft,  kc, 
1855,  Nos.  4-6 ;  and  the  recent  writings  on  heathen- 
dom by  Wuttke  [Geschic/ite  des  Jleidcnth.ums,  1852 
fF.],  Dollinger  [Jleidenthum  und  Jwlenthum,  1851], 
Stiefelhagen,  Lasaulx,  and  others.  [Sclielling,  Philo- 
aophie  d'T  Mytholo'/ie,  1857  ;  Fabri,  Die  Etitittehuuff 
des  HeiilenJhums,  1859;  Niigelsbach  on  the  Jlmneric, 
and  Post-Homeric  Thfolngy,  1840,  1857 ;  Gladstone, 
Studies  on  Homer,  1858  ;'  W.  S.  Tyler,  The  Theology 
of  the  Greek  Poets,  1867. — P.  S.] 

6.  The  description  of  the  original  form  of  natu- 
ral religion  does  not  justify  the  conclusion  that  the 
tv.velation  of  God  in  Glnist  would  not  have  occurred 


under  the  presupposition  of  human  righteousness, 
But  it  leads  us  to  conclude  that  the  progress  from 
the  one  to  the  other  would  have  been  effected  iu  th< 
form  of  a  historical  continuity. 

7.  The  explanation  of  Gentile  corruption  from 
the  great  peccatum  omissionis.  "  They  have  not 
honored  and  thanked  God"  (ver.  21);  this  is  a 
penetrating  glance  which  sheds  its  light  also  upon 
the  first  fall,  as  well  as  upon  every  genesis  of  sin. 
On  the  significance  of  this  passage  for  the  whole 
Epistle,  see  the  Introduction  and  the  Ej:eg.  Notes. 

8.  God's  positive  government,  which  impels  evil 
through  trial  and  temptation  into  the  process  of  de- 
velopment /row  righteous  judgment  (sin  punished 
by  sin)  and  to  righteous  judgment  (Rom.  xi.  .32),  cor- 
responds with  God's  negative  abandonment,  in  which 
the  first  ground  for  the  punishment  is  revealed,  not 
only  because  God,  as  the  Holy  One,  must  witlidraw 
His  Spirit  from  the  consciousness  of  sinful  man,  but 
also  because  He  regards  man  in  his  freedom,  and 
leaves  him  to  its  action  (see  my  Positive  Dogmatics^ 
p.  468). 

[Sin  punished  by  sin.  The  Rabbinical  tract,  Pirkf 
Aboth,  c.  2,  ver.  1,  says:  "Festina  ad  prceceptum 
levetanquam  ad  grave,  et  fuge  transgressionem ;  pr(e- 
ceptMH  cnim  trahit  prceccpAuni,  et  transgressio  trans- 
gressio7iem  ;  quia  merces  prcecepti  prieceptum  est,  et 
transgressionis transgressio.^  Seneca (Ep.  16):  "The 
first  and  greatest  punishment  of  any  connni.-;tiion  of 
sin  is  the  sin  itself  which  is  committed."  De  Wette, 
ad  Rom.  i.  24  :  "  This  view  (that  sin  is  punished  by 
sin)  is  no  mere  Jewish  doctrine,  but  it  is  univei-sally 
true  from  the  absolute  standpoint  of  religion." 
Schiller : 

"  This  is  the  very  curse  of  evil  deed, 
That  of  new  evil  it  becomes  the  seed." 

But  this  judicial  punishment  of  sin  with  sin  does  not 
make  God  the  author  of  sin  in  any  sense.  Dr. 
South  (Serm.  ii.  on  2  Thess.  ii.  11)  says:  "  God  may 
make  one  sin  the  punishment  of  another,  though  it 
still  is  to  be  remembered  that  it  is  one  thing  for  God 
to  give  a  tnan  over  to  sin,  and  quite  another  for  God 
to  cause  him  to  sin ;  the  former  importing  in  it  no 
more  than  God's  providential  ordering  'of  a  man's 
circum.stances,  so  tliat  he  shall  find  no  check  or  hin- 
derance  in  the  course  of  his  sin ;  but  the  latter  im- 
plying also  a  positive  efficiency  toward  the  commis- 
sion or  production  of  a  sinful  act;  which  God  never 
does,  nor  can  do  ;  but  the  other  He  both  may,  and, 
in  a  judicial  way,  very  often  does.  ...  In  all  which 
God  is  not  at  all  the  author  of  sin,  but  only  pursues 
the  great  work  and  righteous  ends  of  His  provi- 
dence, in  disposiTig  of  things  or  objects  in  them- 
selves good  or  indifferent,  toward  the  coTupassing  of 
tlie  same ;  howbeit,  through  the  jioison  of  men's 
vicious  affections,  they  are  turned  into  the  opportu- 
nities and  fuel  of  sin,  and  rrn^e  the  occa.sion  of  their' 
final  destructi(m;  ix.  17,  22."  Dr.  Hodge:  "God 
often  punishes  one  sin  by  abandoning  the  sinner  to 
the  commission  of  others.  Paul  repeats  this  idea 
three  times,  vers.  24,  26,  28.  This  judicial  aliandon- 
ment  is  consistent  with  the  holiness  of  God  and  the 
free  agency  of  man.  God  does  not  impel  or  entice 
to  evil.  He  cea.ses  to  restrain.  He  says  of  the  sin- 
ner. Let  him  alone  ;  vers.  21-28." — P.  S.] 

9.  The  deep  truth  in  the  proof  of  the  connection 
between  religious  aTid  moral  corruption. 

10.  The  intimate  connection  between  the  denial 
of  the  (Vdjct  of  God  and  the  degrailation  of  the  f)oJa 
of  the  human  form  by  whoredom,  and  between  the 


CHAPTER  I.   18-32. 


91 


denial  of  the  truth  of  God  and  the  degradation  of 
the  true  relations  of  human  nature,  as  represented 
by  Paul,  has  not  been  properly  observed.  See  Exeg. 
Jiotes. 

11.  Other  enumerations  of  sins  and  crimes  in  the 
Scriptures :  see  2  Cor.  xii.  20 ;  Gal.  v.  19 ;  Eph.  v. 
8  ;  1  Tim.  i,  9  ;  2  Tim.  iii.  2. 

12.  Sin  reaches  its  chmax  in  wiclied  maxims  and 
principles.  They  are  demoniacal  in  their  character, 
and  the  intellectual  side  of  the  service  of  the  devil, 
which  may  be  known  not  only  in  its  gross  foi-ms,  but 
also  in  the  subtle  form  of  cowardly  idolatry  of  what 
is  base,  and  which  in  this  shape  is  widely  diffused. 
[Yet,  even  in  the  most  reprobate  sinner,  the  voice 
of  conscience  cannot  be  entirely  extinguished  ("  know- 
ing the  jtiAgment  of  God,''''  ver.  32).  It  malies  him 
uneasy  and  miserable  on  eai-th,  and  will  be  his  con- 
demnation in  the  other  world. — P.  S.] 

13.  While  the  Apostle  has  here  described  the 
dark  side  of  heathendom,  the  second  chapter  shows 
that  the  whole  of  heathendom  does  not  appear  to 
him  under  this  dark  aspect.  In  the  first  chapter  he 
describes  the  prevailing  Antinomian  tendency  of 
heathendom,  in  opposition  to  the  prevailing  legalis- 
tic tendency  of  Judaism. 


HOMELETICAL   AND    PEACTICAL. 
Vees.  18-21. 

In  what  does  the  beginning  of  all  the  real  sinful 
corruption  of  the  woild,  and  of  the  Gentiles  in  par- 
ticular, consist  ?  1.  In  the  neglect  of  the  general 
manifestations  of  God  by  creation  ;  2.  in  neglect  to 
worship  God  by  praise  and  thanksgiving. — Against 
what  will  God's  wrath  be  sent  from  heaven  ?  1. 
Against  all  ungodliness ;  2.  against  all  unrighteous- 
ness of  men  who  hold  back  the  truth  in  unrighteous- 
ness (ver.  18). 

The  revelation  of  wrath,  and  the  revelation  of 
love,  as  they,  1.  Are  opposed  to  each  other ;  2.  are 
closely  connected  with  each  other. — The  revelation 
of  God  in  nature  is  a  revelation  of  His  invisible  na- 
ture— that  is,  of  His  eternal  power  and  Godhead 
(vers.  19,  20). — He  who  knows  God,  should  praise 
and  thank  Him.  —  The  knowledge  and  worship  of 
God. — Neglect  of  the  worship  of  God  leads  to  ob- 
scuring the  knowledge  of  God  (ver.  21). 

Luther  :  Where  there  is  no  faith,  reason  falls 
from  one  depth  to  another,  until  it  is  totally  blinded 
in  its  speculations,  as  is  the  case  with  all  self-con- 
ceited and  heated  brains  (ver.  21). 

Starke  :  Even  after  the  fall,  every  man  has  a 
natural  knowledge  of  the  nature  and  works  of  God  ; 
yet  this  is  not  sufficient  to  lead  him  to  salvation  (ver. 
19). — God  esteems  our  knowledge  according  to  the 
means  we  have  of  obtJning  it.  Thus  He  demands 
more  knowledge  from  the  Jews  than  from  the  Gen- 
tiles, and  still  more  from  us  Christians  (ver.  21). — 
As  God  is  a  living  God,  so  must  our  knowledge  of 
Him  also  be  vital,  and  express  itself  in  praise  and 
tlianks  (ver.  21). — Langii  Op.  Bibl. :  Whoever  de- 
nies the  wrath  of  God,  and  describes  God  alone  ac- 
cording to  mere  love,  thereby  obscures  also  the 
greatness  of  the  grace  and  love  of  God,  and  leads 
others  to  despise  this  grace  and  love  (ver.  18). — 
Hedinoer  :  God  does  not  leave  Himself  without  a 
witness  among  the  heathen.  ,  All  creatures  eloquent- 
ly testify  to  His  might  and  wisdom  (ver.  20).  From 
Qdesnel  :   Hugo  ds  Area :  Omnia  creatura  tribus 


vocibus  nobis  loquitur :  prima  est  famulantis,  accipi 
beneficium  ;  secunda  admonentis,  redde  debitum  ser 
vitium  ;  tertia  comminantis,  fuge  suppliciwn  (ver, 
20). 

Bengel  :  Whatever  is  under  heaven,  and  not 
under  the  gospel,  is  under  the  wrath  (ver.  18). — The 
heart  of  man  conforms  to  its  thoughts  (ver.  21). 

Gerlach  :  The  sin  against  which  God's  wrath  ia 
directed  shows  itself  in  the  double  form  of  ungodli- 
ness  and  unrighteousness,  according  as  man  sins  more 
directly  against  God,  or  against  himself  and  hia 
neighbor  (ver.  18). — As  soon  as  man  ceases  to  direct 
himself  to  the  holy  and  gracious  God,  he  woi'shipa 
only  God's  power  and  beauty  (?),  and  makes  Nature 
his  God  (ver.  21). 

Heubn  er  :  The  denial  of  God  can  never  be  ex- 
cused, for  man  can  know  God  (ver.  19). 

The  Pericope  for  the  11th  Sunday  after  Trinity 
(vers.  16-20). — Heubner:  The  joy  of  the  Christian 
in  the  confession  of  faith  :  1.  Disposition  ;  2.  neces- 
sity ;  3.  how  are  we  fitted  for  it  ? — How  shall  we 
learn  to  estimate  properly  the  value  of  the  gospel  ? 

1.  When  we  experience  its  power  in  our  own  hearts; 

2.  when  we  perceive  properly  the  wretched  condition 
of  the  human  race  without  Christianity — its  religioua 
as  well  as  its  moral  condition ;  3.  when  we  learn 
the  insufficiency  of  natural  religion,  which  reveals 
God's  existence  and  power,  but  not  His  mercy  toward 
sinners. — The  relation  of  natural  and  revealed  re- 
ligion :   1.  Harmony ;  2.  difference  ;  3.  inferences. 

Lange  :  For  the  wrath  of  God.  Wrath  a  proof 
of  the  gospel :  1.  Of  its  necessity ;  2.  its  truth ;  3. 
its  glory. — On  the  difference  between  the  knowledge 
and  perception  of  God. — The  general  manifestation 
of  God,  or  the  relation  between  natural  religion  and 
revealed  religion  in  its  narrower  sense. — The  begin- 
ning of  all  sin  is  always  at  bottom  a  sin  of  neglect. 
— The  two  sides  of  piety :  to  praise  God,  and  to 
thank  Him. 

[TiLLOTSON :  Vers.  18,  19.  If  it  were  only  the 
wrath  and  displeasure  of  men  that  the  sinner  were 
exposed  to,  there  might  be  reason  enough  for  fear ; 
but  the  wrath  and  vengeance  of  men  bears  no  com- 
parison with  the  wrath  of  God.  Their  arm  is  short, 
and  their  power  small ;  they  may  shoot  their  most 
poisonous  arrows  at  us,  and  at  last  kill  us ;  but  they 
cannot  pursue  us  into  the  other  world.  But  the 
wrath  of  God  has  none  of  these  limits. —  The  fear 
of  God^s  wrath :  Men  may  harden  their  foreheads, 
and  conquer  all  sense  of  shame  ;  but  they  cannot 
perfectly  stifle  and  subdue  their  fears.  They  can 
hardly  so  extinguish  the  fear  of  hell,  but  that  some 
sparks  of  that  fire  will  ever  and  anon  be  flying  about 
in  their  consciences. — Sotjth  (sermon  on  Natural 
Keligion  without  Revelation,  sufficient  to  render  a 
sinner  inexcui^able  (ver.  20) :  I  heartily  wish  that 
all  young  persons  would  lodge  this  one  observation 
deep  in  their  minds :  That  God  and  nature  have 
joined  wisdom  and  virtue  by  such  a  near  cognation, 
or,  rather,  such  an  inseparable  connection,  that  a 
wise,  prudent,  and  honorable  old  age  is  seldom  or 
never  found  but  as  the  reward  and  effect  of  a  sober, 
virtuous,  and  well-spent  youth. — Scott  :  Even  to 
this  day,  if  any  nations  seem  to  be  sunk  into  so 
entire  a  stupidity  as  to  have  no  notions  of  a  God 
remaining  among  them,  this  still  more  clearly  proves, 
not  man's  want  of  rational  powers,  but  his  canial 
enmity  to  God  and  religion,  through  which  he  be- 
comes more  and  more  the  besotted  and  blind  slave 
of  Satan. — Clarke  :  Paul's  purpose  is  to  ^how  :  1. 
That  all  the  heathen  nations  are  utterly  corrupt,  and 


92 


THE   EPISTLE   OF   PAUL   TO   THE   ROMANS. 


deserving  of  punishment;  2.  that  the  Jews,  not- 
withstanding  the  greatness  of  their  privilege,  were 
no  better  tiian  the  Gentiles. — Hodge  :  The  folly  and 
darkness  of  which  the  Apostle  here  speaks  are  ex- 
pressive of  want  of  Divine  knowledge,  whieh  is  but 
the  ell'ect  and  cause  of  moral  depravity. — J.  F.  H.] 


Vebs.  22-32. 

Abandonment  of  the  Gentile  world  :  1.  Why  did 
God  abandon  them  ?  a.  Because  they  changed  His 
glory    into    something   transitory   and    corruptible ; 

0.  liis  truth  into  a  lie.  2.  In  what  respect  did  God 
abandon  them  ?  a.  In  pollution  of  the  flesh  and 
spirit;  0.  in  utter  hardness  of  heart  (vers.  22-32). — 
How  dreadful  to  be  abandoned  by  God  !     Because 

1.  His  Spirit  departs  ;  2.  sin  becomes  punishment. — 
Has  Paul  described  the  moral  pollution  of  the  Gen- 
tile world  in  too  dark  colors  ?  No.  For  what  tiie 
Apostle  says  is  corroborated  by  witnesses  from  its 
very  midst.  1.  Of  ancient  times  (Aristophanes, 
Horace,  Juvenal) ;  2.  of  the  present  day  (modern 
Hindu  literature,  &c.). — He  who  would  describe  sin, 
must  be  strengthened  by  looking  up  to  God  (ver. 
25).— The  heathen  world  of  the  present  day  is  the 
name  as  that  at  the  time  of  Paul,  and  therefore  can 
be  converted  only  by  the  same  means  (the  gospel). — 
He  who  knows  how  to  do  good,  and  does  not  do  it, 
sins  (ver.  32). — What  men  are  hardened  ?  Those 
who  (1)  know  God's  righteousness,  (2)  yet  do  what 
deserves  death,  and  (3)  are  not  contented  to  have 
pleasure  in  those  who  do  it  (ver.  32). 

LuTHKR  :  The  real  Epicureans  are  those  who  live 
as  if  there  were  no  God ;  who  boast  much,  and 
•would  have  others  boast  of  them  that  they  are  some- 
thing extraordinary,  when  they  really  are  not  (ver. 
30). 

Starkk  :  It  was  a  crime  of  pride,  when  they 
said,  We  are  not  so  foolish  (ver.  22). — To  consider 
one's  self  wise  and  shrewd,  and  yet  to  possess  foolish 
priiwipia^  is  the  greatest  folly  ;  especially  when  ex- 
hibited by  the  world's  wise  men  in  published  writings 
(ver.  22). — The  wisest  and  most  learned  are  often 
also  the  most  perverted. — It  is  absolutely  unreason- 
able to  worship  God  under  the  image  of  a  beast ; 
fur  what  king,  prince,  and  honorable  mifti  would  per- 
mit himself  to  be  represented  in  the  form  of  an  ox, 
or  hog  (!).  How  much  less  can  God  be  treated  thus 
(ver.  23). — He  who  forsakes  God,  will  be  forsaken 
also  by  God  (ver.  24). — The  most  direct  path  to  athe- 
ism, is  to  regard  God  unworthy  to  l)e  known  (ver. 
28). — Cxoodness  goes  gently,  but  evil  goes  violentlj', 
and  will  be  host  in  the  house.  It  foams  and  fer- 
ments like  new  wine  (ver.  29). — Hedingkr  :  Sin  is 
sometimes  the  punishment  of  sin  (ver.  24). — Osian- 
DEii  liihl. :  Teachers  and  preachers  must  be  careful 
to  speak  of  sins  against  God  and  nature  in  such  a 
way  that  those  sins  be  prevented  and  guarded  against, 
rather  than  learned  and  committed  (ver.  20). — Cka- 
MKii :  Altliough  the  neglect  to  know  (Jod  is  regarded 
bj  the  world  aa  no  sin,  or,  if  a  sin,  the  least  of  all, 


it  is  really  a  fountain  of  all  sin,  and,  finally,  of  all 
the  penalties  consequent  upon  sin  (ver.  28). 

Heubner  :  The  ruin  of  the  Gentile  world  is  a 
warning  for  Christians :  Aposttisy  from  the  word  of 
God  induces  similar  aberrations  at  all  times — a  new 
though  more  refined  heathenism  (ver.  22).— God  for- 
sakes only  those  who  will  not  hear  Him  (ver.  24). — 
A  wicked  state  of  heart  leads  to  absolute  pleasure  in 
wickedness  itself  (ver.  32). 

Besser  :  Unnaturalness  follows  from  the  deifica- 
tion of  nature  (ver.  27). 

Lange  :  The  connection  between  religious  and 
moral  ruin  is  exhibited  also  in  the  world  at  the  pres- 
ent  time. — The  barbarous  disregard  of  the  human 
person  in  all  sexual  sins,  as  often  concealed  beneath 
the  most  refined  masks  of  culture,  is  closely  con- 
nected with  the  irreligious  disregard  of  the  personal- 
ity of  God  and  man. — A  fundamental  sanctification 
of  the  sexual  relations  can  arise  only  from  the  vital 
knowledge  of  the  dignity  of  personal  life. — Sin  tak. 
ing  on  the  form  of  the  devilish  nature  in  wicked 
maxims. 

[Scott  :  Religion  moderates  and  regulates  natu- 
ral affections,  but  excess  of  depravity  extinguishes 
them.  It  is  a  proof  of  more  determined  impiety  for 
men  to  take  pleasure  in  the  company  of  the  enemies 
of  God,  than  to  commit  many  crimes  whilst  the  heart 
and  conscience  protest  against  them. — Clarke  :  We 
see  what  the  world  was,  and  what  it  would  ever  have 
been,  had  not  God  sent  a  divine  revelation  of  His 
will,  and  established  a  public  ministry  to  proclaim 
it.  Were  man  left  to  the  power  and  infiuence  of  his 
fallen  nature,  he  would  always  be  what  tlie  Apostle 
here  describes  as  the  condition  of  the  Gentile  world. 
— Comprehensive  Comm.  :  No  wickedness  so  hein- 
ous, but  a  reprobate  mind  will  comply. 

Hodge  (condensed) :  1.  It  is  the  very  nature  of 
sin  to  be  inexcusable,  and  worthy  of  punishment ;  2. 
as  the  works  of  God  reveal  His  eternal  power  and 
Godhead,  we  should  accustom  ourselves  to  see  in 
them  the  manifestations  of  His  perfections ;  3.  the 
human  intellect  is  as  erring  as  the  human  heart ;  4. 
as  the  light  of  nature  is  insufficient  to  lead  the  hea- 
then to  God  and  holiness,  it  is  our  obvious  and 
urgent  duty  to  send  them  the  light  of  the  Bible  ;  5. 
sins  of  uncleanness  are  peculiarly  debasing  and  de- 
moralizing ;  6.  to  take  pleasure  in  those  who  do 
good,  makes  us  better;  as  to  delight  in  those  who 
do  evil,  is  the  surest  way  to  become  even  more  de- 
graded than  they  are  themselves. — Compare  two  ser- 
mons by  R.  South  on  llie  Heinous  Guilt  of  Taking 
Pleasure  in  Other  Meu^s  Sins  ;  and  sermon  by  C. 
GiRni.ESTONE  on  Pleasure  in  the  SiglU  of  Sin  {^Paro- 
chial Sermons'). — J.  F.  H.] 

[Ver.  32.  South  (Sermon  on  the  text):  That 
sin  (which  sympathizes  with  and  patronizes  the  sin- 
ner) is  a  pitch  beyond  all  other  sins,  and  such  »n  one 
as  must  nonplus  the  devil  himself  to  proceed  farther. 
It  is  the  very  extremity,  the  fulness,  and  the  eon- 
eluding  period  of  sin  ;  the  last  line  and  finishint 
stroke  of  the  devil's  image,  drawn  upon  the  soul  of 
man. — P.  S.J 


CHAPTER  II.   1-16.  9S 


Third  Section. —  Gradual  transition  from  the  corrvption  of  the  Gentiles  to  that  of  the  Jews.  The  unt- 
versality  of  the  corruption,  and,  with  the  universality  of  guilt,  that  worst  con-uplion,  the  judgment 
of  others.  This  ju:Igment  is  likewise  judged  by  the  continuance  of  a  universal  antagonism,  within  the 
univei-sal  corruptioii,  between  piotis,  earnest  men,  and  obstinate  rebels,  both  among  Gentiles  and  Jews, 
in  view  of  the  righteous,  impartial  government  of  God  by  virtue  of  the  coniinuat^ce  of  the  universal 
legislation  of  God  in  the  conscience.  The  revelation  of  the  antagonism  of  loyal  Gentiles  and  disloyal 
Jews  on  the  day  of  the  proclamation  of  the  gospel. 

Chap.  H.  1-16. 

1  Therefore  [Wherefore]  thou  art  inexcusable,  O  man,  whosoever  thou  art 
that  judgest :  for  wherein  thou  judgest  another  [the  other,  thy  neighbor,  rov 
frf()OJ'],  thou  condemnest  thyself;  for  thou  that  judgest  doest  the  same  things. 

2  But  we  ai-e  sure  that  the  judgment  of  God  is  according  to  truth  against  them 

3  which  [those  who]  commit  such  things.  And  [But]  thinkest  thou  this,  O  man, 
that  judgest  them  which  do  [those  who  practise]  such  things,  and  doest  the 

4  same,  that  thou  shalt  escape  the  judgment  of  God?  Or  despisest  thou  the 
riches  of  his  goodness  and  forbearance  and  long-suffering ;  not  knowing  [not 
considering]  that  the  goodness  of  God  leadeth  [is  leading]  thee  to  repentance  ? 

5  But,  after  thy  hardness  and  impenitent  heart,  treasurest  up  unto  [for]  thyself 
N    wrath  against  [in]  the  day  of  wrath  *  and  revelation  '  of  the  righteous  judgment 

of  God ; 
6,  7         Who  will  render  to  every  man  according  to  his  deeds  :    To  them  [those] 
who  by  patient  continuance  in  well-doing  [by  endurance  in  good  work]  seek 
for  glory  and   honour  and  immortality  [^rfii  he  render,  djroSoio-et,  ver.  e],  eternal  life  :  ^ 

8  But  unto  them  that  [to  those  who]  are  contentious  [self-seeking,  or  partisans], 
and  do  not  obey  [disobey]  the  truth,  but  obey  unrighteousness,  [shall  be  rendered] 

9  indignation  and  wrath  [wrath  and  indignation],*  Tribulation  and  anguish,  \omit  ,] 
upon  every  soul  of  man  that  doeth  evil  [is  working  out  to  the  end  the  evil, 
lov  X a r eQya^ofi8i'ov   to   x«xoj'],   of   the   Jew  firsi,   and    also   of   the   Gentile; 

10  [Greek.]  But  glory,  honour,  and  peace,  to  every  man  that  worketh  good  [is 
working  the  good,  ro)  fQyatonho^  to  dya&ov].,  to  the  Jew  first,  and  also  to  the 

11  Gentile  [Greek].     For  there  is  no  respect  of  persons'  with  [before]  God. 

12  For  as  many  as  have  [omit  have]  sinned  without  law  shall  [will]  also  perish 
without  law ;  and  as  many  as  have  [omit  have]  sinned  in  [under]  the  law  shall 

13  [will]  be  judged  by  the  law ;  [.]  (For  not  the  hearers  of  the  law  °  [of  law] 
are  just  [righteous]  before  God,  but  the  doers  of  the  law  [of  law]  shall  [will] 

14  be  justified  [declared  righteous].  For  when  [whenever]  the  [omit  the]  '  Gentiles, 
which  have  not  the  law  [Gentiles  having  no  law,  t&vi]  ra  fuj  t6[iov  f'xorrci],  do ' 
by  nature  the  things  contained  in  the  law  [the  things  of  the  law,  t«  rov  rofiov, 

i.  e.,  the  things  pertaining  to,  or  required  by,  the  law],  these,  having   not  the   laW    [not   having 

15  (the)  law,  i>6fiov  fitj  fxavreg],^  are  a  law  imto  [to]  themselves :  Which  [Who] 
shew  the  work  of  the  law  written  in  their  hearts,  their  conscience  also  bearing 
witness,  and  their  thoughts  the  mean  while  accusing  or  else  excusing  one 
another ;)   [their  thoughts  between  one  another,  or  alternately,  [leta^v  dXh'p.ojv^ 

16  accusing  or  also,  ^  xaJ,  excusing.]  '"  In  the  day  when  God  shall  judge  the 
secrets  of  men  by  [through]  Jesus  Christ  according  to  my  gospel. 


1  Ver.  5.-r[e  V  iiiiipa  opy^s,  i.  e.,  wrath  which  will  he  revealed  in  the  day  of  wrath.  It  belongs  to  hpyfiv,  not  to 
>»)(ravpt'^ei?.  The  E.  V.  confounds  iv  with  «is,  which  is  inadmisgible,  unless  we  take  it  as  a  conslructio  in-eqnans,  so  that 
ev  includes  eij.— P.  S.]  ^    tr         7 

'  Ver.  5.— (c  ai  after  iiroKaXvyjieait  is  nowise  sustained  either  by  the  Codd.  or  by  the  connection.  [Probably  inserted 
to  relieve  the  number  of  geiiitives.  Meyer  :  The  (cot  would  make  the  sense  :  the  appearance  0/  God  and  His  righieoaa 
judgment.  But  the  term  aTroKdKvJiK  toO  6tov  is  unusual.  Paul  speaks  only  of  the  anoK.  Xai<rTov,  1  Cor.  i.  7: 
2  Thess.  1.  7.— P.  S.]  x-  .-  r  >  » 

3  Ver.  7.— [On  the  different  constructions  see  the  Exeg.  JVoles.—T.  S.] 

*  Ver.  8.— The  rec.  Bviib^  ttal  bpyi}.  [The  reverse  order  is  intrinsically  preferable  and  sustained  by  t(.  A.  B. 
P  ,•  G':  ,Vulg.  Syr.,  &c.,  and  adopted  by  the  critical  editors.  The  change  in  tiie  construction  from  the  » tcusativt 
4<i»7i»»  aiiiviov  {anoSuiirei.),  ver.  7,  to  the  nominative  bpyri  xaX  6vfi6t  {inroSuaaTM  or  icrai),  ver.  S,  is  no  doubt  intentional 


04 


THE   EPISTLE   OF   PAUL   TO   THE   ROMANS. 


Go'l  gives  eternal  life,  and  wills  all  men  to  be  saved ;  but  condemnation  is  man's  own  puilt,  and  comes,  so  to  speak,  Dtt 
nolnte.  Comp.  (licumenius,  Wordsworth,  Hodge,  and  Forbes  in  loc.  Bengel,  on  Matt.  vii.  '24,  says:  '^  Salularia  Dcut 
ad  SI",  r^'fert ;  mala  a  *e  remuvfl." — P.  S.) 

*  Vcr.  11. — [Literally,  cccp^tiHcc  of  facfs.  For  >rpo<rwiroAi)i^i«,  several  CoJd.  (A.  D.  G.  .ind  Sinaiticus)  read 
rpo<r(un'oAi7/zi//ta,  with  an  /it,  and  this  reading  has  been  adopted  by  Lachmann,  Alford,  and  others  here  and  else- 
where (Acts  X.  M ;  James  ii.  9).  The  insertion  of  a  fi  is  probably  Alexandiian  usage,  and  due  to  a  vicious  pronuncia- 
tion i>f  ^  and  ir.— P.  S.] 

*  A'er.  13. — The  article  [before  voijlov  in  both  cases,  which  is  found  in  the  iext.  rtrj]  is  'wanting  in  A.  B.  D.  E.  [and 
in  Cod.  Sin.,  and  is  i>robably  inserted  to  indicate  tliat  the  written  law  of  Moses  is  meant  here.  Nevertheless  the  article 
before  low  may  be  properly  retained  in  the  E.  V.  Alford  proposes  to  omit  the  article  before  hearers,  and  ilners,  since  <>■ 
In  both  cases  is  generic,  ot  aKpoaToi  vo/nov  and  ot  woiT/Tal  i-o/liov  form  properly  one  word  :  Gcselzishorcr,  GisilzeslUdler, 
law-hearers,  law-doers. — P.  S.] 

'  Ver.  14. — [edvri,  not  ra  e9vr).  The  omission  of  the  article  is  important  to  avoid  the  appearance  of  conBiot  with 
the  general  moral  depravity  of  the  heathen,  as  taught  i.  22  ff. — P.  S.] 

*  Ver.  1-1. — [Dr.  Lange  translates  .  'Yion '//"ti,  and  so  renders  the  force  of  the  subjunctive  n  o  n"i  <r  i  v ,  which  is  bcttei 
attested  (X.  A.  B.)  than  the  indicative  noiovaiv,  and  is  adopted  by  Lachmann,  Tisclicndorf,  Alford.  Others  read  the 
singular  Troirj  with  reference  to  the  neutral  plural  edvq  (Meyer,  "Wordsworth). — P.  S.] 

«  Ver.  14.'— [There  is,  as  Meyer  remarks,  a  difference  of  emphasis  between  fxij  i/o^oi'  ex.  and  vofiov  fi>j  ex. ;  the  first 
denies  the  possession  of  the  low,  the  second  the  ^-ossession  of  ihe  law.  This  difference  can  perhaps  best  be  rendered  in 
English  by  :  lioving  nn  law,  and,  7wl  havivg  llie  /at?. — P.  S.l 

'"  Ver.  la. — [The  inward  monitor  of  the  heathen  condemns  or  acquits  their  moral  conduct.  The  xai  after  jj  is  con- 
cessive, and  implies  that  thi'  acquittal  is  the  CJ.ception,  the  condemnation  the  rule,  /nerafu  aAA^Aiov  must  not  be 
separated,  and  ixerafu  is  to  be  tikon  not  as  adverb,  as  in  the  E.  V.,  but  as  preposition,  inhr  .te,  between  one  another, 
iiixnrem,  allernalehj ;  comp.  Acts  xv.  9  :  SieVptve  ij.eTa(u  r]ij.C>v  re  koX  avrdv  ;  Slatt.  xviii.  l.i :  fierofu  aou  xal  auToO.  The 
aAA^A(oi<  may  ri'fcr  either  to  the  edvT],  as  the  pioneding  ainiav  (Meyer,  Lange),  or  to  the  following  riiv  iioAoyKr^wi',  i.  «., 
thought  against  thought  in  inner  strife.'  See  Exyg.  Xntes.  Omit  the  parenthesis  vers.  13,  14,  and  15  (E.  V'.),  or  of  14 
and  1.)  (Lachmann,  Meyer),  which  only  disturbs  the  connection.     See  Excg.  JS'oies  on  ver.  16. — P.  S.] 


EXEGETICAL  AND  CRITICAL. 

Summari/. — These  are  the  parts  of  this  highly 
important  section  :  1.  Every  judgment  pronouticcd 
on  another  becomes  the  self-condemnation  of  tlie 
one  judging ;  for  he  is  in  the  same  condemnation 
with  the  one  who  is  judged  by  him.  Herein  the  sin 
of  the  Jews  is  already  presupposed  (vers.  1-5). 
2.  The  righteousness  of  God  is  exalted  above  all  par- 
tial righteousness ;  and  in  its  retribution  it  distin- 
guishes between  men  who  earnestly  long  after  right- 
eousness, and  those  who  obstinately  resist ;  between 
men  who  constantly  look  toward  things  eternal,  and 
those  whose  princii)le  of  life  is  contentioti  and  party 
spirit  (vers.  6-11).  This  opposition  constitutes  a 
higher  ideal  and  dynamic  opposition  between  pious 
and  ungodly  people  above  the  historical  antagonism 
of  Jews  and  Gentiles,  and  independently  of  it,  so 
that,  on  the  day  of  the  declaration  of  the  gospel, 
Jews  may  appear  as  Gentiles,  and  Gentiles  as  Jews 
(vers.  12-16). 


First  Paraoeaph,  vers.  1-5. 

Ver.  1.  Wherefore  thou  art  inexcusable. 
It  maybe  asked,  To  what  docs  r)  k'i  ,  wherefore, 
refer?  1.  To  the  fundamental  thought  of  the  whole 
section  of  chap.  i.  18-32  (Meyer,  and  others).  2.  i)i.6 
refers  back  to  the  (iixnlntiia  in  ver.  32  (Dc  Wettc, 
Phili|)pi  I  Alford,  Hodgi;]).  3.  iVio  points  y)rolepti- 
cally  to  the  sins  of  the  Jews  (Hengel,  Tholuck).  We 
need  hardly  mention  BuUinger's  explanation  :  It  is 
coutiniialiimis  parfa-uln ;  prcvtn-ea.  We  here  find 
a  definite  reference  to  chap.  i.  32.  The  otnvn;.  indi- 
cates diielly  the  climax  of  Gentile  corruption  ;  but 
Gentile  and  Jewish  corruption  meet  together  at  this 
climax.  Getitile  corru|)iii)n  culminates  in  the  ap- 
proval of  evil,  and  Jewisii  in  judging.  But  their 
common  corruption  is  the  perfect  moral  self-contra- 
diction :  sin  against  better  knowleilge  and  conscience. 
Therefore  «  i'  an  n  ).o  y  tjT  n  i ,  inexcusable,  are 
not  merely  those  wIk)  contriliute  aid  to  evil-doers, 
but  those  al.-o  who  pronounce  sentence  on  tluni.  In 
Other  words,  not  the  (Ko,  but  ver.  32  is  proleptic, 
especially  in  connection  with  the  avthiifiovn;  in 
ver.  31.  ' 

O  man,  whosoever  thou  art.  To  whom  is 
thin  address  directed  'i     1  To  the  GtntilfS.  csDecially 


Gentile  authorities  (Chrysostom) ;  their  better-mind- 
ed ones  (Olshausen,  Melanchtlion) ;  their  philoso- 
phers (Clericus).  2.  The  Jews  (De  Wette,  Kiickert, 
and  others).  Meyer :  "  Judging  the  Gentiles  as 
rejected  by  God  {Midr.  TiUin  'f.  6,  3  ;  Vhdubb.  f.  3, 

2.  &c.)  was  a  characferisticmn  of  the  Jews.  [Alford: 
The  Jew  is  not  yet  named,  but  hinted  at. — P.  S.] 

3.  All   men,  without  distinction  (Beza,  Calovius). 

4.  All  men,  but  with  a  special  reference  to  the  Jews 
(Tholuck).*  The  last  interpretation  must  be  ren- 
dered more  definite  by  the  consideration  that  the 
merciless  among  Jews  and  Gentiles  are  meant.  But, 
in  reality,  every  one  is  meant  who  makes  him.self 
gtiilty  of  condemnatory  judgment  (for  this  is  the 
sense  of  x^x'rfu',  here,  as  in  Matt.  vii.  1  ;  xxv.  35). 
See  vt!rs.  9,  10.  The  Gentiles,  too,  were  heartless 
judges.  We  need  call  to  mind  only  Roman  politics. 
Tholuck  recalls  the  corruption  of  Jewish  life  at  that 
time  imder  Ilerod,  and  even  among  their  scribes. — 
'/?!'  i<) ,  ■wherein,  is  explained  in  ver.  21  .sqq.,  and 
hence  must  not  be  understood  as  instrumental,  by 
which  mrans,  wherebi/  ;  still  less  eodem  tempore  quo, 
at  the  time  when  (Kollner),  but  in  that  wherein,  in 
the  matter  in  whieh  (Luther  [E.  Y.,  ^leyer,  Alford], 
and  others).  [Thou  that  judgest  doest  the  same 
things,  Trt  yci(t  avrn  niinctan^i;  o  x(iiviov. 
rncliaritable  judging  is  itself  a  grave  olfence  against 
the  law  wiiicl)  enjoins  humility  and  charity  as  the 
very  soul  of  virtue  and  piety.  Besides,  even  the 
most  moral  men  carry  in  themselves  tlie  seed  of  all 
vices,  and  if  kept  from  open  transgression,  it  is  either 
by  the  grace  of  God  j)reventing  them,  or  by  (Pimri- 
saie  arid  Stoic)  pride,  which  is  itself  a  sin  against 
God,  the  sin  of  Satan  and  the  fallen  angels. — P.  S.] 
Tlie  addition  of  6  -/.(jiviov,  "with  reproachful  ex- 
pression "  (.Meyer). 

Ver.  2.  But  we  are  sure,  Ou^antv.  Who? 
1.  The  Jews,  as  knowers  of  the  law  (Rosenmiiller, 
and  others). f    2.  Universal  human  knowledge  (Riick- 

*  [.'Similarly  TTodpc :  Though  from  what  follows  it  ia 
plain  that  tlie  Jews  are  here  intended,  yet  the  proposition 
IS  made  treneral.  Wordsworth  :  I'aul  uses  d»'9p<oir<  Instead 
of  'lovSaie,  liecause  the  proposition  is  of  univcrs.il  applica- 
tion, and  because  ho  would  approach  the  Jew  with  gentle- 
ness, and  not  alienate  him  by  an  abrupt  denunciation. — 
P.  S.l 

t  [Wordsworth  :  We  who  are  .Tews  and  have  the  Scrip* 
tares.  The  Apostle  ehariiably  and  wisely  identiflei*  him- 
self with  the  Jews  to  convince  them  from  the  conceded 
(trouud  of  the  O.  T.— P.  B.J 


CHAPTER   II.    1-16. 


95 


«rt,  Meyer,  Philippi  [Hodge]  ).  3.  Jewish-Christian 
knowledge,  with  reference  to  chap.  iii.  19 ;  vii.  14 
(Thohickj.  4.  Yet  the  consciousness  here  declared 
is  the  specifically  Christian  one,  which  is,  however, 
anticipated  by  the  better  universal  consciousness  in 
forebodings  of  the  common  misery  of  sin. 

According  to  truth.  Kara  a  A  ?/  fl  ?  ta  v , 
not  alijOwi;  [revera,  truly']  (Raphel,  Kollner,  it  is 
real\  but  [as  in  E.  V.]  according  to  truth  (Tholuck, 
Meyer  [Alford] ) ;  that  is,  corresponding  to  the  in- 
ternal and  real  relations  of  guilt  [according  to  jus- 
tice, without  error,  without  respect  of  persons].  The 
condemnatory  judgment  of  God  on  those  who  judge 
is  according  to  tlie  relations  of  truth,  by  which  judg- 
ment they  are  the  most  condemnable  who,  without 
knowing  it,  pronounce  judgment  on  themselves. 
Therefore  they  are  hypocrites.  [/Carci  a).tjOfi,av 
belongs  not  to  y.Qiftct,  as  the  predicate  of  the  sen- 
tence, but  to  ifftiv,  as  adverb  :  it  proceeds  accord- 
ing to  truth,  or  the  judgment  of  God,  which  is  accord- 
ing to  truth,  is  i»g-.niist  those,  &c. — P.  S.] 

Ver.  3.  And  thinkest  thou  this,  O  man. 
According  to  Meyer  and  Tholuck,  ver.  2  is  the 
propos'tio  major  in  relation  to  what  here  follows. 
If  the  Apostle  had  designed  such  a  conclusion  in 
ver.  5,  the  minor  proposition  of  vers.  8  and  4  would 
have  been  oti\erwise  expressed.  We  have  here  the 
beginning  of  tlie  conclusion  from  the  premise  in 
ver.  2.  Thinkest  thou  </*«<,  rovro.  Reference  to 
the  strange  supposition  that  God  will  become,  by 
way  of  exception,  a  partisan  for  liim.  Tiierefore 
also  the  av  is  emphasized.  Meyer:  " In  opposition 
to  Jewish  conceit."  Matt.  iii.  7 ;  Luke  iii.  7.  Yet 
the  expression  here  must  not  be  limited  to  the  Jews. 
— That  thou  [o-iVthou  thyself,  thou  above  all  oth- 
ers, thou  because  a  Jew]  shalt  escape.  Not  by 
acquittal  (Bengel  [Hodge] ),  but  by  exemption.  So 
Meyer  :  "  Only  tlie  Gentiles  shall  be  judged,  accord- 
ing to  the  false  opinion  of  the  Jews  (Bertholdt, 
Chrisiologie^  p.  206),  but  all  Israel  shall  have  part 
in  the  Messiah's  kingdom  as  its  true-born  children 
(Matt.  viii.  12)."  [Comp.  Matt.  iii.  7,  9  ;  John  viii. 
33.]  The  expression  escape  refers  at  the  same 
time  to  an  approaching  actual  judgment  which  will 
overtake  every  guilty  person. 

Ver.  4.  Or  despisest  thou.  This  is  a  differ- 
ent case  from  the  preceding.  [//  introduces  a  new 
error  or  objection. — P.  S.]  In  what  does  the  differ- 
ence consist  ?  Thou  regardest  thyself  either  exempt 
from  punishment,  because  thou  believest  thyself  a 
favorite  of  the  Deity,  and  that  thou  shalt  escape  at 
the  coming  judgment ;  or  thou  dost  wickedly  regard 
the  riches  of  God's  goodness  in  delaying  the  punish- 
ment as  a  sign  that  the  general  judgment  will  never 
come  to  pass  at  all.  Paul  frequently  uses  tt Ao  Tro? 
as  an  expression  for  great  fulness  [chap.  ix.  23  ;  xi. 
83 ;  Eph.  i.  7,  18  ;  ii.  7  ;  iii.  16  ;  Col.  i.  17.  It  is 
not  a  Hebraism,  but  found  also  in  Plato  and  other 
Greek  classics,  to  denote  abundance  and  magnitude. 
— P.  S.]. — His  goodness.  The  ■/ q  ij a r or  rjq  is, 
more  specifically,  mildness,  beneficent  goodness,  in 
contrast  with  penal  justice.  It  may  be  asked  whether 
we  should  read  :  His  goodness  (/Qtjarorijroc)  and 
forbearance  (aroyTji;)  and  long-suffering  {fiaxQo- 
■©■I'.Hiwc),  or  wliether  the  /^(^ffTor//?  is  here  divided 
by  Kai-y.ai,  as  well,  as  also,  into  the  idea  of  for- 
bearance and  long-suffering.  We  accept  the  latter, 
since  the  Apostle  subsequently  groups  all  again  in 
TO  yQtjirrov.  The  Apostle  Peter  uses  the  same 
expression,  /ico'.QoO-v/iia,  for  the  two  ideas  :  forbear- 
ance toward  the  weaknes."  of  friends,  and  long-suf- 


fering toward  the  opposition  of  enemies  [slowness  in 
the  infliction  of  deserved  punishment].  But  Paul 
distinguishes  between  patience  or  forbearance,  chap, 
iii.  25,  and  lonr/suffering,  chap.  ix.  22,  according  to 
the  rehition  already  indicated.  The  avoy/i]  is  about 
equal  to  the  vnofiovij.  Col.  i.  11,  and  tlie  7r^o(OT/;<i 
Col.  iii.  12. — Compare  avfyonivou  aXlijlcn',  Col.  iii. 
13  ;  fia/.^oOi'finrf  n()6q  ndvrai;.  It  is  thus  natu 
ral  that  one  idea  should  sometimes  run  into  the 
other.  Tholuck  :  "  The  word  of  Christ  (Luke  xix. 
41 ;  Matt,  xxiv.)  would  cause  the  expectation  of  a 
judgment  on  Israel,  which  really  occurred  abou* 
twenty  [ten]  years  after  this  Epistle.  Here  Paui 
may  naturally  have  had  this  in  view." — ^ A yvoiiiv. 
The  translation  Not  knowing  is  too  weak.  [Dr. 
Lange  translates  ayvo<i)v:  Indem  du  misskeniist, 
wilfully  ignoring  ;  while  Grotius,  Tholuck,  Words- 
worth, ah,  render  it :  not  coni^idering. — P.  S.]  Meyer 
opposes  the  interpretation  of  ayvoiZv  as  winhing 
not  to  knoiv  (De  Wette  [Alford],  and  others).  Yet 
wilful  and  culpable  ignorance  is  certainly  meant  here 
(comp.  ayvoia,  Eph.  iv.  18). — Is  leading  thee  to 
repentance,  aytv  means,  at  all  events,  not  only 
the  objective  intention  of  God  (Philippi),  but  also 
the  real  determination  of  Divine  goodness.  [Ben- 
gel  :  Deus  ducit  volentem  dtici  ;  duett  sttaviter,  non 
cogit  necessitate.  Wordsworth  :  "  The  word  aj-ft, 
leads,  intimates  the  uill  of  God,  but  also  the  will 
of  man.  God  leads,  but  man  may  refuse  to  be  led." 
To  this  Dr.  Hodge  assents,  but  adds,  from  his  strict 
Calvhiistic  standpoint :  "  Who  gives  the  will  to  be 
led  ?  Is  there  no  preventing  grace  [gratia  prceveni- 
ens]  ?  Does  not  God  work  in  us  to  will,  as  well  as 
to  do  ?  Surely  there  is  such  a  thing  as  being  made 
willing  without  being  forced.  There  is  u  middle 
ground  between  moral  suasion  and  coercion.  God 
supersedes  the  necessity  of  forcing,  by  making  ns 
willing  in  the  day  of  His  power.  The  Apostle,  how- 
ever, is  not  here  speaking  of  gracious  influence,  but 
of  the  moral  tendencies  of  providential  dispensa- 
tions."—P.  S.] 

Ver,  5.  But,  after  thy  hardness  [Kara  6k 
rijv  ay.).ri(i6rrjrd  aov].  Evidently  not  a  contin- 
uation of  the  question  (Lachmann  [Alford]  ),  but  an- 
tithesis. The  hardened  one  mistakes  the  benign  pur- 
pose of  Divine  government,  and  by  this  means  trans- 
forms the  same  into  a  judgment.  The  question  can 
therefore  not  be  one  of  mere  frustration.  [Kara, 
is  taken  by  some,  in.  proportion  to,  so  that  the  de- 
gree of  punishment  corresponds  to  the  degree  of 
hardness  and  impenitence  ;  but  by  most  conmicnta- 
tors  in  the  sense  of  secundum,  i.  e.,  as  may  be  ex- 
pected from  thy  hardness,  agreeably  to  its  nature. — 
P.  S.] — And  impenitent  heart.  This  takes  away 
from  the  idea  the  harsh  appearance  of  a  fatalistic 
compulsion.  The  hardness  is  voluntarily  continued 
and  magnified  by  impenitence  of  heart.  —  Thou 
treasurest  up  for  thyself  [thou  for  thyself,  not 
God  for  thee. — P.  S.]  The  verb  dr,<jcxv(j  i^fi-v  is 
used  in  the  wider  sense  of  every  accumulation,  and 
denotes  also  ironically  the  heaping  up  of  evils  and 
punishments.  It  here  stands  in  striking  opposition 
to  the  7r).ovro<;  of  God's  goodness.  The  despising 
of  the  riches  of  God's  goodness  in  forbearance  and 
long-suffering  is  the  heaping  up  of  a  treasure  of 
wrath.  Unto  thyself  indicates  voluntary  guilt  as 
well  as  completed  folly. — In  [or  on,  iv]  the  day 
of  nrrath.  The  construction  is  not  Q rfaavQitft.^ 
fk  ii/'fQav,  &c.  (Luther  [E.  V.,  agains'],  Tholuck), 
and  also  not  an  o^y'i  which  will  break  out  on  the 
day  of  wrath  (Meyer  [Alford.  Hndgel ).     But.  the 


96 


THE   EPISTLE   OF  PAUL   TO  THE   ROMANS. 


meaning  is,  that  the  day  of  wrath  is  even  now  readj 
to  burst  (ortl),  and  that  that  furious  and  senseless 
&^(Tai(ji^nv  still  continues ;  comp.  James  v.  3 ; 
i&rjaavi)i(Tarf  iv  ia/dran;  iinifiati;.  Every  catas- 
trophe of  judgment  wliich  succeeds  a  period  of  long- 
BufTering  is  designated  a  day  of  wrath  (Ezek.  xxii 
24 ;  Zephaniali  ii.  2).  But  each  of  these  judicial 
catastrophes  is  a  preUuie  to  the  last  day  of  consum- 
mated wrath. — And  revelation  [manifestation]  of 
the  righteous  judgment.  The  <)txatoz()KT<'a 
(in  the  New  Testament,  arnxi  /* yo/uiov,  and  but 


seldom  elsewhere).*  The  righteous  judgment  of 
God  proceeds  in  an  emphatic  way  through  all  period! 
of  time ;  but  it  has  special  epochs  of  its  a.Tio*a.kv 
V't?.  The  whole  conte  nplation  of  diflerent  judicial 
catastrophes  consists  in  the  certainty  that  the  time 
of  final  decision  is  introduced  with  the  coming  ol 
Christ.     Tholuck  cites  Klopstock's  lines : 

"  Among  the  ways  of  men 
God  walks,  with  quiet  tread,  Ilis  unseen  path  ; 
But  drawinp  near  the  i;oal,  He  rushes  on, 
Decided  as  the  gleaming  thuuderbolt." 


Second  Paraoraph  (vers.  6-11). 

[It  may  aid  the  reader  in  the  exegesis  of  this  paragraph  to  have  in  view  the  following  parallel  arrangei 
ment  in  four  stanzas  of  three  lines  each,  which  we  adopt  from  the  Analysis  of  Forbes,  with  some  change* 
In  the  translation : 

6.  Who  will  render  to  every  man  according  to  his  deeds ; 

iTo  those  who  by  endurance  in  good  work 
Seek  t6r  glory,  and  honor,  and  immortality. 
Eternal  life : 

I  But  to  those  who  are  self-seeking, 
And  disobey  the  truth,  but  obey  unrighteousneae, 
Indignation  [shall  be]  and  wrath : 

iTribtilation  and  anguish 
Upon  every  soul  of  man  that  worketh  evil, 
Of  the  Jew  first,  and  also  of  the  Greek ; 

IBut  glory,  honor,  and  peace. 
To  every  man  that  worketh  good. 
To  the  Jew  first,  and  also  to  the  Greek. 

The  first  two  stanzas,  A  and  B,  and  the  last  two  stanzas,  B  and  A,  are  antithetically  parallel  in  each  of 
their  lines,  which  indicate:  (1.)  The  character  of  the  two  opposite  classes  to  be  compared;  (2.)  their 
respective  pursuits;  and  (3.)  the  appropriate  rewards.  In  another  point  of  view  the  four  stanzas  are 
introversively  parallel,  the  first  corresponding  with  the  fourth,  and  the  second  with  the  third.  The  glorious 
reward  of  the  righteous  is  put  first  and  last  in  order  to  stimulate  and  encourage  the  reader.  The  lines  in 
each  stanza  are  also  introversively  parallel,  as  is  made  apparent  to  the  reader  by  the  typographical  arrange- 
ment.— P.  S.] 


Vcr.  6.  Who  will  render  to  every  man.   The 

negative  form  of  this  declaration,  see  ver.  11.  The 
righteousness  of  God  is  far  above  the  partisan  right- 
eousness of  man,  and  also  above  that  partisan  jus- 
tice which  believes  that  God's  government  is  re- 
Btrained  by  the  historical  difference  between  Judaism 
and  heathendom.  Tiie  decision  stated  by  the  Apos- 
tle is  pronounced  by  the  fundamental  law  of  the 
entire  Scrii)tuiT8,  of  all  Christendom,  and  of  all 
religion  (comp.  Ps.  Ixii.  12;  Isa.  iii.  10,  11;  Jer. 
xvii.  10  ;  Matt.  vii.  21-24  ;  xii.  36  ;  xvi.  27  ;  xxv. 
85  ;  John  v.  29 ;  Rom.  xiv.  10  ;  2  Cor.  v.  10).  The 
supposition  that  there  is  a  great  difficulty  here, 
and  an  apparent  contradiction  between  this  sen- 
tence and  the  doctrine  of  justification  by  faith,  is 
a  remarkable  indication  of  an  inadequate  view  of 
works  on  one  hand,  and  of  justification  by  faith  on 
the  other.  Tholuck  gives  an  account  of  the  ques- 
tion in  discussion,  p.  88  sqq.  Solutions  of  the 
imaginary  difficulty :  1.  The  Apostle  speaks  here 
only  hypothetically  of  the  judgment  of  believers,  as 
God  would  judge  them,  apart  from  the  standpoint 
of  the  gospel  (Melanchthon,  &c.).  Tholuck :  Here, 
and  in  vcr.  16,  the  Apostle  regards  only  the  Divine 
valuation  placed  on   men,   ai)art   from    redemption. 

tSo,  substantially,  Alford  and  Hodgo. — P.  S.].     2. 
le  speaks  of  the  final  jtidgmcnt,  wlien  faith  will  be 
proved  to  be  the  absolute  fulfilment  of  the  law  (Ols- 


hausen).  This  is  adopted  by  Philippi,  but  under  the 
restriction :  That  the  (itxaiocrrr/;  £x  ninrmx;  will 
remove  the  deficiency  in  the  works  of  the  regen- 
erate. Gerhard  :  Opera  adducentur  in  jwlicio  non 
ut  sahilis  merita,  S'd  ut  fidei  kstimonia  et  effecta. 
3.  Fritzsche :  The  Apostle  is  inconsistent,  and  here 
opens  a  semita  per  honrstntcm  near  the  via  rerfia  of 
justification.  4.  Luthardt :  The  new  vital  form  of 
faith  must  be  regarded  as  the  product  of  a  previous 
direction  of  life ;  the  tf^iya  arc  perfected  in  faith 
(Sl'idicn  und  Kritiken  for  1852,  No.  2,  p.  368). 
[This  view  seems  inconsistent  with  the  Scripture 
doctrine  of  regeneration  as  a  new  creation,  and  of 
the  new  life  as  the  reverse  of  the  old  (Rom.  vi.  4, 
19  AT.),  and  with  the  personal  experience  of  PauL 
But  see  Dr.  Lange's  remarks  below,  and  consider 
the  remarkable  concession  of  Peter,  Acts  x.  34,  36, 
where  a  disposition  to  fear  God  and  to  work  right- 
eousness is  supposed  to  exist  before  conversion,  even 
among  heathen,  and  to  qualify  them  for  acceptance 
with  God. — P.  S.]  6.  Cocccius  and  Limborch  :  The 
f^iith  in  Christ  nnist  also  be  included  as  the  highest 
work  (?()j'o»').  This  view  is  undoubtedly  correct ; 
and  Tholuck's  explimation,  that  Triirni;  tii;  /(»»ffTo» 
must  not  be  included  here  (with  reference  to  chap. 

*  rln  the  writintrs  of  Justin  Martyr  and  other  fitthaiti 
See  Meyer  in  loc.—l'.  8.] 


CHAPTER   II.    1-16. 


V) 


iv.  6 ;  xi.  16  ;  x.  6),  obscures  the  whole  question. 
Tlie  passages  cited  by  Tholuck  plainly  relate  alto- 
gether to  a  life  in  the  works  of  the  law.  But  in 
John  vi.  29  Clirist  calls  faith  a  work  of  God  which 
believers  should  exercise.  Paul  also  calls  faith  a 
good  work  {tjiyov  ayaSov),  Phil.  i.  6  ;  viewing  it, 
however,  as  the  operation  of  God.  In  1  Tliess.  i.  3, 
he  speaks  of  an  'iijyov  r^t;  niatuDi; ;  also  in  2  Thess. 
j.  11.  He  means  in  these  passages,  of  course,  such 
a  faith  as  proves  itself  by  works.  But  it  follows, 
nevertheless,  most  decidedly,  that  he  distinguishes 
just  as  positively  two  kinds  of  works,  just  as  James 
distinguishes  two  kinds  of  faith.  We  must  therefore 
distinguish  a  two-fold  conception  of  works  with  the 
Apostle,  if  we  would  escape  the  confusion  made  by 
a  timid  species  of  orthodoxy.  The  direction  of  faith 
as  well  as  of  unbelief  has,  according  to  Paul — as 
Luthardt  has  properly  remarked — its  antecedens  in 
the  antithesis  of  the  fundamental  tendencies  which 
he  describes  in  vers.  V,  8.  The  one  class  are,  in 
their  inward  frame  of  mind,  'QriT ovvrn;,  striving 
souls — therefore  men  of  longing  and  aspiration,  poor 
in  spirit  [Matt.  v.  3].  Their  good  works  constitute 
a  unity  of  effort,  vno/iovij  'd^yov;  their  aim  is 
the  ()6|a,  Tifi/j,  aipOa^tjia  (goodly  pearls ;  precious 
pearls,  Matt.  xiii.  45).  The  other  class  are,  in  their 
mental  disposition,  e|  iiJi.&tiaq,  contentious,  even 
when  they  confess  an  orthodox  form  of  faith.  Tliey 
are  men  animated  by  the  bigotry  of  party  spirit,  and 
therefore  wantonly  rebelling  against  the  truth,  while 
they  are  the  narrow-minded  slaves  of  the  unright- 
eousness of  party  spirit.  But  the  retribution  of 
both  classes  will  be  determined  by  the  respective 
degrees  of  virtue  and  vice  which  they  reach.  As 
seekers,  they  find  faith  and  justification  by  faith, 
which,  according  to  chap,  iii.,  proceeds  also  fi-om 
righteousness.  As  believers,  they  strive  for  the 
treasure  of  their  heavenly  calling,  and  strive  after 
those  things  which  are  before  them,  until  they  reach 
the  goal  of  perfection.  But  there  they  do  not  ap- 
pear with  works  of  the  law,  nor  with  a  mixture  of 
perfect  justitia  imputata  and  imperfect  works.  In 
the  kingdom  of  perfect  love  the  antagonism  of  merit 
and  grace  tlisappears  in  a  higher  unity  of  both.  It 
is  observable  that,  with  the  Apostle,  all  the  ideas  of 
the  Old  Testament  become  more  profound,  and  are 
made  perfect :  1.  The  law  becomes  the  law  of  the 
Spirit ;  2.  work  becomes  the  work  of  faith ;  3. 
righteousness  becomes  justifying  righteousness ;  4. 
retribution  becomes  free,  ruwarding  love.  The  ob- 
servation of  Meyer,  that  we  have  here  the  law  of 
the  Jews  only,  and  with  it  the  natural  law  of  the 
Gentiles  as  the  medium  affecting  the  decision,  does 
not  relieve  the  matter.  He  indeed  also  adds,  that 
Paul  had  good  reason  for  this  statement,  since  the 
Christian,  too — because  he  is  to  be  judged  according 
to  his  conduct — must  be  judged  according  to  the  law 
(conip.  the  doctrine  of  the  tertius  usus  legis),  and  ac- 
cording to  the  7i}.i^^o)Gt.i;  to?  vofxov  introduced  by 
Christ  [Matt.  v.  17;  xxv.  31  ff.';  Rom.  xiii.  8-10]. 
He  justly  rejects  the  opinion  of  Reiche,  that  the  doc- 
trine of  justification  by  faith  implies  a  partial  abro- 
gation of  the  moral  order  of  the  world.* 


♦  [Of  the  English  and  American  commentators,  whom  I 
have  consulted,  Dr.  Hodge  is  the  only  one  who  takes  some 
pains  to  solve  the  dogmatic  difficulty  presented  by  this 
apparent  contradiction  of  the  doctrine  of  retribution  ac- 
cording to  works,  and  the  doctrine  of  justification  by  faith. 
I  quote  the  substance  of  his  remarks :  "  First,  nlitwith- 
Btanding  the  doctrine  of  gratuitous  ju.stification,  and  in 
perfect  consistency  with  it,  the  Apostle  still  teaches  that 
the  retributions  of  eternity  are  according  to  our  works. 

7 


Ver.  Y.    To  those  who  by  endurance  (or 
perseverance)  in  good  work  [  n  a  5 '   {no ,«  o' 

vijv  tQyov  ayaOov,  an  adverbial  quahfication 
of  the  verb  cz/Torct],  &c.  Where  the  different 
works  are  only  one  good  work,  and  where  there  ia 
this  perfect  endurance  of  life  and  effort,  the  direc- 
tion toward  higher  and  eternal  things  can  only  be 
meant.  The  genitive  tfjyov  ayctdov  is  genit. 
subj.  (not  obj.  ;  Meyer) ;  that  is,  the  endurance  M'hich 
is  peculiar  to  the  truly  good  work.  [Comp.  'vnonovi[ 
t7j<;  i/.nidoq,  1  Thess.  i.  3. — P.  S.].  It  may  be 
asked,  whether  the  Apostle  here  uses  the  words 
d  oia,  Tifi  /j ,  and  aqO  a^aia,  m  the  specifically 
Christian  sense,  or  in  the  more  general  sense.  If  the 
former  be  the  case,  they  mean  future  salvation  in  its 
glory  (2  Cor.  iv.  17 ;  Matt.  xiii.  43),  in  the  !i07ior  con- 
nected  with  it  (for  it  is  the  reward  of  victory,  1  Cor. 
ix.  25  ;  joint  heirship  with  Christ,  chap.  viii.  17  ; 
reigning  togetlier  with  Him,  2  Tim.  ii.  12),  and  in  its 
incorruptibility  (1  Cor.  xv.  52  sqq.  ;  Rev.  xxi.  4;  1 
Peter  i.  4).  But  then  it  must  be  said  that  the  passage 
refers  to  a  seeking  whose  object  (goodly  pearls.  Matt, 
xiii.)  is,  at  the  beginning,  more  or  less  concealed  from 
the  seekers  themselves  (comp.  Acts  xvii.  23).  It 
seems  more  natural,  however,  to  interpret  tlie  above 
ideas  as  stages  of  the  development  of  noble  seek- 
ing; the  first  aim  is  dola,  spiritual  splendor  of 
life,  ideality;  then  ti^/itj,  integrity,  honorableness 
of  character;  then  aqOaQoia,  deliverance  from 
corruption.  The  l^oit]  atolrtoc;,  as  the  grace  and 
gift  of  God,  is  very  nearly  related  to  this  last  object 
of  c/yTfiv.  The  restless  u^/Tfir  —  dissatisfaction, 
and  further  striving,  until  the  object  is  reached,  here 
or  there — (Matt,  v.,  the  first  beatitudes ;  Acts  xvii.) 
remains  the  key-note.  Other  constructions :  1.  CEcu- 
menius,  Luther :  a7io<')(''i(rfi-  [to  be  supplied  from 
ver.  6]  is  connected  with  the  accusatives  JoSav, 
Tt//>;)',  a(f'{y.  ;  and  ttixoTau  with  LMtjv  aiMviov  [i.  e., 
"  Who  will  give  glory,  honor,  and  immortality  to 
those  who,  by  patience  in  good  works,  seek  eternal 

The  good  only  are  saved,  and  the  wicked  only  are  con- 
demned. *  *  *  The  wicked  will  be  punished  on  account 
of  their  works,  and  according  to  their  works ;  the  ritrhteoue 
will  be  rewarded,  not  on  account  vi,  but  according  to  their 
works.  Good  works  are  to  them  the  evidence  of  their  be- 
longing to  that  class  to  whom,  for  Christ's  sake,  eternal  life 
is  graciously  awarded ;  and  they  are  in  some  sense  and  to 
some  extent,  the  measure  of  that  reward.  But  it  is  more 
pertinent  to  remark,  in  the  second  place,  that  the  Apostle 
is  not  here  teaching  the  method  of  justification,  but  is  lay- 
ing down  those  general  principles  of  justice,  according  to 
which,  irrespective  of  the  got-pel.  all  men  are  to  be  judged, 
lie  is  expounding  the  law,  not  the  gospel.  Anil  as  the  law 
not  only  says  that  death  is  the  wages  of  sin,  but  also  that 
those  who  keep  its  precepts  shall  live  by  them,  so  the  Apos- 
tle says,  that  God  will  punish  the  T\'icked  and  reward  the 
righteous.  This  is  perfectly  consistent  with  what  he  after- 
wards teaches,  that  there  are  none  righteous;  that  there 
are  none  who  so  obey  the  law  as  to  be  entitled  to  the  life 
which  it  promises ;  and  that  foi'  such  the  gospel  provides  a 
plan  of  justification  without  works,  a  plan  for  saving  those 
whom  the  law  condenms.  He  is  here  combating  the  false 
hopes  of  the  Jews,  who,  though  trusting  to  the  law,  were  by 
the  principles  of  the  law  exposed  to  condemnation.  This  he 
does  to  drive  them  from  this  false  dependence,  and  to  show 
them  that  neither  Jew  nor  Gentile  can  be  justified  before 
the  bar  of  that  God,  who,  while  He  promises  eternal  life  to 
the  obedient,  has  revealed  His  purpose  to  punish  the  dis- 
obedient. All,  therefore,  that  this  passage  teaches  is,  that 
irrespective  of  the  gospel,  to  those  who  either  never  heard 
of  it,  or  who  having  heard,  reject  it,  the  jirinciple  ef  judg- 
ment will  be  law."  This  is  a  combination  of  the  interpre- 
tation of  Tholuck  with  that  of  Olshausen,  eniunerated  above 
as  Nos.  1  and  2.  Stuart :  "  There  is  some  real  goodness  in 
the  works  of  the  sanctified  ;  and  this  will  be  rewarded,  im- 
perfect as  it  is,  not  on  the  ground  of  law,  but  on  the  ground 
of  grace."  Very  unsatisfactory.  T)r.  Wordsworth  says  not 
a  word  on  this  difficulty,  but  gives  a  long  extract  from  Je- 
rome's work  against  Pelagius  in  explanation  of  ver.  ^4 — 
P.  S.] 


98 


THE   EPISTLE   OF   PAUL   TO   THE   ROMANS. 


life] ;  2.  Reiche  [Ewald]  :  rou;  /liv  [to  the  one] 
xa'/  vTtoiiovriV  loyor  ayaO-ov  Aoinv  xai  Tt/f^ft' 
nat  aif  ftafjfjiav  (ctnof^iiicfn) — ^^/Torffn'  t^oi^/v  aldh 
viov  ["ZiiTmrtiv  as  ai)positioii  to  Tofg  /<«'].  3.  Ben- 
gel  [Kritzsclie]  and  others:  toTi;,-  //ti'  /.a^f  vnoft. 
i^>ynv  «j'«.9-or  (ocffn'),  i)6;av,  &C.  u/Torffu' — '^lo/jv 
aio'iriov  {a7io<)<>i(Tn.)  [i.  e.,  to  those  who  pei"severe  in 
good  work,  seeking  glory,  &e.,  He  mill  give  eternal 
lift;] ).  Beza  suggests  still  another  and  very  dog- 
matic construction  :  Qui  secundum  pnlienlem  cxsptc- 
tationem  quceritnt  boni  operis  gluriam.  Our  con- 
struction has  most  expositors  in  its  favor  [Vulgate, 
Calvin,  (-rrotius,  Tholuck,  Olshauscn,  De  Wette,  Mey- 
er, Pliilippi,  Alford,  Hodge,  &c.]  ;  also  the  clear- 
ness of  the  parallel,  in  conseqnence  of  which,  right- 
eous retribution  constitutes  the  conclusion  both 
times. — 'Ynofiovt'i,  not  patience,  but  jursevera/i- 
tia  (Erasmus).  "Efiyov,  not  collectively  (Tholuck 
[Hodge]  ),  but  dynamically.  [The  singular  indicates 
the  general  course  and  habit  of  life,  or  the  moral 
character  as  a  unit,  as  distinct  from  isolated  resolu- 
tions and  actions,  comp.  Gal.  vi.  4 ;  1  Thess.  i.  3  ; 
James  i.  4,  &c.  The  E.  V.,  palient  continuance  in 
well-doing,  though  not  literal,  is  well  expressed. — 
P.  S.]  y/6i«,  tint],  a(fi  0-a(>tTici,  are  the  phases 
of  the  manifestation  of  the  L.i,)fj  aim'ioi;  for  those 
who  liave  from  afar  been  striving  for  salvation.  The 
matter  is  inverted  in  the  case  of  believers :  Power 
of  life,  worth  of  life,  glory  of  life*  Tholuck's  re- 
mark is  strange,  that  "  the  Apostle  characterized 
here  the  striving  of  the  better  class  of  unbelievers 
in  such  a  manner  as  he  could  hardly  expect  to  find 
it  by  any  possibility  among  them."  But  Paul  had 
become  ac(iuaintcd  with  such  men  as  Gamaliel,  Ser- 
gius  Paulus,  Gallio,  and  others. 

Ver.  8.  But  to  those  vrho  are  self-seeking 
partisans. f  [Literally,  t/iose  of  self-seeking  —  a 
periplirase  of  the  subject,  indicating  the  origin  {ix, 
out  of  as  from  a  root)  and  moral  character ;  comp. 
ot  Ix  voitor,  the  legalists ;  oi  ix  nimKix;,  the  be- 
lievers;  oi  ix  TTf^iiro,"/^,-,  the  circumcised,  &c.,  and 
the  cognate  use  of  v'uti  and  ri/.va. — P.  S.].  On 
iQi,&tin,  compare  Tholuck  and  Meyer.  We  must 
not,  with  the  elder  commentators,  derive  it  from 
i^itirt  or  t()t<;  [from  which  it  is  distinguished,  2  Cor. 
xii.  20 ;  Gal.  v.  20. — P.  S.],  and  therefore  not  iden- 
tify it  with  qii/.nvuxia,  '■ontenfinusness  (Vulgate : 
Qui  sunt  ex  contcniinnc,  die  Slreitsiir/itigen) ;  but  it 
comes  from  iVn.9o?,  a  hhreling  ;  i(ti,Stv(»,  to  work 
for  wa  les,  to  act  selfislily.  Its  first  meaning  is 
greediness,  then  trickerii,  partisanship.  Aristotle, 
Polit.  V.  2,  3,  &c. ;  see  Fritzsclie,  Excursus  on  Rom. 
ii.J     Meyer  :  "  The  latter  signification  [Rdnkesucht, 


•  [Tholuck  makes  B6(a  the  condition,  ri^iij  the  reco(!7ii- 
tion,  a'f>dap(7(a  the  unbroken  continunnci^  of  the  blessed- 
ness of  the  saints.  Hodge  :  The  maniffsted  excidlenco  or 
splendor  of  the  future  oondifion  is  expressed  by  5o£a,  the 
honor  due  such  excellence  by  rifi^,  and  the  endless  nature 
of  bleoscdnesj  tiy  a.4i9ap<iia.    Siuiilnrly  Meyer. — P.  S.] 

t  [Lango  renders  oi  <{  <pt0cta(,  die  vom  Partfi- 
trtihen  her  find. — 1'.  S.) 

t  [Fritzsclie  renders  the  word  mnlilintti  frauilnm  mnchi- 
nalorei.     This  derivation  wis  first  suifu'ostod  by  Huckerl 
and  is  now  i^cnerally  udoplt'd  ;  also  by  Alford,  Wordsworth, 
and  Ilodf-'e,  although  Ilod^^e  renders  the  word  conlrnlioiis, 
kod  K;ives  it  in  the  present  rase  a  wider  meaning,  like  I)e 
Wette  and  Tholuck.     Conybcare  and  Howson  :  "'Epifieta 
Meina  to  me:in  selfish  purty  inlrigw  condiirltd  in  n  mfrrc- 
nirji  jpini,  iiiid  more  Renorally,  stlfisli  cunning  ,  .  .  tpi- 
Stvoiiivovi    is    usi'd    for    inliiguing  parllMrui    by    Aristotle  ; 
(Pnlii.  V.  ;!)•      The  history  of  the  word  seems'  to  hear  n  [ 
•tronL.'  analo/T  to  thai  of  our  tf  nn  jnh."     ^[osus  Stuart  ad-  [ 
heres  to  the  old  derivation  from  tptc  ;  Uobinson  adopts  the  I 
eorrect  dcriv:ttlon  from  lpi9o<i,  ipidtvu,  but  gives  it  the  I 


Farieitreiberei]  must  be  retained  in  all  passages  of 
the  New  Testament;  2  Cor.  xii.  20;  Gal.  v.  20; 
Phil.  i.  1(1;  ii.  3;  James  iii.  14,  HI."  The  succeed- 
ing words  also  establish  this  explanation.  [The  op- 
posite of  ot  ii  ifJi^Ofiaq  is  ol  ej  aycintji;,  Phil.  i. 
16,  17.  Ignatius,  Ad  Philad.  8,  opposed  iitiOna 
to  x(jt.(TToiiaOna. — P.  S.]  Tholuck:  Tiie  Apostle 
has  here  in  view  those  Jews  who  surpassed  the  Gen- 
tiles in  opposition  to  the  gos[)el.  He  recalls  to  mind 
the  intrigues  of  the  "  Zealots,"  and  supposes  that 
the  popular  sense  has  extended  to  the  meaning  of 
contrntion,  probably  on  the  ground  of  the  sujiposed 
derivation  from  i()i'Zn.v.  Remember  the  contentious 
spirit  of  the  Tahnudist  Jews.  In  point  of  fact,  the 
party  spirit  is  always  united  with  the  love  of  con- 
tention. But  the  ifiLDfia  is  a  corruption,  which  ex- 
ists  in  Gentiles  and  Jews  alike.  There  are  only  two 
kinds  of  men :  Men  who  are  of  the  truth,  whose 
ethical  principle  of  life  is  the  truth  (the  upright ; 
Prov.  ii.  7  ;  John  iii  21),  and  who,  being  such,  do 
not  lose  themselves  in  gnisping  after  temporal  ob- 
jects ;  and  men  whose  ethical  principle  of  life  is  a 
contentious  spirit,  that  is,  the  spirit  of  any  bad  tem- 
poral object,  and  who  for  this  very  reason  seditiously 
oppose  the  truth  as  partisans,  and  are  subject  to  un. 
righteousrifss,  as  slaves  to  party.  In  this  direction 
every  temporal  form  of  divine  things  can  be  con- 
verted into  a  party  affair,  and  destroyed  b^-  party 
spirit ;  just  as  the  Jews  of  that  period  made  even  an 
i^)if)-tia  out  of  the  Old  Testament  religion.  Never- 
theless, the  definite  idea  is  obliterated,  if  ifJiO^fla  is 
made  to  mean,  without  qualification,  \ingodliness,  or 
vileness  (Kiiliner,  Fritzschc). — Disobey  the  truth. 
^ Ann,0  flv  ;  the  truth  has  the  right  of  a  king,  and 
Christ  is  King,  as  King  of  the  truth.  Therefore,  to 
strive  against  the  truth,  involves  not  only  religious 
opinion,  but  moral  misconduct.  Such  revoltcra 
against  what  is  high  are  necessarily  slaves  to  what 
is  low ;  they  bow  before  unrighteousness  (chap.  i. 
18). — Wrath  and  indignation.  Tiie  nominative 
6<jytl  xai  Oruoi;  is  supplied  by  a;ro<)(i'»fTfTr<t,  or 
iarav,  as  constructio  variala.*  Offiot;  as  e.rcan- 
dcsccntia  enlanccs  the  idea  of  o (i ;■  >/ .  The  histori- 
cal form  of  the  judgment  pronounced  on  the  self- 
seeking  party  sjiirit  is  therewith  intimated ;  ofiyn 
and  Oviioi;  of  the  party  8[)irit  are  judged  by  o^^yi; 
and  {yi'/io.;  of  an  opposite  kind  ;  and  therein  the 
oQyi^  and  Or/ioi;  of  the  Lord  are  revealed.  (See 
the  history  of  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem,  Matt, 
xviii.  33,  34). — [The  majority  of  philologists  and 
commentators  make  ooyt;  express  the  permanent 
feeling  and  settled  disijosition  (comp.  John  iii.  36  ; 
the  wrath  of  (Jod  ahideth  on  him) ;  O^riio';,  the  mo- 
mentary impulse  or  actual  outbreak  of  wrath  on  the 
day  of  judgment.  Ammon. :  Oiuo^  7T(JO(Txai(iOi;, 
6(>yii  TTo/.i/fjorim;.  O^rnoi;  {Gcniiilh)  is  the  mind 
as  the  seat  oi'  the  emotions,  and  hence  denotes  vehe- 
ment  affection,  anger,  fury.  According  to  the  cor- 
rect reading,  it  fitly  follows  after  OQy'h  "•"'  ''*  execu- 
tion  and  outbreak ;  irce  excandcscentia  (Cicero,  Tusc, 


same  meaning  as  fpis,  party-strife,  faction,  conietUum.— 
P.  S.) 

•  [The  chance  of  construction  is  a  delicate  adjustment 
in  the  Greek,  to  express  the  nice  distinction  that  (iod  is  di- 
rectly the  Author  aud  (liver  of  eterniil  life,  Imt  not  strictly 
and  primiinly  of  etcrniil  ]>UMishment,  which  is  the  necessary 
rcsvut  of  the  sinner's  own  conduct.  A  simibir  distinrtion 
is  intended  by  the  chanije  of  construction  from  the  lutiva 
nporfToinajjtv  to  the  piussive  KarripTKru^va,  )lom.  ix.  '21,  23 : 
The  vessels  of  nu-rcv  Ood  Himself  lnvl  ft./.u-c  pr-pirrd  unto 
fflory,  but  the  vessefs  of  wrath ii if  _/!//<•>/,  orhiive  fitted  tbem< 
selves,  for  perdition.     Comp.  Texlual  ^olc  *.— P.  3.] 


CHAPTER  II.   1-16. 


99 


W.  9).  "  oQyt'i  is  the  heat  of  the  fire  ;  &viii6<;  is  the 
bursting  forth  of  the  fame." — P.  S.] 

Ver  9.  Tribulation  and  angiiish  (5;.^^/'^c,• 
reel  (Trfvo/u)^in).  Vers.  9  and  10  repeat  the 
same  thouglit  of  retribution,  but  in  greater  precision 
and  increased  force  :  1.  The  retribution  of  evil  and 
good  does  not  merely  stand  as  the  limit  at  the  close, 
but  it  is  ordained  from  the  beginning,  and  follows 
man  like  a  shadow  ;  2.  it  does  not  only  overtake  all 
in  general,  but  will  visit  every  individual ;  3.  it 
reaches  to  the  soul ;  4.  it  comes  also  as  punitive 
retribution,  first  to  the  Jews,  and  then  to  the  Gen- 
tiles. The  same  may  be  said  also  of  the  reward  of 
the  righteous.  Punishment  goes  from  without  in- 
wardly ;  the  external  tribvilation,  or  oppression, 
becomes  an  internal  angiiish,  or  agony,  from  which 
the  burdened  soul  knows  no  escape.* — Every  soul 
of  man  [  DTX  ttJE?"b3].  Wn/tj  is  not  merely  a 
circumlocution  of  av9-(io>noi;  (according  to  Grotius, 
Fritzsche).  [It  expresses  the  idea  that  the  soul,  and 
not  the  body,  is  to  suffer  the  penalty,  according  to 
Riickert,  Meyer,  Fritzsche.  But  xi'v/i^  rather  de- 
notes the  whole  person,  as  in  chap.  xiii.  1. — P.  S.] 

That  worketh  out  the  evil.  The  narfQ- 
yai^o/drov  must  be  regarded  as  a  strong  form. 
It  is  the  consistent  consummation.  [Alford :  "  y.arfo- 
ydLotiai,  to  conimit,  is  more  naturally  used  of  evil, 
while  i(jyd^ofiai,,  to  work,  is  used  indiff'erently  of 
both  good  and  evil."  But  xaTf^ydi^Kiflai,  is  also 
used  of  the  good ;  v.  3  ;  xv.  18  ;  Phil.  ii.  12.  As 
distinct  from  the  simple  i()'/d^i:(TOat,,  it  signifies,  to 
work  onf,  to  bring  to  an  end,  to  consummate.  Comp. 
Meyer  on  Rom.  i.  27  (p.  77).— P.  S.] 

Ver.  10.  But  glory  and  honor  and  peace. 
Instead  of  d<iOa^ala,  we  have  here  flntjvrj  ["here 
in  its  highest  and  most  glorious  sense  "J  as  the  sub- 
jective enjoyment  of  d(pOaQ<jla,  by  which  the  ex- 
pression r^'vyij  is  supplied  (ver.  9). — Of  the  Jew 
first,  and  also  of  the  Greek.  Greek  represents 
the  Geiitih,  as  i.  16.  As  the  Jew  is  first  in  privi- 
lege and  opportunity,  so  he  is '  first  in  responsibility 
and  guilt,  ('omp.  Luke  xii.  47,  48,  and  Exeg.  Notes 
on  i.  16.  It  becomes  now  evident  that  the  second 
chapter  refers  especially  to  the  Jews,  as  chap.  i. 
18-82  to  the  Gentiles.— P.  S.] 

Ver.  11.  For  there  is  no  respect  of  persons. 
This  conclusion  reproves  especially  the  exclusive 
party  spirit  of  the  Jew — who  thought  himself  under 
the  particular  favor  of  God — by  reference  to  a  paral- 
lel expression  in  the  Old  Testament,  Deut.  x.  17  ; 
see  Gal.  ii.  6.  The  expression,  to  7-e.spect  the  person 
(to  accept  the  face),f  is  used  in  the  Old  Testament 
in  a  good  as  well  as  bad  sense  ;  but  in  the  New  Tes- 
tament it  occurs  only  in  a  bad  sense,  because  it  is 
here  employed  always  in  combating  the  conceit  of 
Jewish  bigotry,  which  changed  God  into  a  partisan. 

Third  Paragraph  (vers.  12-16). 

Ver.  12.    For  as  many  as  sinned  without 

law.     Tholuck :    The  Apostle  here   mentions  the 

*  [Meyer  and  Alford :  "  ffKi^in  signifies  more  the  out- 
ward weia:ht  of  objective  infliction,  (rrevoxtapia  the  subjec- 
tive feelin?  of  the  pressure."  They  are  often  associated, 
viii.  35;  2  Cor.  iv.  8;  vi.  4.  The  latter  is  the  stronger 
term,  and  hence  it  always  follows  by  way  of  climax. — P.  S.] 

t  [-''^Q  Xttir,  to  lift  up,  or  accept  the  face  of  some 
one,  V.  f.,  ti)  be  favorable  or  partial  to  him  from  personal 
♦onsiderations.  In  the  N.  T.  the  terms  TrpocrwiroAijTrTe'o), 
irpo^KairoKriijjia,  jrpoo-wTroA^TrTrjs  (in  some  Codd.  written  with 
an  (u,  before  i/;)  always  denote  the  unjust  partiality,  and  are 
denied  to  God  and  forbidden  to  man. — P.  S.J 


judgment  only  on  its  condemnatory  side,  becaus^. 
according  to  his  purpose  in  chap.  iii.  20,  it  was  not 
necessary  that  he  should  take  a  broader  view  hero. 
But  he  also  wishes  to  prepare  for  the  doctrine  of 
justification  by  faith.  Thus,  vers.  12  and  13  estab- 
lish ver.  9 ;  and,  on  the  other  hand,  vers.  14,  15, 
and  16  establish  ver.  10. — Without  law,  dvoft  wi;; 
that  is,  without  the  knowledge  and  norm  of  the  Mo- 
saic law  (comp.  Rom.  v.  13) — that  is,  without  a  defi- 
nite consciousness  of  definite  transgression  (1  Cor 
ix.  21).  [7\'6/(oc;  and  dv6/(0)q  throughout  here 
refer  to  the  written  or  revealed  law  of  Moses,  as 
the  expressed  will  of  God  concerning  our  moral  con- 
duct. The  heathen  are  called  dvo/ioi,,  not  absolutely 
— for  they  have  the  unwritten  law  of  conscience — 
but  as  distinguished  from  the  Jews,  who  were  itnii 
v6/iov.  dv6/io)(;  therefore  is  equivalent  to  '/mok 
vonov. — P.  S.] — Shjdl  also  perish  without  la'w 
Meyer :  "  a  /r  o  A  o  ?  r  t  a  t  is  the  opposite  of  the  ffojTj; 
^i'«  in  i.  16,  of  the  C'/trfTai.  in  i.  17,  of  the  twr 
ai(hvi,o<;  in  ii.  7,  of  the  (iota,  &c.,  in  ii.  10.  Comp. 
John  iii.  15  ;  Rom.  xiv.  15  ;  1  Cor.  i.  18."  Since 
the  dno^.ovvTai,  has  its  degrees  (comp.  Matt.  xi.  22  ; 
Luke  xii.  48),  Meyer  sliould  not  deny  that  (as  Chry- 
sostom,  Theophylact,  fficumenius  assert)  there  is 
something  alleviating  in  the  dvo^ioyq.  The  external 
consequences  of  sin  could  be  similar,  yet  the  inter- 
nal consequences  could  be  different,  according  to  the 
different  degrees  of  the  knowledge  of  transgression  ; 
and  x^i.9?)(7oj'T«t  is  accordingly  a  stronger  expres- 
sion than  drroloT'vrai.  We  should  all  the  more 
reject  the  barbarous  view  of  Dodwell,  Weisse,  Bill- 
roth, and  others,  by  which  the  dnolorrrai,  is  made 
to  express  the  avnihilation  of  those  who  do  no.< 
possess  the  Christian  principle  (see  Tholuck,  p.  99) 
It  is  evident  that  also  the  dvofiMi;  must  not  be  un 
derstood  absolutely  (see  ver.  15).  They  only  do  not 
possess  the  law  in  the  clearness  and  fulness  of  the 
Mosaic  code.  [The  passage  certainly  teaches,  1. 
That  the  immoral  heathen  will  not  escape  punish- 
ment, since  they,  too,  are  inexcusable,  having  the 
light  of  God's  general  revelation  in  nature  (i.  20), 
and  in  their  conscience  (ii.  14,  15);  2.  that  they  will 
be  judged  aro/'ox,- — i.  e.,  not  with  the  rigor  of  the 
written  law,  as  the  disobedient  Jews  and  unfaithful 
Christians,  but  impartially,  and  hence  more  mildly, 
according  to  the  common  law  of  reason  and  of  con- 
science. The  unfaithful  Jews  will  fare  worse  than  the 
Gentiles,  and  the  unfaithful  Christians  worse  than  the 
Jews.  The  severity  of  punishment  corresponds  to  the 
measure  of  guilt,  and  the  measure  of  guilt  depends 
on  the  amount  of  opportunity.  The  Bible  plainly 
teaches  different  degrees  of  punishment;  comp.  Luke 
xii.  47,  48  ;  Matt.  xi.  21-24  ;  xii.  41,  42.  In  the  in- 
terpretation of  tliis  passage,  moreover,  we  should  not 
overlook  what  Paul  says  immediately  afterward  of 
the  better  class  of  heathen,  vers.  14,  15,  and  26-29; 
comp.  the  Notes  below. — P.  S.] 

And  as  many  as  sinned  in  the  law,  shall 
be  judged  by  the  law.  They  shall  be  condemned 
according  to  the  law.  N6^(0(i,  even  without  the 
article,  signifies  here  the  Mosaic  law.  The  iv 
v6/(0)  —  De  Wette  :  in  the  law;  Tholuck,  Meyer: 
in  the  possession  of  the  law.  The  sense  of  the  word 
seems  to  require  a  stronger  expression.  See  chap, 
vii.  8.  [fV  signifies  the  status,  under  the  law. — P.  S.] 
This  sentence  verifies  ver.  9  :  first  upon  the  soul  of 
the  Jew,  in  contrast  with  the  presumed  righteous« 
ness  of  the  Jew.  Peter  institutes  a  similar  law  fol 
the  Christian  Church  (1  Pet.  iv.  17). 

Ver.  13.  For  not  the  hearers  of  the  law 


100 


THE   EPISTLE   OF   PAUL   TO   THE   ROMANS, 


Griesbach  and  Reiclie  parenthesize  vers.  13-15 ;  ; 
Kopi)e,  ver.  13 ;  Laclimaun,  Meyer,  Bauragarteii-  | 
Crusiu^,  vers.  14,  15.  All  these  pareutheses  dis-  I 
turb  the  coiiiiectioii.  Yer.  13  jjroves  the  damnable-  | 
ness  of  those  who  sinned  against  the  law  (see  ver.  I 
17,  and  Jaiues  i.  22),  and  accordingly  cunstitntes  , 
the  transition  to  what  follows. — Not  the  hearers.  ] 
•'Because  the  Mosaic  law  was  known  to  the  majority 
only  by  being  read  to  them  ;  (h\\.  iv.  21  ;  Matt.  v. 
21  ;  James  i.  22;  .John  xii.  31."  Josephiis,  Anthj., 
6.  1,  &c.,  Meyir.— But  the  doers  of  the  law 
shall  be  justified.  niilii)pi :  ^'' dixctt-m  0  t';(Tov- 
T«t  corresponds  to  (Vizcttoi-  7ia(ja  no  & nji  of 
the  first  member  of  the  sentence  :  They  shall  be 
just  before  the  judgment-seat  of  God — pronounced 
just  by  God.  ^/tzftiorr,  like  the  Hebrew  p"'"n:in, 
as  this  passage  already  proves,  is  terminus- forensis : 
to  declare  just,  not  to  make  just;  for  the  doers  of 
the  law  are  already  just,  and  need  not  be  made  just 
by  God.  Jixcuoi'i;  from  iV/zkios',  according  to  the 
analogy  of  rr(i /.oii-  (to  make  blind),  and  other  verbs 
in  oil)  derived  from  adjectives  of  the  second  declen- 
eion,  means  properly,  it  is  true,  according  to  the 
etymology,  =  to  make  jitst.  Yet,  as  the  Septuagint 
and  the  S'ew  Testament  usage  shows,  we  must  sup- 
ply, 6//  declaralon.''''  Then  Jixcuooj  is,  originally,  to 
make  just,  on  the  part  of  the  iii/.tj  [right,  righteous- 
ness, also  the  goddess  of  righteousness],  and  accord- 
ing to  its  tribimal  ;  that  is,  to  acknowledge  just^ 
which  has  throughout  a  forensic,  but  never  an  ab- 
straclli/  forensic  sense  ;  as  <ii,xai,6(o  means  also,  in 
the  cliissic  sense,  to  think  or  esteem  just,  according 
to  the  tribunal  of  personal  opinion.  Therefore  the 
innocent  man  also,  when  once  he  stands  at  the  tri- 
bunal, must  be  declared  just  ;  and  the  guilty  one, 
who  is  declared  just  in  the  tribunal  of  grace,  re- 
ceives with  this  declaration  the  dtxaioifia  of  Christ 
in  his  faith,  without  which  he  could  never  be  pro- 
nounced just  according  to  Divine  truth.  See  the 
Biblt-Work  on  James  ii.  21  [p.  t>6  of  the  German, 
p.  85  of  the  Amer.  ed.l.  Even  the  punishment,  ac- 
cording to  the  classical  use  of  the  term,  becomes  a 
bixfuovv,  because  the  punished  one,  by  punishment, 
becomes  again  conformable  to  the  ()<'x»/.  According 
to  Meyer,  the  Apostle  has  here  only  set  forth  the 
fundamental  law  of  God  judging  in  righteousness. 
According  to  Fhilippi,  the  tic itjrni  Tor  rd/ioi' 
are  here  only  placed  sis  the  true  rule,  in  opposition 
to  the  false  rule  of  the  Jews,  that  the  cixooaTai 
Tor  j'o/ioi'  should  be  just  before  God,  apart  from 
the  ipiestion  whether  there  are  such  7Joi,rjai ;  but 
»  the  whole  argument  of  the  Epistle  to  the  Romans 
proves,  that  no  man  is  by  nature  such  a  7roi.»;T/;(,-  rov 
voitov.  This  construction  does  not  coincide  with  vers. 
14  and  15.  We  should  rather  observe  here  the  deeper 
idea  of  nmnv  [t(<}'cci.'f(Tflat  to  ayct!)ov'\  in  ver.  10, 
and  of  vo/ini;  in  ver.  14 ;  and,  at  the  same  time,  with 
Tersleegen's  view  of  God's  different  tribunals,  we 
must  acknowledge  that  the  Apostle  can  also  use 
here  the  dixaioTv  in  the  wider  sense.  Comp.  1  Cor. 
iv.  4.  The  connection  of  this  passage  with  the  fol- 
lowing verses  cannot  be  destroyed  by  a  dogmatizing 
exegesis.* 

•  [On  the  mcaningof  the  terms  Sucax6a>,  SiKaioKrn,  8i<co4o- 
avini,  the  roador  is  refiTrud  to  the  A'x-ff.  Aors,  chap.  j.  17, 
and  iii.  21-31.  lir.  Ilodi^fe  holds  to  the  slriclly  forensic  view, 
iind  nifrecs  here  witli  Thillppi.  "  To  be.  jusl  hrfurc  Omi,"  ho 
nays,  "  und  («  6';  juMififl,  iiro  the  same  thing.  They  are 
|)oth  foron.sic  expressions,  and  indicjite  the  statu  rather 
than  the  chamctor  of  those  to  whom  they  refer.  Those 
aro  just  in  the  siglit  of  Ood,  or  are  .iuntifled,  who  have  done 
what  the  law  rci^uirus,  and  uru  rc){ardc'd  and  treated  oucurd- 


Yer.  14.  For  when  Gentiles  [i'flr/;,  without  i 
the  article,  meaning  some,  not  allj.  Tlie  confk'uia- 
tion  of  ver.  In  is  introduced  by  what  the  Apostle 
has  already  said.  The  expositors  seem  here  to  have 
thoroughly  wandered  from  the  proper  path,  and  to 
be  influenced  by  a  conunon  misunderstanding  oi 
ver.  Id.  1.  According  to  Bucer,  Calvin,  Tlioluck 
[Hodge],  and  others,  ver.  14  refers  to  the  first  hall 
of  ver.  12.  While  there  the  question  is  concerning 
those  who  shall  perish  without  law,  the  objection 
here  to  be  met  is,  that  there  is  only  condemnation 
where  a  i'0/(0s'  is  present ;  in  consequence  of  this, 
Koppe  regards  ver.  13  as  parenthetical.  Yet  not 
only  is  the  ano/MYOi'idrutv  against  this  view,  but 
also  the  rci  ror  voiion  7toi.iT>ui.v.  2.  I'hilippi :  The 
Apostle  refers  to  the  first  half  of  ver.  13.  "Not 
the  hearers  of  the  law  are  just  before  God,  for  the 
Gentiles  have  also  a  law ;  the  Gentiles  are  also 
a>!(*octTrtt  Tor  vofior."  But  this  was  not  the  ciise  in 
the  opinion  of  the  Ajiostle.  3.  According  to  Meyer, 
he  refers  to  the  second  half  of  ver.  13.  "  The  Gen- 
tiles possess  a  certain  substitute  for  the  Mosiiic  law. 
Therefore  they  are  also  subject  to  the  rule :  o» 
Tioi-t-T.  roft.  (yi.xaKi).9v;ffoi'Tfa."  But  the  fundamen- 
tal rule  is  adduced  only  hypothctically  by  tiie  Apos- 
tle, and  not  in  the  sense  that  the  Gentiles  actually 
are  doers  of  the  law.  The  deduction  of  vers.  14 
and  15  will  evidently  establish  the  proposition  of 
ver.  10,  "  But  glory,  honor,"  &c.,  and  "  also  to  tht 
Greek,"  after  vers.  12  and  13  have  established  the 
proposition  of  ver.  9.  77ie  fundamental  thouriht  ia, 
that  also  the  Gentiles  can  obta'n  eternal  life;  for  it 
was  not  necessary  that  he  should  first  prove  this  in 
reference  to  the  Jews.  This  thought  is  mediated 
neither  by  the  first  half  of  ver.  13  alone,  nor  by  the 
second  alone,  but  by  the  whole  rule  :  Not  the  hear- 
ers of  the  law  are  already  just  before  God,  but  the 
doei-s  of  the  law,  in  the  sense  of  ver.  7.  The 
LtjToTvTfi;,  as  poor  in  spirit,  who  are  penitent,  shall 
be  justified  in  the  new  economy  of  salvation. — ^Tor 
when.  oTMV  "supposes  a  case  whose  fVeiiuent 
occurrence  is  possible :  in  case  when,  whenever,  as 
often  as"  (Meyer  [who  refers  to  Kiihner,  ii.  p.  635 
f.,  and  Matthias  p.  1105]).  —  Gentiles,  t/yvtj, 
without  the  article.  The  rule  might  refer,  as  hypo- 
thelically  expressed,  to  the  whole  body  of  the  Gen- 
tiles (according  to  De  Wette,  Reiche  [Philippi,  Al- 
ford,  Hodge],  and  others) ;  but  iis  it  is  too  evident 
from  the  first  chapter  that  this  case  did  not  really 
occur,  there  is  very  properly  no  article ;  and  the 
supposition  that  there  is  really  "  an  election "  of 

inifly ;  that  is,  are  declared  to  bo  free  from  coudemnatlon, 
and  entitled  to  the  favor  of  Ood.  In  obvious  allasion  to 
the  opii.ion,  that  heiuR  a  Jew  wa.f  cnoiiKh  to  Bccure  admis- 
sion to  lienveii,  the  .Apostle  says,  It  is  n.)t  the  hearers  but 
thr  liners  of  llir  Inw  that  are  justified.  Ho  Is  not  speaking 
of  the  method  of  justiflcatiim  available  for  sinneis,  as  re- 
vealed in  the  Kospel,  Imt  of  the  principles  of  justice  which 
will  be  applied  to  all  who  look  to  tlio  law  for  justification. 
If  men  rely  on  works,  they  must  have  works;  they  must  bo 
doors  of  the  law;  they  must  satisfy  its  demaiuU,  if  thoy  nro 
to  he  justified  by  It.  For  Ood  is  just  and  impartial ;  ]{« 
will,  OS  a  judce  adniiniHteriiip;  the  law,  judpo  every  man,  not 
nccoidinif  to  his  privilenes,  but  BccordiiiR  to  his  works  and 
the  knowledge  of  duty  which  Iio  has  possessed.  On  thofla 
principles,  it  Is  his  verv  desijtn  to  show  that  no  flesh  li\'ing 
can  be  justified."  Similarly  Melanchthon  :  "  Hiex-  dftcriptit 
fsl  jiisliliir  lf(ji.<.  rnitr  nihil  imprilil  iilin  ilictii  ilr  jiiililiit  fiiUi." 
But  the  real  (lilllciilty  consist.s  in  the  apparent  contlict  of 
I'aul's  iliiclrine  of  ju.stiflcation  by  j-race  alone  through  faith, 
and  his  iloctrine  oil  judKiuont  by  works,  as  taught  not  only 
hero  from  the  staiKlpoiiiO  .)f  the  law,  but  elsewhero  from  th« 
stJiudpoint  of  tho  cospcl  aa  well,  2  Cor.  v.  10 ;  llom.  xiv.  10  j 
Oal.  vi.  7  ;  Eph.  vi.  8  ;  Col.  ili.  21,  25  ;  Matt.  xii.  36;  xxv. 
31 -4() ;  Jotrn  v.  20.  Comp.  tho  oomments  on  ver.  6,  p.  S6  ff 
-v.  S.l 


CHAPTER  II.   1-16. 


101 


such  Gentiles  thereby  gains  greater  probability. 
[Conip.  Meyer  m  loc,  and  Hofmann,  Sc/iriftbeweis, 
i.  p.  bGl,  who  likewise  press  the  absence  of  the  arti- 
cle, and  justly  reject  the  reference  to  iii.  29  ;  ix.  30  ; 
1  Cor.  i.  23  (quoted  by  De  Wette,  Alford,  and 
Hodge,  in  favor  of  the  other  view).  On  the  other 
hand,  tO^v^  is  not  identical  with  if)ri.y.ni,  but  indi- 
cates a  species  or  class  of  Gentiles. — P.  S.] 

Who  have  no  law,  r a  /< ij  vofiov  iyovta. 
The  absence  of  the  article  means  not  only  that  they 
have  not  the  Mosaic  law,  but  that  they  have  no  re- 
vealed religious  law  whatever. — Do  perchance  by- 
nature.  By  nature  {(pvan,)  must  not,  with  Bengel 
and  Usteri,  be  referred  to  the  preceding.  For  also 
the  Jews  do  not  have  the  law  6,y  nature.  Nature  is 
here  the  original  nature,  as  it  proves  itself  active, 
especially  in  the  noble  few — in  the  impulse  or  ten- 
dency toward  the  noble. — The  things  of  the  law. 
It  is  the  material  substance  of  the  leligious  and 
moral  law,  apart  from  tlie  formal  definitions  of  the 
Mosaic  code.  The  exposition  of  Beza  and  others  is 
dogmatizing:  Quae  lex  facit  {J ex  juhet,  coniimc/f, 
dainnat,  puiiit ;  hoc  ipsuni  facit  et  ethnicus^i  &c.  ; 
Cappell).  [Hodge  :  "  There  are  two  misinterpreta- 
tions of  the  phrase  ra  rov  vofov  novtiv.  The  one 
is,  that  it  means,  to  fulfil  the  law ;  the  other,  to  do 
the  office  of  the  law — i.  e.,  to  command  and  forbid. 
The  former  is  unnecessary,  and  is  in  direct  opposition 
to  the  express  and  repeated  declaration  of  the  Apos- 
tle, that  none,  whether  Jew  or  Gentile,  have  ever 
fulfilled  the  law.  To  do  the  things  of  the  law,  is 
indeed  to  do  what  the  law  prescribes  (comp.  x.  5  ; 
Gal.  iii.  12) ;  but  whether  complete  or  partial  obedi- 
ence is  intended,  depends  upon  the  contest.  The 
man  who  pays  his  debts,  honors  his  parents,  is  kind 
to  the  poor,  does  the  things  of  the  law,  for  these  are 
things  which  the  law  prescribes.  And  this  is  all  the 
argument  of  the  Apostle  requires,  or  his  known  doc- 
trine allows  us  to  understand  by  the  phrase,  in  the 
present  instance.  This  being  the  case,  there  is  no 
need  of  resorting  to  the  second  interpretation  men- 
tioned above,  which  was  proposed  by  Beza,  and 
adopted  by  Wetstein,  Flatt,  and  others.  Though 
TiouJv  to.  rov  voflov  might  mean  to  do  what  the 
law  does,  prescribe  what  is  good,  and  forbid  what  is 
evil,  it  certainly  has  not  that  sense  elsewhere  in 
Paul's  writings — see  x.  5  ;  Gal.  iii.  12 — and  is  espe- 
cially out  of  place  here,  in  immediate  connection 
with  the  phrase  noitjrai  toP  i6,((oi',  in  the  sense  of 
the  doers  of  the  law." — P.  S.] 

These,  not  having  (the)  law,  are  a  law  to 
themselves,  ovtoi,  is  emphatic  with  approba- 
tion, voiiov  fi'tj  I'/orTfc;,  in  distinction  from 
uri  vo.iiov  'd/ovra,  indicates  want.  Meyer :  Their 
own  moral  nature  supplies  in  them  tlie  place  of  the 
revealed  law  (see  the  classical  parallels  in  Meyer). 
Philippi  distinguishes  between  rov  v6/tov  nouiv 
[ver.  13,  or  tov  vo/iov  Tfblr,  ver.  27]  and  ra  rov 
vofiov  novnv.  They  perform  what  belongs  to  the 
law  ;  they  observe  only  simile  outward  commands  of 
the  law^,  one  man  this,  another  that.  "  Therefore 
they  do  not  observe  the  law  in  its  spirituality  or  deep 
inner  meaning."  *  An  utter  perversion  of  the  proper 
relation.  Without  knowing  the  laws  of  Moses,  they 
observe  the  essential  part  of  the  law,  ra  (iixauoftara 
Tof'  v6/iov.  Ver.  26,  rov  v6/wv  riXovvrft;,  that  is, 
performing  it  according  to  its  defined  purpose,  ver. 
27.  • 

*  [Fcibes,  p.  148,  fully  adopts  this  distinction  of  Philippi, 
and  (hinks  it  essential  to  the  proper  undcrstaudiEg  of  the 
wholi  passage. — P.  S.] 


Ver.   15.    Who    shew,   &c.      Oirtrft;  is  no 

"  exjilaining  or  proving,"  but  ernphnsizinff,  recorn'  / 
mending  (see  the  antithesis  in  ver.  1).  WJiat  and 
how  do  these  prominent  Gentiles  show  ?  They  show, 
or  exhibit,  the  w^ork  of  the  law ;  that  is,  the 
woik  required  by  the  law.  Not  the  law  itself  (Wolf. 
Koppe,  &c.) ;  for  the  Ten  Commandments  are  not 
formally  written  in  their  heart,  but  the  essential 
meaning  of  their  requirement.  Meyer:  "The  con. 
duct  currcupoiidinci  to  the  law."  More  pioperly  ex. 
pressed,  the  conduct  ititendedhy  \i.  Luther:  Tht 
contents  of  the  law  ;  likewise  Seller  and  Baur.  Ac- 
cording to  Meyer  and  Tholuck,  the  singular  stands 
collectively  instead  of  ifjya.  "  As  ver.  7  "  (Tho- 
lu(tk).  But  ver.  7  rather  means  that  the  i(jya  are 
only  good  when  they  proceed  from  the  unity  of  a 
vTTo/iorij  tiiyov  ayaOov.  In  the  higher  aspiration 
of  the  Gentile  there  was  this  analogy  to  Christian 
faith  :  that  it  consisted  really  in  the  unity  and  con- 
sistency of  sentiment  and  life. 

Written  in  their  hearts.  The  adjective 
yqanrov  (supply  or)  is  .stronger  than  the  parti- 
ciple  yhy(JUfiiiivov.  [It  implies  the  idea  of  perma- 
nency.]  Evidently  a  contrast  to  the  Mosaic  record  ^ 
of  the  law  on  the  tables  of  stone.  See  2  Cor.  iii.  7  ; 
Jcr.  xxxi.  33.  Therefore  a  higher  order  of  Judaism, 
similar  to  the  New  Testament  life,  is  exhibited  in  ita 
essential  features  in  these  chosen  Gentiles  (see  the 
history  of  the  Centurion  at  Capernaum).  [The  Greek 
poet  Sopliocles  speaks  of  "  the  unwritten  and  indeli- 
•ble  laws  of  the  gods"  in  the  hearts  of  men ;  and  the  , 
Platonic  philosopher  Plutarch  speaks  of  "  a  law 
which  is  not  outwardly  written  in  books,  but  im- 
planted in  the  heart  of  man." — P.  S.] 

Who  shew,  ivSi-lxvvvrai,.  And  how  do 
they  exhibit  or  prove  this  ?  (see  chap.  ix.  17,  22.) 
1.  By  the  doing  of  the  law  (Zwingli,  Grotius,  and 
the  majority  of  recent  commentators ;  De  Wette, 
Meyer).  2.  By  the  mark  of  their  better  <ndeavors 
in  many  ways  (in  a  certain  measure,  Calvin  ;  but 
better  Cocceius,  torn.  v.  p.  46.  Yet  both  are  biassed 
by  the  Augustinian  view).  3.  By  the  law  of  con- 
science. Tholuck  (according  to  Theodoret  and  Eras- 
mus) :  "  Who,  indeed,  bear  the  impress  of  tlie  judg- 
ment  of  the  law  in  themselves,  and  in  correspond- 
ence therewith  their  consequent  conscience  assumes 
in  them  the  office  of  judge.  For  where  we  find 
the  exercise  of  the  judicial  power  in  man,  we  must 
also  presuppose  the  legislative  power."  But  this 
view  is  inconsistent  not  only  with  <jiv  in  (Tv/i/ia^- 
rvQovnijt;  (for  the  extended  treatment  of  this  ques- 
tion, see  Tholuck,  p.  105,  and  Meyer  [p.  98,  ed.  iv., 
the  note] ),  but  also  with  ivdti/.vvvrai,.  Here  the 
language  is  concerning  proofs  of  conscientiousness 
becoming  ontiuardly  manifest.  Numbers  1  and  2  are 
to  be  united,  since  the  well-doing,  according  to  ver. 
7,  is  only  the  perseverance  in  a  noble  eialeavor  (un- 
der the  gratia  prceveniens),  which  attains  its  object 
only  in  Christianity. 

Their  conscience  also  bearing  witness 
^a  V  ^l  /i(  a  ^  r  V  ()  o  V  (T  i;  <;  a  v  r  utv  r  Tj  q  (t  vri- 1.  <)  //  - 
fff  (.)(,•]•  It  gives  witness  with,  in  connection  with 
their  better  manner  of  action.  Both  bear  witness  to 
the  belief  that  they  are  a  law  to  themselves,  in  their 
natural  spontaneity.  De  Wette  :  '^  (jvfifia{trv(>flv  ia 
neither  equal  to  /ia(jrr()nv  (Grotius,  Tholuck),  nor 
wia  tistari,  with  reference  to  the  novflv  ra  rov  voft. 
(Meyer,  Fritzsche,  &c.).  But  the  avr,  like  con  in  con. 
tei<tari,  refers  in  part  to  the  relation  of  the  witness  to 
him  for  whom  he  testifies  ;  and  in  part,  as  in  avvti- 
d,jat.i;  itself,  to  the  inner  relation  of  the  conscious. 


102 


THE    EPISTLE   OF   PAUL   TO   THE   ROMANS. 


Desa."  *  But  as  the  ait-tidijau;  is  a  coiiiiciousncss 
in  nuin  whicli  is  botli  objective  and  sulycctive,  and 
hence  independent  of  his  merely  subjective  conscious- 
ness, so  is  ihe  (Ti'fi/iai)Tr(jftv  an  independent  witness 
ot"  the  rif^ht,  wliicli,  in  tliu  case  before  us,  corresponds 
with  tlie  witness  of  man  in  his  deed.     It  is  the  Gen- 

■^  tile's  cheering  and  often  even  joyous  consciousness 
of  his  rigiit  direction  ;  as,  for  exanjple,  of  the  Wise 
Men  from  tiie  East  nmler  the  guidance  of  their  star. 
And  bet^ween  one  another  their  thoughts 
accusing  or  also  excusing.  [Dr.  Lange  trans- 
lates: Iiidem  ziviJichrn  i/iiien  d  e  Gedatikenurtheile 
anklai/ende  oder  auch  en/sc/iuldiffende  siud.  He  re- 
fers, with  Meyer,  /ifjaii'  a/./.tj/.iov  to  the  hea- 
then, not  to  the  thoughts. — P.  S.J  Different  expo- 
sitions :  1.  Their  thouirlits  inwardly  accuse  each  other 
(Luther,  Calvin,  Tlioluck  [Alfofd,'  Hodge]  ).  Ti)ere 
are  dirt'erent  views  on  /nrutr  a).).i]hiiv :  at  a  future 

y  time,  iv  /'/"'f?'  o'  judgment  (Koppe) ;  post  rem 
actam  (Vater) ;  between  (two  portions  of  time),  at 
the  same  time,  me<mwliile  (Kiillner  [E.  V.]  ).  But 
we  must  observe,  on  the  contrary,  that  Paul  does 
not  speak  of  the  inner  I'acis  of  the  consciousnes-s, 
since  these  facts  here  fall  under  the  conception  of 
the  historical  tvtin.'ii.i;.  2.  The  accusations  and  de- 
fences which  were  conducted  between  Gentiles  and 
Gentiles  (Storr,  Meyer).  Against  this  interpretation 
Tholuck  raises  the  question  :  "  How  can  tmv  /oj'kt- 
Hiov,  wiliout  a  more  ajjeeial  indication,  refer  to  any 
other  subject  than  the  one  whose  witness  of  con- 
Bcience  has  just  been  mentioned  ?  "  But  if  the 
imaih  coj.t'j/jitv  refers  to  the  intereotirse  between 
Gentiles,  then  the  following  must  have  the  meaning: 
since  the  judgments  of  their  thoughts  are  through- 
out accusing  or  excusing ;  that  is,  therefore,  moral 
judgments,  which  refer  to  the  origin  of  an  imma- 
nent moral  law.  The  accusinr/  thoughts  come  first 
here,  because  the  language  refers  first  of  all  to  the 
nobler  (ientiles,  whose  opinions  are  nilated  to  tiie 
ordinary  popular  life  as  judicial  ideals.  But  also  in 
their  excusing  they  often  appeal  from  barbarian  legal 
practices  to  the  unwritten  la^v  (see  Sophocles,  An- 
tigone). In  short,  the  whole  intercourse  between 
the  nobler  heathen  is  a  kind  of  moral  dialectics,  a 
continual  moral  process  of  thought.  [Paul  describes 
the  moral  process  which  takes  place  in  the  heart  of 
man  al'r.er  a  good  or  bad  act  ;  the  conscience,  tjivfi- 
dtjaui,  sits  in  judgment,  ami  i)ron(jinices  the  sentence 
in  God's  name  according  to  tiie  law  ;  the  I'iua.oyirrnoi 
ftre  the  several  moral  reflections  and  rea.sonings  which 
appear  as  witnes.ses  testifying  and  pleading  in  this 
court  of  conscience,  and  are  often  conflicting,  since 
the  sinful  inclinations  and  passions  interfere  and 
brif>e  the  witnesses;  the  object  of  the  zar/yj-fi^^n'i', 
or  ci/To/oyf  r<T.9«i,  is  the  incjral  action  which  is  brought 
before  the  tribunal  of  the  conscience.  The  //  xui 
indicates  that  the  conscience  finds  more  to  accuse 
than  to  excuse.  This  judicial  proccs.s,  which  takes 
place  here  in  every  man's  heiut,  is  a  forerunner  of 
the  great  judgment  at  the  eiul  of  the  world. — P.  S.] 
Ver.  in.  In  the  day.  The  commentators  .seem 
liere  to  overlook  the  obvious,  pro[)er  meaning,  be- 
cause they  suppose  that  the  Ijiitoa  on  which  (iod 
will  judge;  the  secrets  of  men,  must  be  referred  to 
the  day  of  final  judgment.     But,  in  the  first  place, 


*  (''imilnrlv  Afford  :  "ro.NFiuMiNo  by  its  trstimont, 
tbc  irvf  n'xKnfy'inif  the  nirrormcnt  of  the  witness  with  tho 
d<!ud,  nm  mn  in  cunli-nlnri,  nniflrmiiir  ;  pprhnp*  also  tho  avv 
may  t)0  partly  in'luri'il  liy  the  aw  in  ffuMiiijo-ewi— rcfcrrinK 
to  th«  r<"tlrctivc  nrorcsM,  in  which  a  mun  confers,  no  to 
•p(«k,  with  liimBolf."— I*.  «.] 


the  connection  does  not  support  this  view,  and  hcnd 
an  artificial  connection  has  been  variously  construct- 
ed (the  Gentilex  show  that  on  the  daij,  &c.).  Calvin 
explains  iv  r^nffja  as  k',-  t;ii{our,  unto  or  urifi/  tho 
day.  [Others  modify  this  f)y  making  »)•  to  include 
iL,  "  until  and  on  that  day.''— P.  S.J  Tholuck  filla 
up  the  apparent  chasm  between  vers.  15  and  l*)  by 
supposing  that  the  Apostle  probably  had  in  mind  a 
transition  such  as  xai  to'to  iidhrsTu,  and  this  espe- 
cial/i/,  with  the  remark  :  "  This  view  has  now  become 
the  general  one."  *  Others  have  helped  thcmselvea 
by  parentheses.  "  So  Stuart  inclines  to  unite  ver. 
16  with  ver.  11  ;  Beza,  Grotius,  Keiche,  &c.,  con- 
nect it  with  y.i)i,l)i]aorrai,,  ver.  12  ;  f  Vatab!.,  Pa- 
rens, and  Lachmann,  with  iii,y.ai,u)Oti(roi'Tat.,  ver.  13." 
Meyer  also,  with  Lachmann,  parenthesizes  vers.  14 
and  15,  and  not,  with  Beza,  and  others,  ver.<.  13-15. 
[Alford  refers  ver.  1(5  to  the  affirmation  concluding 
with  ver.  10,  and  regards  vers.  11-15  as  a  series 
of  quasi-parenthetic  clauses,  oi''  ydit — onoi.  '/do— 
ou  yd(j — uTuv  yd(j,  assigning  the  reasons  for  the 
great  retribution  on  the  last  day.  Ewald  goes  back 
even  to  ver.  5. — P.  S.J  Secondly,  the  declaration 
that  "  God  shall  judge  according  to  vii/  gospel,"  pro- 
nounces against  the  reference  of  '/V't^rt  to  the  day 
of  final  judgment.  Meyer  passes  over  this  difficulty 
with  the  remark  of  Calvin  :  Sunm  appeUat  ratione 
ministerii.  His  quotation  of  1  Tim.  ii.  8  does  not 
argue  any  thing  for  his  interpretation.  On  the  opin- 
ion that,  according  to  a  number  of  the  Fathers,  the 
gospel  of  Paul  must  be  understood  to  be  the  gospel 
of  Luke,  compare  the  quotation  in  Meyer.  But  the 
Serii)tures  take  cognizance  not  merely  of  one  day  of 
judgment.  I'he  daij  on  which  God  judges  the  secrets 
of  men  according  to  the  gospel  of  Paul,  is  the  day 
when  the  Apostle  preaches  the  gospel  to  them.  On 
this  day,  in  this  time  of  decision,  it  becomes  mani- 
fest  that  there  are  Gentiles  who  are  a  law  to  them- 
selves ;  that  there  is  another  opposition  than  that  of 
external  Judaism  and  paganism  ;  that  there  are  Gen- 
tiles who  must  be  counted  for  the  circumcision,  and 
Jews  whose  circumcision  must  be  counted  for  un- 
circumcision  (see  vers.  26  and  27).  It  is  a  thought 
whose  root  is  found  already  in  the  Old  Testament, 
that  the  time  of  the  appearance  of  Christ  an<l  of  the 
preaching  of  the  gospel  is  a  time  of  judgment.  See 
Joel  iii.  6,  7,  and  in  other  places  ;  Malaelii  iii.  2  ff. 
In  John  iii.  19,  even  the  ajipearance  of  Christ  is 
relatively  called  the  judgment.  John  v.  25  :  "  The 
hour  is  coming,  and  now  is."  The  time  of  perfect 
faith  is  denoted  a  day  (John  xvi.  "J."?,  26).  Al.w,  in 
Rom.  xiii.,  ver.  12  connected  with  ver.  13,  the  lan- 
guage cannot  relate  exclusively  to  the  day  of  final 
judgment.  The  same  applies  to  ijiitoa  in  1  Cor.  iii. 
13.  Comp.  2  Cor.  vi.  2,  !;iif(in  fTOTijoiVcv  The 
Apostle  mentions  this  day  without  the  article,  with- 
out a  solemn  addition.  He  marks  the  day  as  the 
day  when  God  .shall  judge  the  secrets  of  men.  He 
uses  the  same  word  xoinrd  as  in  ver.  21>,  jl  »r  tw 
xomrio  'iorfVarot,-.  lie  says  tnni — not  merely  the 
Gentilix — because  the  gospel,  according  to  chaps, 
ix.-xi.,  mnnifests  (Jod's  judgment  not  only  on  the 
(ieiitiles,  l)Ut  also  on  the  .lews;  and  this  is  a  judg- 
ment pronoinueil  on  their  internal  good  conduct  or 
misconduct  toward  tho  internal  nature  and  spirit  of 

*  (Wordswortli  also  ailopts  this  connection  with  ver.  15, 
nnd  (|U"tos  liiiin  Bisho]!  IViirson  (.\rt.  VII.  on  tho  Crcii): 
"  Conxcifncc  is  ii  witness  liounil  over  to  k\\v  testimony  for 
or  aK:iinst  us  at  sonic  judgment  after  this  life  to  pnsH  upon 
U.S."  — 1'.  .'^  1 

t  (So  do  tho  editioiig  of  Orieshach  and  Knupp  ond  th« 
E.  v.,  who  parenthesize  vers.  Vi,  14,  19.— P.  S.J 


CHAPTER  II.    1-16. 


108 


the  law.  In  this  relation  the  gospel  of  the  Apostle 
was  the  real  medium  and  measure  of  the  judgment 
(sec  1  Cor.  i.  18);  and  Jesus  Christ  was  the  real 
judicial  authority.  See  John  iii.  16 ;  Acts  xvii.  30, 
31 ;  1  Cor.  iv.  5,  and  other  places. — On  the  day  of 
the  promulgation  of  the  gospel  the  better  Gentiles 
manifested  their  ordination  to  salvation,  just  as  the 
majority  of  the  Jews  made  manifest  their  hardness 
of  lieart. 

[According  to  my  gospel.  The  /lov  is  to 
be  either  understood,  ratione  ministerii  (Calvin, 
Meyer),  or  better,  the  gospel  oi  free  grace  for  the 
uncircumcision ,  which  was  especially  committed  to 
Paul,  as  the  gospel  for  the  circumcision  was  to 
Peter,  Gal.  ii.  7.  The  same  expression  occurs  Rom. 
xvi.  25,  26. — Through  Jesus  Christ,  as  the  ap- 
pointed Judge  of  the  world  ;  Acts  xvii.  30,  31 ; 
1  Cor.  iv.  5  ;  2  Cor.  v.  10 ;  Matt.  xxv.  31 ;  John  v. 
27,  &c.  While  y.arcc  to  fvayyihov  fiov  favors  Dr. 
Lange's  interpretation  of  iv  rjni^a,  the  di,a  ^ItjO. 
Xq.  seems  to  refer  rather  to  the  future  judgment ; 
yet  Christ  has  His  hand  in  all  the  preparatory  judg- 
ments of  the  history  of  the  Church. — P.  S.] 


DOCTRrNAL  KST>  ETHICAL. 

1.  The  common  characteristic  in  the  condem- 
nable  condition  of  the  Gentiles  and  Jews  is  their 
religious  and  moral  self-contradiction.  In  this  self- 
contradiction  Paul  (chap.  i.  21)  discovers  the  be- 
ginning of  the  offence  of  the  Gentiles,  whom  he 
represents  as  inexcusable  («)'a;7o/.oy;/Toi't,).  The 
same  self-contradiction  is  consummated,  on  one  side, 
in  the  man  who  approves  sin  against  better  knowl- 
edge and  conscience  (chap.  i.  32,),  and,  on  the  other 
side,  in  the  man  who  condemns  the  sinner,  and  yet 
is  guilty  of  weighty  offences  liimself  (chap.  ii.  1). 
Therefore  the  expression  inexcusable  {avunoloytj- 
Toc)  is  also  repeated  here.  The  judgment  of  God  is 
ever  also  a  self-judgment  of  man.  See  Matt.  xii. 
37  ;  xviii.  23  ;  xxv.  26,  27.  In  the  one  who  judges, 
the  self-contradiction  is  completed  as  falsehood  of  the 
inner  life  in  the  very  strongest  degree.  The  sincere 
man,  on  the  other  hand  (we  can  by  no  means  speak 
of  sincerity  as  absolute,  but  yet  as  gradually  pre- 
dominating), by  looking  into  his  own  heart  and  life, 
arrives  at  that  /la/.Qo&vftia,  in  relation  to  human 
sin  and  misery,  which  is  akin  to  compassion,  and 
points  not  to  the  judgment  of  condemnation,  but  to 
the  saving  judgment  of  the  gospel. 

2.  The  condemnatory  judgment  pronounced  by 
the  sinner  on  the  sinner  does  not  only  condemn  him 
in  form,  but  transposes  him  al-so  actually  to  a  con- 
dition similar  to  condemnation.  Fanaticism  is  never 
more  unhappy  than  when  it  would  compel,  by  meas- 
ures of  deceit  and  violence,  those  who  think  differ- 
ently to  adopt  its  pretended  forms  of  happiness 
(James  ii.  13). 

3.  The  one  who  judges,  says  Paul  (vers.  3,  4), 
has  always  a  false  idea  of  God.  He  either  regards 
himself  as  the  favorite  of  a  partial  God,  on  account 
of  His  conformity  to  theocratical,  ecclesiastical,  or 
legal  forms,  or  he  is  inwardly  vicious  and  wicked, 
and  despises  the  real  manifestations  of  God  (see  Ps. 
1.  16-21).  An  atheistic  element  is  common  to  both 
classes. 

4.  The  long-suffering  of  God,  or  the  forbearance 
of  God's  justice  toward  the  sinner,  stands  in  recipro- 
cal action  with  the  wrath  of  God.  Both  denote  the 
polar  antagonism  in  the  government  of  absolute  jus- 


tice, which  is  no  rule  of  abstract  law,  but  has  a  liy 
ing,  pedagogic  form  corresponding  to  the  relation  o) 
the  Divine  personality  to  the  human  personality 
See  vay  Positive  IJoymatics,^.  119.  God's  forbear 
ance  and  clemency,  no  less  than  His  wrathful  judg- 
ment, looks  to  the  working  of  repentance. 

5.  The  unbeliever  and  hardened  one,  by  his  owt 
deeds,  transforms  the  works  of  God's  fbibearanoe 
and  goodness  into  the  preliminary  conditions  of  Hia 
wrathful  judgment,  and  accumulates  for  himself,  out 
of  the  riches  of  God  which  he  has  experienced,  a 
store  of  destruction. 

6.  The  day  of  the  rejected  gospel  is  to  man  a 
day  of  inward  judgment,  as  is  proved  by  the  de- 
struction of  Jerusalem.  See  the  Exey,  Notes  on 
ver.  5.  But  all  judgments  are  prophecies  and  pre- 
ludes of  the  last  day  of  wrath.  It  is  a  nari-ow  view, 
to  suppose  that  the  conception  of  historical  peiiods 
excludes  epochs,  or  that  single  epochs  exclude  the 
final  catastrophe.  This  may  also  be  applied  to  the 
idea  of  judgments.  Just  because  the  world's  history 
is  the  world's  judgment,  the  former  pursues  its  course 
toward  the  latter. 

7.  The  embarrassments  of  commentators  on  the 
sense  of  vers.  6-10  give  evidence  of  timid  and  nar- 
row views  on  the  doctrine  of  justifcation.  The 
passage  gains  its  true  light  from  the  biblical  doc- 
trine that  there  is  a  gratia  prteveniens  over  the  Gen- 
tile world,  which  even  Augustine  did  not  yet  wholly 
ignore,  but  which,  through  his  influence,  was  loat 
siglit  of  in  the  orthodox  theology  of  the  Middle 
Ages,  and,  indeed,  of  more  recent  times.  The  seek- 
ers who  are  portrayed  in  vers.  7  and  10  will  never 
think  seriously  of  relying  upon  their  works  before 
God,  because  they  are  in  a  gravitation  toward  the 
Eternal,  which  will  find  rest  only  when  they  see  God 
in  Christ,  either  in  this  or  the  other  world.  But  the 
opposite  class — whose  principle  of  life  is  party  spirit, 
and  reliance  upon  temporal  association — will  ever 
place  their  confidence  in  their  own  achievements, 
even  when  they  vigorously  reject  the  doctrine  of  the 
meritoriousness  of  good  works.  For,  besides  the 
righteousness  of  works  ( Werkgerecfttigkeit),  there  is 
also  a  righteousness  of  doctrine,  of  orthodoxy  {ZeJir- 
gerechtigkeit),  a  righteousness  of  the  letter  [Biich- 
stabevge  echiigkeit),  a  righteousness  of  negation  and 
protest  {Negationsgvrechtigkeit),  which  have,  in  com- 
mon with  the  righteousness  of  works,  the  fimda- 
mental  characteristic  of  party  righteousness  {Fartei- 
gerechiigkeii),  and  may  be  the  more  dangerous  forms 
as  they  are  the  more  subtle.  On  the  salvation  of  the 
heathen,  comp.  Tholuck,  Comm.,  pp.  92  ff. — The 
doctrine  of  justification  cannot  conflict  with  the  doc- 
trine of  God's  righteousness,  by  virtue  of  which  He 
will  reward  every  man  according  to  his  works. 

8.  Glory  and  honor  and  immortality — precious 
pearls ;  eternal  life — the  goodly  pearl.  See  Matt, 
xiii.  45,  46. 

9.  It  is  the  character  of  all  party  spirit  to  be  a 
rebel  upwardly  against  the  royal  right  of  truth,  and, 
on  the  other  hand,  a  slave  downwardly  to  the  tyran 
nical  and  terrifying  spirit  of  party. 

10.  Because  God,  as  the  Righteous  One,  looks  at 
the  substance  of  personal  life.  He  does  not  regard 
the  person  according  to  its  external  and  civil  concep- 
tion, nor  according  to  its  external  appearance  and 
estimate. 

11.  In  ver.  12,  different  degrees  of  punishment 
are  evidently  indicated.     See  the  Uxeg.  NoUs. 

12.  On  jytzatorv,  comp.  the  Exeg.  Notes  on 
ver.  13  [also  i.  17,  and  iii.  21-31].     Likewise  th< 


104 


THE   EPISTLE    OF   PAUL   TO    THE   ROMANS. 


Bible- ]\'orfi:  ou  James  ii.  20  ff.  Since  6\y.aio'n',  even 
accordinfj  to  the  idea  of  iiuikifuf  jun/,  can  only  mean 
to  diclare  just,  because  the  (|Ucstioii  is  always  con- 
cemiiig  jiisiiticatiou  in  some  lejial  tribunal,  the  sup- 
posed exceptions  where  lytxaiori-  in  the  Scriptures 
is  made  to  signify  fo  make  Jusf,  should  be  investi- 
gated anew.  The  passage,  Isa.  liii.  2,  can  really  not 
Otherwise  be  explained,  than  that  He  will,  by  virtue 
of  his  knowledge  as  the  righteous  servant  of  God, 
declare  many  just ;  and  this  because  He  shall  bear 
their  ini'juities.  The  passage  in  Daniel,  chap.  xii.  3, 
must  by  all  means  be  explained  thus :  Tliat  the  sub- 
ject is  tlie  judgment  of  the  worhl,  in  which,  accord- 
ing to  the  biblical  representation,  the  righteous 
shall  t;ike  part  (1  Cor.  vi.  2) ;  and  even  if  ■'i;?"'^ST? 
refers  to  this  life,  it  no  more  means  one  who  makes 
just,  than  CS^Sw'S  means  one  who  makes  wise. 
The  reading,  dixuniiOi'iTiii,  Rev.  xxii.  11,  cannot  be 
sustained  against  the  more  strongly  credited  render- 
ing, i)i.y.ato(ri'vtjv  TToK/ffaTo).  See  more  on  this  sub- 
ject ad  chap.  iii.  26. 

13.  On  the  occurrence  of  a  fnljihient  of  the  law 
atno)tf/  the  Gentiles,  see  Tlioluek,  pp.  101,  102.  The 
author,  following  the  older  theologians,  very  justly 
opposes  Flacianism  [i.  c,  that  .sin  is  a  substance,  a 
revival  of  the  old  Maniehaian  heresy,  by  Flacius 
lUyricus,  the  editor  of  the  Magdeburg  Centuries, 
and  a  Lutheran  controversialist  of  the  16th  century. 
— P.  S.].  To  speak  of  virtues  of  the  heathen,  is 
liable  to  misunderstanding,  unless  we  mean  thereby 
a  search  after  the  Infinite.  As  heathen  virtues,  they 
can  only  be  virtues  of  progress  toward  poverty  in 
spirit  (Matt.  v.  3),  under  the  guidance  of  the  r/rutia 
prcBuenieiis,  or  fundamental  forms  of  the  develop- 
ment of  a  desire  after  salvation.  The  attempt,  in 
Rothe's  Etliik,  part  ii.  p.  398  [1st  ed.],  to  explain 
this  class  of  virtues,  is  not  very  clear. 

14.  The  three  objective  forms  of  seeking  higher 
attainments  in  the  (fentUc  world  are  :  The  state,  as 
the  expression  of  the  search  after  righteousness  in 
the  conscience,  or  in  the  will ;  philosophy,  as  the 
expression  of  the  search  for  an  intelligent  comprc- 
hension  of  the  truth ;  and  art,  as  the  expression  of 
the  search  for  ideal  contemplation,  and  the  represen- 
tation of  life  by  means  of  the  sentiments. 

15.  The  three  subjective  forms  of  search  for 
hiffher  aitainments  in  the  Gentile  world  are :  1. 
Wnrks  of  maffiuinimiti/.  2.  The  conscience,  espe- 
cially the  dieerful  impulses  of  the  moral  conscious- 
nes-s.  "  When  they  saw  the  star,  they  rejoiced  with 
exceeding  great  joy."  3.  An  intercourse  of  m  rnl 
jttdgine  -fs,  of  either  an  excusing  or  accusing  charac- 
ter. [Bishop  Sanderson,  as  quoted  by  Wordswortii : 
Paul  teaches  here  (ver.  15)  tliat  even/  man,  however 
unholy,  has  a  conscience,  though  depraved ;  and 
that,  at  the  fall  of  man,  conscience  itself  was  not 
lost,  but  its  rectitude  and  integrity  were  impaired  ; 
and  that,  when  we  are  bom  again  in  baptism,  we  do 
not  receive  the  infusion  of  another  conscience,  but 
our  conscience,  which  was  before  unclean,  is  wa.shed 
hy  the  blood  of  Christ,  and  is  cleansed  by  faith,  and 
is  enliglitened  by  the  Holy  Sjjirit,  in  order  that  it 
may  pleime  (Jod. — P.  S.] 

16.  On  the  day  of  the  crisis  which  the  goSpel 
brings  to  pass,  it  will  appear  that  many  fientiles  are 
really  Jews,  and  that  many  Jews  are  really  Gentiles. 
Likewise,  many  Christians  of  the  Middle  Agi'S  were 
essentially  believers  of  evangelical  truth,  while  many 
ao-called  evangelical  persons  whose  righteousness 
OODsisls  of  works,  and  others  whose  righteousness 


consists  of  doctrines,  and  still  others  whose  right- 
eousness consists  of  their  Protestantism,  are,  after 
all,  only  Roman  Catholics  at  heart.  Ideal  dynamica. 
antitheses,  which  the  day  of  the  Lord  will  bring  to 
light,  predominate  over  the  hi.-!torical  antitheses, 
which  possess  very  great  significance.  Ou  the  daj 
mentioned  here,  see  the  Sjceg.  Notes. 

nOMILETICAI,  AND  PRACTICAL. 

God's  impaitial  righteousness  is  shown  :  1.  He 
does  not  give  preference  to  the  Jews,  although  they 
possess  the  law  ;  2.  He  is  not  prejudiced  against  the 
Gentiles,  although  they  are  without  the  law  ;  but,  3. 
of  one,  just  as  of  the  other.  He  asks  whether  they 
have  done  good  or  evil  (vers.  1-16). — Because  oth- 
ers  are  black,  we  do  not  become  white  (ver.  1).^ 
Judging  our  neighbor  is  the  worst  depravity,  be- 
cause :  1.  We  are  blind  toward  ourselves ;  2.  we 
are  unjust  toward  our  fellow-men  (ver.  1). — By  our 
judgment  of  otlier?^  we  fall  under  the  judgment  of 
God  pronounced  on  ourselves  (ver.  3). — Wliat  does 
the  celebration  of  a  day  of  fa.sting  and  prayer  re- 
quire us  to  do  ?  1.  Not  to  de-spise  the  riches  of 
God's  goodness,  patience,  and  forbearance ;  but 
rather,  2.  to  remember  that  His  goodness  should 
lead  us  to  repentance  (ver.  4). — God's  goodness  re- 
garded as  tiie  pure  source  of  reiieiitanee  (ver.  4). — 
Treasure  not  up  unto  thyself  wi'ath  against  the  day 
of  wrath  (ver.  5). — Dies  irce,  dies  ilia,  solvit  scecla  in 
favilla  (vers.  5,  6). — What  will  God  give  to  every 
man  according  to  his  works?  1.  To  some,  glory 
and  honor  and  immortality,  together  with  precious 
peace ;  2.  to  otiiers,  indignation  and  wrath,  tribula- 
tion and  anguish  (vers.  6-11). — What  it  is  to  continue 
patientli/  in  roell-doinq  for  eternal  life  (ver.  7). — God's 
indignation!  1.  Not  unmerited,  but  de.*erved  ;  2.  not 
temporary,  but  eternal  (ver.  8). — God's  wrath  :  holy 
displeasure,  not  unholy  anger. — No  one  is  without 
law.  For,  1.  God  has  given  His  law  to  the  Jews  by 
Moses ;  2.  he  has  written  the  substance  of  it  upon 
the  hearts  of  the  Gentiles  (vers.  12-16). — The  uni- 
versal  revelation  of  God  in  the  conscience  (vers.  14, 
15). — The  conscience,  and  human  thouglits  in  their 
relation  to  each  other.  This  relation  is  such,  that, 
1.  The  witness  of  the  former  testifies  of  the  work 
of  the  law  ;  2.  the  latter,  in  the  presence  of  such 
witness,  accuse  or  excuse  one  another  (vers.  14,  15). 
— Iinpo-isibility  of  preaching  the  gospel  among  the 
heathen,  if  they  were  dej)rived  of  conscience. — The 
revelation  of  God  in  tlie  conseit-nee,  on  the  one 
hanil,  not  to  be  despised  ;  and,  on  the  other,  not  to 
be  overvalued. — Con.><cicnce  regarde<i  as  tiiecoimect. 
ing  link  for  every  missionary  sermon  among  the 
heathen. 

LrTHKR  :  *  The  little  word  "  law  "  must  not  be 
understood  here  after  a  human  fashion,  that  it  teach- 
es which  works  are  to  be  done,  and  whieii  are  to  be 
left  undone  ;  as  is  the  case  with  the  laws  of  men, 
widen  can  be  ol)eyed  by  works,  without  the  feeling 
of  the  heart.  God  judges  according  to  the  intent 
of  the  heart,  and  will  not  be  satisfied  by  words ;  but' 
all  the  more  punishes  as  hypocri.-iy  and  lyiiig  those 
works  which  are  done  without  the  fetling  of  the 
heart.  Therefore  Paul  says  that  nobody  is  a  doer 
of  the  law  by  the  works  of  the  law  (ver.  15). 

•  Lonfr-giifferinff  i«  a  virtue  whirh  is  slow  to  bcooms 
wmthftil  and  to  punish  wronir.  rniicnoo  is  that  which 
boars  mi^fortuiio  in  I'liipcrty,  bo'ly,  or  reputation,  whether 
it  hnppi'H  jiHtly  or  unjustly.  (Joodnods  is  t<?mp<jral  redp- 
rooal  bcneflccncc,  and  a  friendly  nature  (ver.  4). 


CHAPTER   II.    1-16. 


lOS 


Starke  :  The  ungodly  are  as  the  swine,  which 
do  not  look  at  the  tree  whose  acorns  they  gather  up. 
Thus,  with -all  their  enjoyment  of  temporal  mercies, 
they  do  uot  look  up  to  God,  who  gives  them  richly 
to  enjoy  every  good  thing  (Hosea  ii.  7  ;  Isa.  i.  3  ; 
Jer.  V.  24) ;  for  by  every  morsel  of  bread  He  seeks 
their  improvement  (ver.  4). — He  who  does  not  grow 
better,  will  grow  worse  by  Divine  goodness  (ver.  5). 
— As  the  labor,  so  the  reward  ;  and  each  one  must 
reap  what  he  has  sown  (ver.  6). — T^ie  pious  will  gain 
in  perfection  in  the  kingdom  of  glory  that  which 
they  had  sought  in  the  kingdom  of  grace  (ver.  10). — 
Hedixgeu  :  To  censure  others,  is  the  same  as  to  con- 
demn one's  self.  He  who  therefore  loves  to  judge, 
pronounces  sentence  upon  himself  (ver.  1). — Blind- 
ness !  Delay  produces  deception.  Security  follows 
Divine  forbearance.  Take  care !  The  longer  the 
storm  gathers,  the  greater  its  devastation.  The  one 
who  has  received  the  long  loan,  has  not  therefore 
received  it  as  a  gift  (ver.  4). — Every  sin  will  receive 
its  due  reward.  Who  will  trifle  with  it  ?  (ver.  8.) — 
A  greater  measure  of  knowledge  brings  only  greater 
condemnation,  and  no  excuse.  This  much  a  Gentile 
knows  of  the  will  of  God,  that  he  may  be  condemned 
to  death  justly;  much  more  may  the  Christian  be 
justly  condemned  who  can  and  should  know  per- 
fectly the  will  of  God  in  the  law  (ver.  14). — Xova 
Bibl.  Tub. :  The  sinner  can  persuade  himself,  and 
by  many  kinds  of  misconception  stupefy  himself,  so 
as  to  believe  that  his  sins  will  go  unpunished.  Ah, 
how  common  is  this  deception  1  (ver.  3.) — Eternal 
life  is  a  jewel  for  which  we  should  strive,  a  croicn 
for  which  we  should  fight,  a  gift  which  we  should 
accept,  hold,  and  keep  until  the  end.  He  who  per- 
severes, will  be  saved.  The  question  at  the  judg- 
ment-day will  not  be  one  of  words,  but  of  deeds 
(ver.  Y). — No  one  is  without  law  !  If  it  is  not  writ- 
ten in  stone,  it  is  nevertheless  engraved  upon  the 
heart.  Every  one  knows  by  nature  what  is  just  and 
what  is  unjust,  what  is  good  and  what  is  evil  (ver. 
4). — Cramer  :  God  must  be  truly  in  earnest  for 
human  salvation,  which  He  seeks  lay  prosperity  and 
adversity.  When  words  cannot  avail,  He  punishes, 
and  waits  with  great  forbearance  and  patience  until 
the  sinner  is  coi^^verted  (ver.  4). — The  law  of  nature 
is  a  source  of  the  written  law  of  God,  embraced  in 
the  two  rules :  Whatsoever  ye  would  that  men  should 
do  to  you,  do  ye  even  so  to  them  ;  and  what  you 
would  not  have  them  do  unto  you,  do  not  unto  them 
(ver.  14). — Xo  one  can  sin  so  that  his  sins  shall  re- 
main concealed  ;  for,  if  they  are  not  revealed  before, 
they  will  be  brought  to  light  at  the  last  day  (ver. 
16). —  Wurtemb.  -Bibl. :  Works  are  witnesses  of  faith. 
We  must  therefore  do  good  works,  not  in  order  to 
be  saved,  but  in  order  that  with  them  we  may  testify 
of  our  faith,  and  by  faith  may  inherit  eternal  life 
(ver.  7). — Lasge  :  Abandon  all  the  excuses  of  age, 
or  condition,  or  other  personal  circumstances,  that 
you,  with  your  want  of  honest  Christianity,  bring 
forward ;  for  you  can  derive  no  advantage  from  them 
before  God's  judgment-seat  (ver.  11). — The  law  of 
nature  must  be  of  great  advantage,  and  be  written 
very  deeply  on  the  hearts  of  all  men,  since  its  wilful 
transgression  brings  upon  men  so  great  guilt,  and 
punishment  or  condemnation  (ver.  12). 

Bengkl  :  As  long  as  man  does  not  feel  the 
judgment  of  God,  he  is  apt  to  despise  His  good- 
ness. Matt,  xxviii.  18.  Mark  here  the  antithesis  of 
the  richness  of  Divine  goodness  despised,  and  the 
iccumulated  treasure  of  wrath. 

0.  v.  Geklacu  :  The  goodness  of  God  is  mani- 


fested in  the  exhibition  of  blessings ;  His  pa'ience, 
in  bearing  with  the  sinner;  and  His  lovg -suffering 
in  withholding  from  punishment  (ver.  4). — Christian- 
ity is  not  something  lately  discovered  among  men  ; 
but  its  Founder,  the  Son  of  God  Himself,  is  the 
King  and  Judge  not  only  of  Christians,  but  likewise 
of  Jews  and  Gentiles,  whom  He,  in  His  preparatory 
households  of  grace — the  former  in  His  Father's 
house,  the  latter  by  an  awakened  longing  for  the 
same — is  seeking  to  train  up  for  His  kingdom,  though 
now  they  are  far  distant  from  home  (ver.  16). — 
Lisco :  Merely  external  honesty  is  also  punishable 
(ver.  1). — Glory,  splendor,  instead  of  lowness,  honor 
instead  of  contempt,  and  immortality  instead  of  the 
mortal  condition  (1  Cor.  xv.  53,  54),  are  the  reward 
of  patience,  of  the  continuous  striving  for  eternal 
life  in  spite  of  all  impediments  and  difficulties 
(ver.  V). 

Hecbner  :  God's  judgment  is  righteous  :  1.  Ob- 
jectively :  in  accordance  with  sacred  laws  ;  not  arbi- 
trarily or  cai)riciously,  without  regard  to  the  person  ; 
2.  subjectively :  according  to  the  true  character  of 
the  man,  taking  each  one  for  his  internal  and  exter- 
nal worth  (ver.  2). — The  dealing  of  God  toward  sin- 
ful men  is  simply  this :  He  first  tries  each  with  good- 
ness, before  He  pronounces  punishment ;  it  is  our 
salvation  to  acknowledge  this  goodness,  but  it  is  our 
I'uin  to  despise  it  (ver.  4). — The  hardened  heart  ia 
accusable :  its  operation  is  not  that  of  nature,  but 
of  its  own  degeneration.  How  is  it  first  hardened? 
1.  By  frivolity ;  2.  by  obstinacy  and  pride  ;  3.  by 
actual,  continued  sinning  (ver.  5). — The  righteous 
impartiality  of  God.  God  does  not  judge :  1.  By 
outward  advantages,  form,  birth,  pedigree,  power, 
respect,  wealth  ;  nor,  2.  by  gifts  of  mind,  acqui- 
sitions, skill ;  nor,  3.  by  external  performances  aa 
such,  by  merely  external  works,  external  piety  ;— 
but  by  the  w-hole  inward  sense,  by  the  simplicity 
and  clearness  of  the  heart ;  by  faith  and  fidelity. 
He  has  regard  to  what  is  given  to  each  man  (ver. 
11). 

The  Peeicope  (vers.  1-11)  for  10th  Sunday  after 
Trinity  (Memorial  of  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem), 
instead  of  1  Cor.  xii.  1-11  :  The  impenitent  sinner 
has  no  excuse  before  God. :  1.  Proof;  2.  applica- 
tion.— Man  before  the  Divine  judgment :  He  must, 
1.  Acknowledge  himself  guilty ;  2.  regard  God's 
judgment  righteous  and  inevitable ;  3.  take  refuge 
in  God's  goodness,  and  listen  to  its  call  to  repent- 
ance ;  4.  fear  the  future ;  5.  listen  to  revelation. — 
We  should  see  ourselves  reflected  in  the  example  of 
the  impenitent  Jews. 

Dasiel  Superville  :  The  sovereign  equity  of 
God  (ver.  11). — Menken  :  The  universal  equality  of 
men  before  God's  judgment. 

Spenkr  :  The  wliole  law  was  written  on  the  heart 
of  the  first  man,  for  his  soul  was  an  image  of  God'a 
perfect  holiness  and  righteousness.  But  after  this 
complete  law  had  been  erased  from  the  heart,  there 
remained,  so  to  speak,  only  some  of  the  larger  let- 
ters, some  portion  of  the  knowledge  of  the  manifest 
evil  and  good  (ver.  15). — Conscience  is  nothing  else 
than  a  voice  of  God  (ver.  15). — Roos  :  Conscience 
is  the  consciousness  or  the  judicial  declarations  of 
the  law  (ver.  15). 

Besskr  :  From  man's  knowledge  of  God's  law 
written  on  his  heart,  there  arises  conscience,  which 
tesiitie-t  to  him,  as  Luther  excellently  describes,  the 
power  with  which  conscience  presses  its  judicial  wit. 
ness  upon  man  (ver.  15).' — To  the  question,  "  What 
disease  is  kiUing  you  ?  "  the  poet  Euripides  makes  a 


106 


THE   EPISTLE    OF   PAUL   TO   THE   ROMANS. 


matricide  answer :  "  Conscience  ;  for  I  am  conscious 
that  I  have  done  evil"  (ver.  15). 

J.  P.  Langk  :  The  judgment  of  men  in  the  judg- 
ment of  Ciod. — The  sources  of  judgment  (vers.  4,  5). 
—How  tlie  sinner  changes  the  treasures  of  Gods 
goodness  into  treasures  of  wrath. — The  great  judg- 
ment-days in  the  world's"  history,  especially  the  de- 
struction of  Jerusalem. — Justification  and  God's 
righteousness :  1.  Apparent  contradiction ;  2.  per- 
fect unity. — Two  kinds  of  men  perceptible :  1.  Li  two 
purposes ;  2.  two  kinds  of  seeking ;  3.  two  results 
(vers.  7-10). — God  does  not  regard  the  person  be- 
cause He  looks  at  it :  1.  He  does  not  regard  it 
in  a  worldly  sense ;  2.  He  regards  it  according  to 
its  spiritual  significance. — The  gospel  reveals  the 
thoughts  of  the  heart :  1.  As  a  savor  of  death  unto 
death  ;  and  2.  as  a  savor  of  life  unto  life. — But  this 
does  not  apply  to  every  form  of  Christianity. 

[Bl'kkitt  :  On  the  day  of  judgment  aa  the  time 
when  God's  character  and  dealings  shall  be  dis- 
played, ver.  5. — It  will  be  a  day  when  His  righteous- 
ness shall  be  universally  manifested  and  magnified  ; 
when  all  His  attributes  shall  be  glorified  ;  His  won- 
derful clemency  sweetly  displayed;  His  exact  justice 
terribly  demonstrated  ;  His  perfect  wisdom  clearly 
unfolded  ;  all  the  knotty  plans  of  Providence  wisely 
resolved  ;  all  the  mysterious  depths  of  His  coun.sels 
fully  discovered ;  and  His  injured  honor  and  glory 
clearly  repaired,  to  the  joyful  satisfaction  of  all  good 
men,  and  to  the  dreadful  consternation  and  confusion 
of  the  wicked  and  impenitent  world. — On  ver.  16  : 
Here,  1.  A  doctrine  is  boldly  asserted — a  coming 
day  of  judgment ;  and  2.  its  proof  and  confirmation 
— "  according  to  my  gospel." 

[M.  Hkxky  (condensed)  on  the  whole  passage, 
vers.  1-10  :  The  Apostle,  1.  Arraigns  the  Jews  for 
their  censoriousness  and  self-conceit ;  2.  asserts  the 
invariable  justice  of  the  Divine  government ;  3. 
draws  up  a  charge  against  the  Jews ;  4.  describes 
the  measures  by  which  God  proceeds  in  His  judg- 
ment ;  and  5.  proves  the  equity  of  ail  His  deal- 
ings with  men  when  He  comes  to  judge  them. 

[Macksigmt:  Paul  distinguishes  between  7nen7o- 
f  rioim  and  gratuitous  justification  ;  the  former  being 
I  that  which  is  unattainable  by  works  of  the  law,  the 
^  latter  that  which  is  attainable,  as  James  says,  not  by 
faith  only,  but  by  WKrks  also. — Ver.  l.j  :  That  there 
is  a  natural  revelation  made  to  the  heatlien,  is  proved 
I  by  Paul  by  three  arguments  :  1.  By  many  virtuous 
acts  performed  by  tlie  heathen ;  2.  by  tlie  natural 
operation  of  tlieir  consciences ;  3.  by  their  reason- 
ings with  one  another,  by  which  they  excused  or 
accused  one  anotiier. 

[JoKiiN :  These  suppositions  agree  both  with 
(  Scripture  and  reason :  1.  All  men  can  do  all  that 
God  requires  of  them  ;  2.  all  who  do  the  best  they 
can,  derive  help  from  God  as  far  as  is  needfid  ; 
8.  they  all  have  Christ  as  their  Redeemer,  thougli 
He  was  never  revealed  to  them. — Who  knows  wheth- 
er the  lot  of  the  savage  be  not  better  than  that  of 
the  philosopher,  and  the  lot  of  the  slave  than  that 
of  the  king?  But  this  much  we  know,  that  every 
one  ought  to  be  contented  with  that  state  in  which 
his  wise  and  good  Creator  has  placed  him,  and  to 
conclude  that  it  will  be  the  best  for  him  if  he  makes 
the  best  use  of  it.  Upon  this  supposition  the  Divine 
impartiality  stimds  fully  justified. 

[Timothy  Dwiomt  :  1.  Our  eternal  life  is  in  itself 
an  iinmeiise  good  ;  t2.  eternal  hap))ine8a  consists  in 
eternal  <lisinterestcdnes3  and  its  consequences.  (See 
sermon  on   Coiisiatency  of  Benevolence  with  seeking 


Salvation,  in  which  Lord  Shaftesbury's  celebrated 
theory,  that  disinterestedness  is  virtue,  and  the  onlj 
virtue,  is  controverted.) 

[John  yosTEU  :  To  the  present  hour  in  each  life, 
the  series  of  the  Divine  goodness  may  be  counted  by 
the  succession  of  a  man's  sins.  Not  one  sin,  small 
or  great,  but  immediately  close  by  it  were  acts  and 
proofs  of  this  goodness.  If  this  had  been  realized 
to  thought,  what  a  striking  and  awful  admonition  I 
Every  sin  a  testimony,  a  representative  of  good ;  and 
the  wonder  is  that  the  goodness  goes  on  ! 

[Annot.  Parag.  Bible  (London):  The  question  ia 
not  (vers.  14,  15)  whether  any  of  the  Gentiles  have 
actually  attained  to  eternal  life  without  a  Divine 
revelation,  but  whether  they  had  the  law  of  nature 
or  conscience.  They  had  this  ;  and  by  it  they  shall 
be  judged. — Taylor:  Note  Paul's  wisdom  in  appeal- 
ing to  Jew  and  Gentile  :  1.  If  the  Jew  could  bo 
convinced  that  a  right-minded  Gentile  might  be 
blessed  with  eternal  salvation,  why  should  he  not 
now  be  pardoned,  and  taken  into  the  visible  Church? 
2.  the  Gentile,  made  despondent  by  the  representa- 
tions of-  his  guilt  in  the  last  chapter,  here  finds  him- 
self placed  with  the  Jews,  and  entitled  to  hope  in 
God's  mercy. 

[HoriGE :  The  principles  on  which  the  Apostle 
assures  us  all  men  are  to  be  judged,  are,  1.  He  who 
condemns  in  others  what  he  does  himself,  ipso  facto 
condemns  himself;  2.  God's  judgments  are  accord- 
ing to  the  real  character  of  men  ;  3.  the  goodness 
of  God,  being  designed  to  lead  us  to  repentance,  ia 
no  proof  tiiat  He  will  not  punish  sin  ;  4.  God  will 
judge  strictly  according  to  works,  iiot  profession; 
6.  men  shall  be  judged  strictly  according  to  their 
knowledge  of  duty. — Further  Retnarks  by  HonoK 
(condensed) :  1.  The  deceitfulness  of  the  heart  strik- 
ingly exhibited  in  the  different  judgments  they  pass 
on  themselves  and  others ;  2.  ask  yourself,  "  How 
does  the  goodness  of  God  affect  me?"  3.  genuine 
repentance  produced  by  discoveries  of  God's  mercy, 
legal  repentance  by  fear  of  His  justice;  4.  any 
doctrine  that  tends  to  produce  security  in  sin,  must 
be  false ;  5.  how  vain  the  hopes  of  bles.-jcdness 
founded  on  God's  partiality,  or  forgetfulness  of  sin  ; 
6.  to  escape  our  guilt,  we  must  seek  the  Saviour's 
righteousness  ;  7.  He  who  died  for  the  sins  of  men, 
will  sit  in  judgment  on  sinners. 

[Ver.  16.  Barnes  :  On  the  propriety  of  a  day 
of  judgment,  when  all  the  thoughts  of  the  heart  will 
be  revealed  :  1.  It  is  only  by  revealing  these  that 
the  character  is  really  determined,  and  inq)artial 
judgment  administered  ;  2.  they  are  not  judged  or 
rewarded  in  this  life  ;  3.  men  of  i)nre  motives  and 
pure  hearts  are  often  basely  caluminated,  and  over- 
whelmed  with  ignominy  ;  while  men  of  base  motives 
are  often  exalted  in  jjublic  opinioii.  It  is  proper  • 
that  the  secret  principles  of  each  should  be  re- 
vealed.—J.  F.  H.] 

[Ver.  7.  Bji  patient  continuance  in  well-doing. 
Barrow:  No  virtue  is  acquired  in  an  instant,  but 
by  degrees,  step  by  step  ;  from  the  .seeds  of  right 
instruction  and  good  resolution  it  springs  up,  and 
goes  forward  by  a  continual  jirogrcss  and  customary 
|)i-iictice.  'Tis  a  child  of  patience,  a  fruit  of  perse- 
verance, anil,  eonsecpiently,  a  work  of  time  ;  for 
enduring  imi)lies  a  good  space  of  time. — Ver.  9, 
Apam  :  Evi'ry  sin,  when  newly  comniitted,  anm/.ea 
and  terrifies  the  soul,  though  the  sense  of  it  soon 
wears  ofl'.  How  .shall  we  bear  the  anguish  of  r-l| 
our  sins  together,  when  conscience,  wliich  forg*-** 
and  extenuates  none,  brings  them  to  our  renicPb 


CHAPTER  II.   lY-24. 


107 


brance  ? — Ver.  14.  A  law  unto  themselves.  Bishop 
Pearson  :  Every  particular  person  has  a  particular 
remembrance  in  himself,  as  a  sufficient  testimony  of 
his  Creator,  Lord,  and  Judge.  That  man  which 
most  peremptorily  denieth  God's  existence,  is  the 
greatest  argument  to  himself  that  there  is  a  God. 
Let  Qaligula  profess  himself  an  atheist,  and,  with 
that  profession,  hide  his  head  or  run  under  his  bed, 
and  when  the  thunder  strikes  his  ears,  and  lightning 
flashes  iu  his  eyes,  those  terrible  works  of  nature 
put  him  in  mind  of  the  power,  and  his  own  guilt, 
of  the  justice  of  God ;  whom,  while  in  his  wilful 
opinion  he  weakly  denies,  in  his  involuntary  action 
he  strongly  asserteth.  So  that  a  Deity  will  either  be 
granted  or  extorted,  and,  where  it  is  not  acknowl- 


edged, it  will  be  manifested. — Vers.  5  and  16 
Bishop  J.  Taylor  :  There  are  two  great  days  in 
which  the  fate  of  all  the  world  is  transacted.  Thi» 
life  is  man's  day,  in  which  man  does  what  he  pleases, 
and  God  holds  His  peace.  But  then  God  shall  hava 
His  day  too,  in  which  He  shall  speak,  and  no  msm 
shall  answer.  If  we  do  the  work  of  God  in  out 
own  day,  we  shall  receive  an  infinite  mercy  in  the 
day  of  the  Lord. — Ver.  16.  J/y  gospel.  The  gos- 
pel:  1.  A  voice  of  love  {vox  amoris) ;  2.  a  voic« 
of  challenge  {vox  contestalionis) ;  3.  a  voice  of  cer 
tainty  {vox  certitudinis) ;.  4.  a  voice  of  persuasioi 
and  invitation  {vox  invitationis) ;  5.  a  voice  of  de 
cision  and  judgment  {vox  judicii). — P.  S.] 


Fourth  Sectiox. —  The  aggravated  corruptio7i  of  the  Jew  in  his  false  zeal  for  the  law  {a  side-piece  to  A 
corruption  of  the  Gentile  in  his  idolatrous  worship  of  symbols).  The  fanatical  and  wicked  method  of 
the  Jews  in  administerivg  the  law  with  legal  pride,  and  in  corrupting  it  by  false  application  and  treach- 
ery— an  occasion  for  the  blasphemy  of  God '«  name  among  the  Gentiles. 

Chap.  IL  17-24. 


17  Behold,'  [But  if]  thou  art  called  [named,  denominated,  fnovoiiuZ;ij\  a  Jew, 
and  restest  in  [upon]  the  law,^  and  makest  thy  boast  of  God  [boastest  in  God], 

18  And  knowest  his  will,  and  approvest  the  things  that  are  more  excellent  [provest, 

19  or,  discernest  the  things  that  differ],^  being  instructed  out  of  the  law ;  And  art 
confident  that  thou  thyself  art  a  guide  of  the  blind,  a  light  of  them  which 

2t)  [those  who]  are  in  darkness,  An  instructor  of  the  foolish,  a  teacher  of  babes, 
which  hast  [having]  the  form  [the  representation,  model,  pattern,  rl^v  jtto^ijpcofffj'] 

21  of  knowledge  and  of  the  truth  in  the  law.  [, — ]     Thou  therefore  which  [Thou, 
then,  who]  teachest  another,  teachest  thou  not  thyself?    thou  that  preachest  a 

22  man  should  not  steal,  dost  thou  steal  ?      Thou  that  sayest  a  man  should  not 
commit  adultery,  dost  thou  commit  adultery  ?   thou  that  abhorrest  idols,  dost 

23  thou  commit  sacrilege  [literally,  robbery  of  temples]  ?  *     Thou  that  makest  thy  boast 
of  [in]  the  law,  through  breaking  the  law  dishonourest  thou  God  ?    [through 

24  the    transgression   of  the    law    thou    dishonourest    God.]  *      "  For    the   name 
of  God  is   blasphemed  among  the   Gentiles   through  you,"   as  it    is   written 

[isa.  lii.  5  ;  Ezek.  xxsvi.  2o]. 

TEXTUAL. 

1  Ver.  17. — [Instead  of  the  text,  rec,  iSe,  behold,  which  is  not  sufficiently  sustained,  read  ei  Si,  but  if,  with  N".  A.  B. 
D*.  K.,  Griesbach,  IJachmann,  Tischendorf,  Bloomtield,  Alford,  and  nearly  all  the  recent  commentators.  The  reading 
iSe  is  either  a  mistake,  or  a  change  for  the?  purpose  of  avoiding  the  anacoliithon,  which,  however,  is  more  apparent  than 
real.  The  apodosis  must  he  supplied  (why  dost  thou  not  act  accordingly,  or,  how  great  is  thy  respnnsibitity'),  or  it  may  be 
found  in  ver.  21,  by  simply  omitting  the  ovv,  which  is  often  epanaleptic,  resuming  the  thread  of  the  sentence.  So  Meyer, 
who  regards  vers.  17-i;8  as  the  protasis,  and  21,  22  as  the  apodosis. — V.  S.] 

"^  Ver.  17. — {irravairavji  vo/xta,  without  the  article,  JC.  A.  B.  D'.  The  later  MSS.  and  the  text. rec.  insert  r<f 
before  vofxta,  because  it  here  clearly  applies  to  the  written  law  of  Moses  as  repieseniing  the  wh«)le  Mosaic  system,  the 
civil  and  religious  polity  of  the  Jews,  voiioi  has  here  ns  in  ver.  14  the  force  of  a  proper  name.  Alford  :  "  The  article  is 
omitted,  because  '  the  l:iw  '  is  not  here  distributed — it  is  not  the  law  itself  in  its  entirely  which  is  meant,  but  (he  /net  of 
having  or  of  knowing  the  law:— the  strict  way  of  expressing  it  would  perhaps  be,  '  in  the  fact  of  possessing  a  law,'  which,  . 
condensed  into  our  less  accmate  English,  would  be  in  one  word,  in  the  law :  viz.,  'which  thou  possessest.'  " — P.  S.] 

^  Ver.  IS.— [On  the  different  interpretations  of  6  OK  tfi  a  ^€is  ra  Si,a<t>epovTa,  see  the  Exeg.  A'otes.  Lange  (with 
Tholuck,  Fritzsche,  Eoiche,  Kiiekert,  Pliilippi,  Alford)  translates  :  Du  heiirtheihsl  die  widerstreitenden  Dinge.  'Iholuck  : 
J)u  prUfst  das  Unlersthiedine.  Tyndale  :  Hasl  experience  of  good  and  bad.  Conybeare  aid  Howson  :  Gives!  jtidgihcni 
vpon  good  or  evil.  Eobeit  Young,  too  literally :  Dost  approve  the  distinctions.  But  the  versions  of  Cranmer,  Geneva, 
James,  j^heims,  and  Am.  Bible  Union  agree  substantially  with  the  Latin  Vulg. :  Probas  uliliora.  So  also  Meyer,  who 
translates:  Da  bilUgsl  das  Vnrzi'igliehe.  Wordsworth:  Thou  discernest  the  things  that  are  more  excellent.  The  same 
phrase  occurs,  Phil.  i.  10,  where  the  E.  V.  renders  it  in  the  same  way.  Grammatically,  both  interpretations  are  correct, 
and  hence  the  connection  must  decide.  So/ct/ua^eti'  means  first  to  ixamine,  to  try.  to  prove  (1  Cor.  iii.  13  ;  1  Peter  i.  7)  ;  and 
then,  as  the  result  of  examination  and  trial,  to  discern,  to  disti)igni.-h,  and  to  aprrove  (I  Cor.  xvi.  3  ;  Pom.  xiv.  22).  6ia- 
^epeiv  is  :  (1.)  To  differ;  (2.)  to  differ  to  advantage,  to  excel.  Hence  ra  Siatpepovra  :  (1.)  The  difference  between  right  and 
wrong,  good  ;ind  bad  ;  (2.)  the  excellent  things,  lUilia. — P.  S.] 

■•Ver.  22.— [Alford  translates  :  Thou  who  ahhorrest  idols,  dost  thou  rob  Iheir  lemp.lesf  To  maintain  the  contrast,  he 
refers  (with  Chrysostom,  Mejur,  Tholuck,  and  others)  kpoervAeis  to  the  robbing  of  idfd  temples  (ciiwAa) ;  but  this  was  n« 
sacrilege  in  the  eyes  of  the  Jew  ;  and  hence  others  refer  it  to  the  temple  of  God  iu  Jerusalem.     See  Exrg.  Notes. — P.  S.] 

*  Ver.  23.— [Lange  and  Meyer  take  this  verse  as  a  categorical  charge,  resulting  from  the  preceding  questions  which 
the  Jew  could  not  deny.  This  view  is  supported  by  the  following  yap.  napa^avn  ,  in  the  sis  other  passages  of  th« 
N.  T.  where  it  occurs,  ie  uniformly  translated  transgression  m  the  E.  V, — P.  S.] 


108 


THE   EPISTLE   OF   PAUL   TO   THE   ROMANS. 


EXEGETICAL  AND   CRITICAL. 

The  connection  with  the  foregoing  is  explained 
by  Tlioluck  [p.  110]  thus:  "  Tlie  Jew  was  already 
humliled  by  the  proof  that  tlie  Gentile  was  also  in 
possession  of  the  law.  But  it  is  Cuither  charged 
upon  him  that  kix  possession  of  the  law  has  become 
a  dishonor  to  Him  who  gave  it  to  him."  We  have 
seen  already  that  the  connection  consists  in  a  sharp 
antithesis:  a  Gentile  who  is  a  Jew  at  heart;  a  Jew 
who,  according  to  the  spirit  of  the  law,  is  the  most 
wanton  Gentile.  [Estius  justly  calls  the  following 
apostrophe,  ''  ontiio  Hplcndnla  ac  vihcmciiK.''''^ 

Ver.  17.  But  il  thou  art  named  a  Jew.  There 
BCCMis  to  be  an  anacoluthon  in  the  following  verses, 
which  it  was  probably  intended  to  remove  by  the 
reading  Hi.  Tholuck  :  "  The  apodosis  appears  to 
be  wanting  to  the  protasis,  vers.  17-20."  But  we 
may  explain  without  an  anacoluthon  (Meyer) :  "  But 
if  thou  art  called  a  Jew,  &c.  .  .  .  thou  tiiercfore 
{pvv,  ver.  21,  in  consequence  of  what  has  been  said, 
who  teachest  another,  teache.st  thou  not  thyself?" 
We  would  find  an  easier  solution,  if  we  could  read 
the  verbs  i/ioroftd'^r^  and  tnavanavri  as  conjunctives 
for  the  formation  of  a  hypothetical  protasis  ;  the  fol- 
lowing indicatives  would  then  constitute  the  apo- 
dosis. But  the  uv  is  wanting  to  the  d.  [See  Textual 
Note  '.] — Named.  Jew  was  the  designation  of  the 
Hebrew  according  to  his  religion ;  therefore  the 
theocratic  name  of  honor,  which  is  also  contained  in 
the  etymology  of  the  word  itself*  ' E 7Tovoiin'Zr\ 
is  translated  cognomiitaris  by  the  Vulgate  and  Ben- 
gel.  [Wordsworth  :  in — ovofiaZi],  thou  hast  a  title 
in  mldittoii  t"  {i/ri)  that  which  other  men  possess. — 
P.  S.]  But  the  compound  verb  is  also  used  in  the 
sen.se  of  the  simple  ovo/id'^nv,  and  the  name  'Joc- 
dftioi;  was  not  a  surname,  although  it  might  become  a 
surname  for  the  false  Jew.  Tholuck  [Meyer,  Phi- 
lippi,  Hodge;  comp.  LXX.  Gen.  iv.  17,  25,  26,  and  the 
cla-<sical  quotations  of  Meyer  in  loc. — P.  S.]. — And 
restest.  Intimation  of  Jewish  pride.  Strictly : 
Thou  liest  on  it  for  rest.  Thus  the  Jew  abused  his 
privilege ;  Ps.  cxlvii.  19,  20. — Israel  perverted  into 
a  false  trust  its  ideal  destination  for  the  nations,  ac- 
cording to  Isa.  xlii.  6,  7,  and  other  passages  ;  and  it 
80  caricatured  the  single  elements  (which  are  desig- 
nated in  the  following  versos)  of  this  destination,  that 
tlie  most  glaring  moial  contnidiction  took  place  in 
its  character. — Thou  makest  thy  boast  f  in  God, 
as  thy  [exclusive]  guardian  God  ;  Isa.  xlv.  25  ;  Jer. 
xxxi.  38.  [To  boast  or  glory  in  God,  or  in  Christ 
(Gal.  vi.  14),  is  right,  if  it  proceeils  from  a  sense  of 
our  weakness  and  unwortliiness,  and  a  corresponding 
sense  of  the  goodness  of  (Jod,  as  our  sure  refuge  and 
strength  ;  but  it  is  wrong  if  it  arises  from  religious 
bigotry  and  conceit,  which  would  monopolize  the 
favor  of  God  to  the  exclusion  of  others.     Calvin : 


•  [  miirr^  is  thp  verbal  noun  from  tho  future  hophal  of 
m*",  tn prni.tp,  and  incana  pniisfl,  sc.  Jah,  God  {Onlltiih); 
Bcc  FUrst,  Dirt.,  8ub  R^,  vol.  i.  491 ;  Oen.  xxix.  35  (where 
Ixjali,  after  the  birth  of  Jiidiih,  Btiys  :  "Now  will  I  priise 
tlio  Lord  :  therefore  she  called  his  naiiio  Jmiih  ") ;  xlix. 
8  ;  Rev.  .ii.  9.  To  be  a  Jew  in  thin  proper  sense  was  to  l>e- 
lone  to  thl  covenant  people  of  God  selected  for  His  praise. 
-P.  S  1 

t  [Kavxacai  (also  in  1  Cor.  iv.  7),  \Wq KaTajeavxa.<ra.i,  Horn. 
X\.  18,  hvvatrai.  (for  ivtrf)).  Mitt.  v.  30,  oivvaaai,  Luke  xvi, 
23,  is  the  oriffin"!  unco  itracted  form  for  tau^?-  '**  "**  w'"' 
tho  ]«oetjt  and  biter  prose-wrilers,  gee  Winer,  Oram.,  p.  73, 
7th  ed.  The  Iv  Hiiniifles  tho  tiphere  in  wliirh  the  boasting 
moves,  or  the  object  of  boosting,  as  xaiptiv  iv.—l'.  H.] 


"  Ilcec  iffitur  non  cordis  nloridtio,  scd  lingnce  jactan^ 
tin  fuit."  The  false  Jewish  boasting  in  God  amouttt. 
cd  to  a  boasting  in  the  tlesh,  against  whicli  we  ar« 
warned,  Gal.  vi.  13  ;  2  Cor.  x.  15  ;  Phil.  iii.  3. 
Joi'tiaini;  inavoud'Cr^ — xcu  iTTuvunai'ar^  voitw — xcU 
xav/dnai,  iv  (ynji,  form  a  rising  climax! — P.  S.] 

Ver.  18.  And  knowest  his  will  [to  O^i- 
).fj/(a  is  emphatic. — P.  S.J  That  i.-;.  His  will  as 
the  inward  purt  of  the  law;  Eph.  iii.  18,  A:c.  ;  or 
rather,  the  ab.-olule  will  which  luis  become  manifest 
in  the  law. — And  discernest  the  things  that 
differ  [liozi,/*  «  !,"? n;  ret  (Uai;  t  (<oi'Ta  J.  Three 
explanations  of  this  expression  :  1.  The  ditference 
between  right  and  wrong  (Theodoret,  Theophylact, 
Grotius,  &c.,  Tholuck,  Philippi,  and  others) ;  2. 
what  is  at  variance  with  the  will  of  God,  sinful 
(Clericus,  Glockler) ;  3.  thou  ai)provest  the  excellent 
(Vulgate :  probas  utiJiora,  Bengel,  Meyer  [llodge]  ). 
According  to  the  meaning  of  i)u(.ni<)n,r  (to  be  promi« 
nent;  to  be  distinguished;  to  excel),  and  t)i,a(fiuovTa 
(the  distinctions ;  the  excellent),  these  different  ex« 
planations  are  equally  allowable ;  and  the  connec- 
tion must  therefore  determine  which  is  the  best  one. 
But  the  explanation  :  thou  a])provest  the  excellent, 
is  not  strong  enough  ;  although  Meyer  sees  in  it 
the  coihpletion  of  a  climax.*  The  Jew  was,  aa 
'ri~3,-}-  the  distinguishing,  the  sharply  deciding 
between  w-hat  was  allowed  and  disallowed  ;  he  was 
skilled  in  the  rUcix^nffn,'  zaAor  tj  y.ai  xaxoT;  Heb. 
V.  14  ;  the  dicwrokh  ccyioiv  y.ai  [Ii-f-jiji.Mv  [a  term 
frequently  used  by  Pliilo].  This  explanation  pa.ssea 
over  into  a  fourth:  t«  liiaiiinnvTo.,  the  contro- 
versies (De  Dieu,  Wolf). — Being  instructed. 
After  his  fashion  he  lives  in  the  law,  y.aTtjyovtif* 
I'oi,',  not  y.urtjyrj&tii;.  \_Bnug  inntruc/'d,  not  only 
calechetically  in  youth,  but  didactically  and  con- 
tinually by  tlie  reading  and  exposition  of  the 
Scriptures  in  the  synagogue  on  the  Sabbath  day. — 
P.S.] 

Ver.  19.  And  art  confident.  He  should  be 
every  thing  that  follows,  according  to  Old  Testament 
intimations ;  see  Isa.  xlii.  ti,  7,  and  other  passages. 
So  nuich  le.ss  is  tliere  a  reason  why  Keiche  should 
find-  here  reminiscences  from  the  Gospels  (.Matt.  xv. 
14  ;  Luke  xx.  32).  The  corruption  of  Judaism  con- 
sisted throughout  in  perverting  the  Old  Testament 
attributes  of  the  people,  and  of  its  future,  into  tho 
literal  and  the  carnal.  From  this  arose  also  its 
l)r()selytism  (Matt,  xxiii.  I'l),  which  is  here  de- 
scribed.— Guide  of  the  blind.  The  Jew  called 
the  (Jeiitiles  blind  ;  ffzdros,  in  Isa.  Ix.  2,  means, 
therefore,  the  Gentiles ;  and  r^eK,-  f«,-  ti/T<)>;«/.ri/'i.v 
iO^i'i'w,  in  Isa.  xlix.  6,  means  the  Jews;  i'»y;rtoi,  tiie 
pro.^elytes  (see  Tholuck). 

Ver.  20.  Form  (pattern)  of  knowledge. 
II  6  p  <f>  (•)  (T  k;  —  cla.'^sically,  mioii  loim  ;  Hcsydiius  : 
(T/y/rtrKT/iog.  [In  the  New  Testament  it  occurs 
only  once  more — 2  Tim.  ii.  5 — where  it  is  opposed 


•  (So  does  Ilodfre  :  "To  approve  of  what  la  rlRht,  i«  a 
hiijhor  nttninment  thnn  merely  to  dincriminato  between 
tfood  nnd  i-vil."  Hut  there  Is  a  illfferenre  between  an  in- 
Htinctive  and  an  intelliirent  approval  of  what  is  ripht.  The 
latter  is  the  result  of  reHection  and  discrimination,  resting 
on  superior  knowledge,  which  was  tho  nectiliar  advantage 
of  the  Jew  hdvine  the  touchstone  of  the  written  law  and 
tho  continual  instruction  of  the  Scriptures.  What  imme- 
diately follow*  nirrecH  l>eltcr  with  trie  interpretation  of 
Lani;e.    Ooinp.  'I'rxliial  Sole  '.—  !'.  8.) 

t  [  HJ^B ,  to  distinguish,  clearly  to  discern,  also  to 
separate.  From  this  the  tenn  Phuriste  (Pi'rishin,  th« 
Aram.iio  foi-m  of  tho  Hebrew  PaiusAini,  "  separated")  il 
derived.— r.  S.) 


CHAPTER  n.   17-24. 


lOS 


to  Svvafiu;,  and  means  the  mere  outward  form  or 
appearance.  Here,  ou  the  contrary,  it  is  the  real 
representation  or  expression,  exemplar,  effigiea. 
Grotius  :  forma  qnce  rem  expriinit. — P.  S.]  Ac- 
cording to  Meyer,  the  doctrines  and  commandments 
of  the  law  itself  are  the  form  of  knowledge  and 
truth.  We  are  nearer  right  when  we  remember  the 
didactic  impression  of  the  Old  Testament  revelation 
of  the  law  in  the  rabbinical  tradition  from  which  the 
Talmud  subsequently  arose  ;  for  the  Apostle  speaks 
of  a  uo^qoxnq  t;]?  yvoxytoii;,  which  should  be  indi- 
rectly fioijqt.  tTj^  a/.tjdilui;  iv-  tw  vofto).  (Ecume- 
nius  and  Olshausen,  without  cause,  think  of  the  typi- 
cal character  of  the  Old  Testament ;  others  (with 
Theophylact)  of  the  mere  phantom  of  truth.  The 
question  is  concerning  an  object  of  which  the  Jew 
boasts.  His  /.lootinxnii  is  indeed  the  gloomy  anti- 
type of  the  personal  incarnation  of  the  truth  in 
Christ,  as  in  Ecclesiasticus  xxiv.  25  (23)  we  read  of 
the  aocfia  becoming  a  book  in  the  Thora.  All  these 
are  now  the  characteristics  of  the  Jew's  pretensions. 
There  now  follow  the  proofs  of  the  contradiction  in 
which  he  stands  to  himself. 

Ver  21.  Thou,  then,  that  teachest  another. 
[The  virtual  apodosis  of  ver.  17.  The  several 
clauses  are  more  lively  and  forcible  if  read  inter- 
rogatively, so  as  to  challenge  the  Jew  to  deny  the 
charge,  if  he  dare. — P.  S.]  The  analogy  of  the  fol- 
lowing charges  to  the  Apostle's  judgment  on  the 
Gentiles  lies  herein  :  the  Jews,  by  their  pride  of  the 
law  and  by  their  legal  orthodoxy,  were  led  into  the 
way  of  ruin,  just  as  the  Gentiles  had  been  by  their 
intellectual  conceit  indulging  in  symbols  and  myths. 
The  first  charge  is  general :  Teachest  thou  not 
thyself?  Ps.  1.  16.  After  this,  three  specific 
charges  follow  in  strong  gradation.  Meyer ;  "  The 
following  infinitives  [iiij  xUTirf^v,  //f/  ftot/evfi-vl  do 
not  include  in  themselves  the  idea  of  dnv  or  itcTvai,, 
but  are  explained  by  the  idea  of  command  which  is 
implied  in  the  finite  verbs"  [viz.,  y.Unrn^,  /<ot- 
jffvtii;.  The  verba  juhendi  here  are  xrj^i'ffffoiv  and 
Xiyo)v. — P.  S.]  In  the  charge  of  stealing,  there 
was  undoubtedly  special  reference  to  the  passion- 
ate and  treacherous  method  of  transacting  business 
adopted  by  the  Jews  (James  iv.  13) ;  in  the  charge 
of  adultery,  to  the  loose  practice  of  divorces  (Matt. 
xJx.  8,  9;"  James  iv.  4). — [Mo^/f  j'ftt;.  The  Tal- 
mud charges  adultery  upon  some  of  the  most  cele- 
brated Rabbins,  as  Akiba,  Meir,  Eleasar. — P.  S.] 
The  strongest  charge  is  the  third  : 

Ver.  22.  Thou  that  abhorrest  idols,  &c. 
B  St  ).v<J(T  0  n  ai,,  from  ^dfh'irao),  to  excite  dis- 
gust by  a  loathsome  odor.  In  the  religious  sense, 
to  abhor.  The  Jew  called  the  idols  fidi}.vyna,ra 
(1  Mac.  vi.  7;  2  Kings  xxiii.  13,  niDSin).  Ex- 
planations :  1.  By  plundering  the  temples  of  idols 
(Chrysostom,  Theophylact,  and  many  others  ;  Meyer, 
Philippi  [Alford,  Conybeare  and  Howson] ).  Tho- 
luck  :  "  The  law,  in  Deut.  vii.  25,  forbids  the  appro- 
priation of  the  gold  and  silver  ornaments  of  the 
images  of  gods ;  and  in  the  paraphrase  of  this  pro- 
hibition in  Josephus  {Antiq.  iv.  8, 10),  express  refer- 
ence is  made  to  the  robbing  of  heathen  temples. 
Acts  xix.  36,  37,  shows  that  the  Jews  had  the 
name  of  committing  such  an  ofi"ence."  [The  objec- 
tion to  this  view  is,  that  the  Jew,  attaching  no 
Bacredness  to  the  temples  of  idols,  regarded  the  de- 
spoiling of  heathen  temples  as  no  sacrilege,  but  sim- 
ply as  robbery,  which  might  be  justified  under  certain 
circumstances. — P.  S.].     2.  ii^o(Tv?.HV  in  the  figura- 


tive sense :  profanatio  majestatis  divince  (Calvin, 
Luther,  Bengel,  Kiillner).*  3.  Embezzlement  of 
taxes  [tithes  and  off'erings]  for  their  own  tempi* 
(Pelagius,  Grotius  [Ewald,  Wordsworth,  and  others; 
comp.  Mai.  i.  8,  12,  14  ;  iii.  8-10]  ).  To  the^jharge 
of  robbing  heathen  temples,  the  idea  of  pollution— 
which  this  robbery  carries  with  it — may  also  be  add- 
ed,  as  is  done  by  Meyer.  But  it  seems  strange  thai 
the  Apostle  should  have  established,  on  isolated  oc- 
currences of  such  robbery,  so  general  and  fearful  a 
charge.  As  in  the  charges :  "  Thou  stealest,  thou 
committest  adultery,"  he  had  not  merely  in  mind 
occasional  great  transgressions,  but  also  the  univer- 
sal  exhibitions  of  Jewish  avarice  and  concupiscence, 
so  we  must  also  here  accept  a  more  general  and 
spiritual  significance  of  his  accusation.  We  must 
indeed  suppose  here  transgressions  that  were  an 
occasion  of  offence  to  the  Gentiles ;  and  Luther  goes 
much  too  far  in  spirituaHzing  the  charge ;  "  Thou 
art  a  robber  of  God  ;  for  it  is  God's  honor  that  all 
those  who  rely  on  good  works  would  take  from 
Him."  But  the  worst  outrage  on  the  temple,  accord- 
ing to  John  ii.  10,  consisted  in  the  crucifixion  of 
Christ  (comp.  James  v.  6).  It  was  therefore  as  a  sign 
of  judgment  that  the  temple  in  Jerusalem  itself  was 
desecrated  by  the  Jews  in  every  possible  way  before  its 
destruction.  In  a  wider  sense,  the  transgression  of 
the  Jews  consisted  in  their  causing,  by  their  fanati- 
cism, not  only  the  downfall  of  the  temple,  but  in 
frivolously  abusing  and  insulting  the  sanctuaries  of 
Gentiles,  and,  where  occasion  offered,  in  converting 
their  treasures  into  spoils  and  articles  of  commerce. 

Ver.  23.  Thou  that  makest  thy  boast  in 
the  lavr.  Since  this  judgment  is  the  result  of  the 
foregoing  question,  Meyer  has  good  reason  for  read- 
ing this  verse  not  as  a  question,  but  as  a  categorical 
impeachment.  This  is  supported  by  the  ydq  in  ver. 
24. 

Ver.  24.  For  the  name  of  God.  That  is,  the 
Gentiles  judged  the  reUgion  of  the  Jews  by  the  scan- 
dalous conduct  of  the  Jews  themselves,  and  thus 
were  led  to  blaspheme  their  God,  Jehovah.  The 
Jews  boasted  of  the  law  (which,  Baruch  iv.  3,  ia 
termed  »)  (36ia  Tor-  'Jcofo')/?),  and  reflected  disgrace 
on  the  lawgiver.  For  the  Jews,  the  Apostle  here 
seals  again  his  declaration,  by  concluding  with  a 
quotation  from  the  Old  Testament— Isa.  Hi.  5  :  "My 
name  continually  every  day  is  blasphemed  "  [in  the 
Septuagint:  du  iV«?  dianavroqro  ovo,ud  fwn  fikaa- 
(fflfxilrai,  iv  Toti;  tOvtaC].  Comp.  Ezek.  xxxvi.  23: 
"  I  will  sanctify  my  great  name,  which  was  profaned 
among  the  heathen,  which  ye  have  profaned  in  the 
midst  of  them." 


DOCTEINAl  AND  ETHICAX. 

1.  The  Apostle  now  passes  over  from  his  indirect 
representation  of  the  corruption  in  Judaism,  which 
he  had  given  from  a  general  point  of  view,  vera. 
10-16,  to  paint  its  life-picture  from  experience.  In 
chap.  iii.  10-19,  he  proves  that  the  Old  Testament 
had  already  testified  to  the  corruption  of  the  Jewish 
people.  But  this  description  of  the  actual  corrup. 
tion  must  be  distinguished  from  the  sketch  of  the 
original  transgression,  chap.  v.  12  fF.,  and  from  the 
development  in  part  of  the  judgment  of  hard-heart- 
edness,  chaps,  ix.  and  x. 

♦  [So  Hodee  :  "  The  essence  of  idolntry  was  profanation 
of  God ;  of  this  the  Jews  were  in  a  high  deeree  guilty 
They  had  made  His  house  a  den  of  thieves."— P.  S.] 


110 


THE    EPISTLE   OF   PAUL   TO   THE   ROMANS. 


2.  The  description  of  the  corruption  in  Judaism 
presents  only  legalistic  features,  as  the  account  of 
Gentile  corniptiou  present,-*  Antinoniian  features.  In 
the  former  ca-^e,  the  disfiguration  of  religion  pro- 
ceeded from  legal  conceit,  while  in  the  latter  it  arose 
from  the  conceit  of  wisdom  ;  the  root  of  pride  is 
therefore  common  to  both  lines  of  corruption.  The 
self-contradiction  of  the  Gentiles  was  developed 
thus :  he,  the  pretended  wise  man,  becomes  a  Ibol 
by  disfiguring  his  symbolical  religion  of  nature ; 
with  all  his  self-glory,  he  becomes  a  worshipper  of 
the  creature,  and  loses  the  dignity  of  his  human 
body  ;  with  all  his  deification  of  nature,  he  sinks 
thereby  into  abominable  nnnaturalness  ;  with  all  his 
efforts  for  vigor  of  life  and  enthusiasm,  he  sinks  more 
and  more  into  the  degi-adation  of  wicked  characters; 
and  finally,  with  all  his  better  knowledge,  he  orna- 
ments and  varnishes  sin  theoretically  and  a>stheti- 
cally.  The  self-contradiction  of  the  Jew,  on  the  other 
hatid,  developed  itself  thus:  he,  the  pretended  teacher 
of  the  nations,  becomes  an  Antinoniian  blasphemer, 
by  the  perversion  of  his  religion  of  revelation  and 
law,  while  he  teaches  others,  and  not  himself,  and, 
by  a  succession  of  transgressions  of  the  law,  goes  so 
far  as  to  prof  me  sacred  things,  by  abusing  and  rob- 
bing the  temples  (see  Matt.  xxi.  13).  To  the  prof- 
anation of  the  temple  was  added  that  of  the  high- 
priesthood,  which  reached  its  climax  in  Caiaphas. 
Likewise  the  ministry  of  the  Jew  was  thoroughly 
profaned  by  proselytism  and  falsification  of  the  law, 
and  his  religiousness  was  converted  into  a  cloak  for 
hypocrisy. 

3.  The  fiinatic  grows  ever  more  profane  by  the 
consistency  of  his  course  of  conduct — a  despiser  of 
the  sutistantial  possessions  of  religion.  Church  his- 
tory furnishes  numerous  examples,  how  fanatics  of 
the  churchly  as  well  as  unchurchly  type  become  at 
last,  out  of  pretended  saints,  profaners  and  robbers 
of  the  temple. 

4.  Priests  and  preachers  have  certainly  corrupted 
religion  as  often  as  philosophere  have  corrupted  wis- 
dom, politicians  the  State,  jurists  the  law,  &c. 

5.  The  dogmatic  and  legalistic  spirit  of  the  Mid- 
dle Ages,  too,  which,  in  a  better  form,  was  really  a 
"  teacher  of  the  blind,"  has  finally  gone  so  far  as  to 
present  the  greatest  variety  of  religious  and  moral 
hindrances  to  modern  Gentiles.  It  is  not  without 
serious  significance,  therefore,  that  the  Epistle  to  the 
Romans  contains  this  very  section. 


nOMrLETICAL  AND  TRACTICAL. 

The  false  z^^al  for  the  law  practised  by  the  Jews 
a.'?  occasion  for  blaspheming  the  name  of  (Jod  by  the 
Gentiles:  so  far  as,  1.  such  false  zeal  knows  (lod's 
will  ;  but,  2.  wantonly  transgresses  it  (vers.  17-24). 
— Tin;  mere  name  of  Christianity  goes  no  further 
than  the  name  of  Judaism  (vers.  17-24). — Do  not 
depend  upon  your  orthodoxy,  if  you  do  not  act  right 
by  faith  (vers.  17-24). — Notwithstanding  brilliant 
knowledge,  one  is  a  bad  teacher  if  he  docs  not 
do  what  he  knows  (vers.  17-24).  —  Blasphemy  of 
the  nainc  of  God  (ver.  24). — God's  name  has  already 
been  often  blasphiMned  among  the  heathen  (and  Mo- 
hammedans) because  of  Christians.  Proof:  1.  From 
the  outrages  of  pei-sons  professing  Christianity  in  the 
Middle  Ages  (Charlemagne,  and  the  Saxons,  the 
Brethren  of  the  Sword,  the  Spaniards  in  America, 
&c.) ;  2.  from  the  abuses  in  trade  in  the  present  time 
(the  olavc  trade,  opium  trade,  .sandal-wood  trade). 


Starke  :  When  one  does  any  thing  which  hai 
ever  so  good  appearance,  it  is  sin  if  it  does  not  come 
from  faith  (ver.  18). — Theological  learning  is  by  na 
means  enough  for  a  teacher,  when  he  is  not  taught 
in  the  school  of  the  Holy  Spirit  (ver.  20). — That 
teacher  cannot  be  an  example  of  good  works  who 
can  only  say  of  himself:  "Judge  according  to  my 
words,  and  not  according  to  my  deeds"  (ver.  21). — 
Boasting  and  vain-glory — the  manner,  alas,  of  many 
Christians!  (ver.  28.) — Cuamkr:  The  titles  and 
names  of  honor  that  we  may  possess  should  be  to 
us  a  continual  reminder  to  conduct  ourselves  in  har- 
mony  with  such  titles  (ver.  17). — Nova  Uibl.  Tub.: 
Oh,  how  many  external  privileges  a  soul  can  have  I 
Communion  in  the  true  Chureli,  knowledge  of  God 
and  His  word,  of  His  will  and  His  works,  the  best 
instruction,  a  skilful  sense  of  the  difference  between 
good  and  evil ;  and  yet,  in  spite  of  all  this,  it  can 
be  at  fault,  and  quite  removed  from  the  inner  fellow- 
ship with  God  (ver.  17). — Look,  teacher !  You  must 
commence  with  yourself;  you  must  first  be  your 
own  teacher,  guide,  and  chastiser ;  first  preach  to 
your  own  self,  first  break  your  own  will,  and  perform 
what  you  preach.  But  to  desire  to  guide,  discipline, . 
and  control  others,  and  yet  steal  and  conniiit  adultery 
yourself,  &c. — that  will  enter  in  judgment  against 
you.  Oh,  how  great  is  this  corruption  !  (ver.  20.) — 
QuESNKL :  Oh,  how  rare  a  thing  it  is  to  be  learned 
without  being  proud  I  (ver.  19). 

Hklbneu  :  There  is  a  fiilse  and  a  true  boasting 
on  the  part  of  a  believer  in  revelation.  He  does  it 
falsely  when  he  imagines,  1.  that  he  thereby  makes 
himself  more  acceptable  to  God ;  2.  that  merely  hav- 
ing and  knowing  are  sufficient,  without  practice ; 
3.  when,  at  the  same  time,  he  despi;;es  others.  He 
boasts  properly  when,  1.  he  gives  God  all  the  glory; 
2.  makes  use  of  the  revealed  truth  ;  3.  does  not  de- 
spise others  (ver.  17). — It  is  a  great  grace  when  God 
gives  a  tender  conscience  (ver.  18). — To  know  the 
right,  is  in  the  power  of  every  Chi-istian  ;  and  sin  does 
not  consist  in  ignorance  or  misunderstanding,  but  has 
its  root  in  the  will  (ver.  19). — Melancholy  contradic- 
tion between  knowledge  and  deeds  (vers.  21-23).^ 
Tlie  honor  of  Christianity  is  dependent  upon  us. — A 
holy  life  is  the  final  vindication  of  faith  (ver.  24). 

Besseu  :  Legalists,  who  woidd  be  righteous  by 
their  works,  deprive  the  law  of  its  spiritual  clear- 
ness (ver.  17). 

Lange  :  The  internal  self-contradiction  between 
knowledge  and  disposition  extends  to  external  life  : 

1.  As   self-contradiction   between   word   and   deed ; 

2.  between  the  vocation  and   the   discharge  of  it ; 

3.  between  destination  to  the  welfare  of  the  world, 
and  degi'ueration,  on  the  contrary,  to  the  misery  of 
the  world. — The  teacher  of  the  law  in  olden  times, 
and  the  (religious)  teacher  of  the  law  in  recent  days 
— the  olVence  of  modern  Gentiles. 

[BiiiKiTT:  Yer.s.  17-20.  Learn:  1.  That  per- 
.sons  are  very  prone  to  l)e  proud  of  church  privi- 
leges,  glorying  in  the  letter  of  the  law,  but  not  eon- 
formed  to  its  spirituality  either  in  heart  or  life  ;  and 
2.  that  gifts,  duties,  and  supposed  graces,  are  the 
stay  anil  staff  which  hypocrites  lean  on.  The  duliea 
which  Christ  has  ai)[)(>inte(l,  are  the  trust  and  rest 
of  the  hyi)()erite  ;  but  Christ  Himself  is  the  trust 
and  rest  of  the  upright. — Vers.  21-24.  1.  It  is 
much  easier  to  instruct  and  teach  others,  than  to  be 
instructed  ourselves  ;  2.  it  is  both  sinful  anil  shame- 
ful to  teach  others  the  right  way,  and  to  go  in  tha 
wrong  ourselves.  While  this  is  a  double  fault  in  9 
private  person,   it  is  inexcusable   in   the   teacher 


CHAPTER  n.   25-29— m.   1-20.  m 


S.  the  name  of  God  suffers  by  none  so  much  as  by  I  ter  of  the  law  and  the  gospel,  and  with  the  solemn 
those  who  preach  and  press  the  duties  of  Christian-  j  tokens  of  a  covenant  relation  to  God,  transgress  His 
ity  upon  others,  but  do  not  practise  them  them-  [  precepts,  and  violate  our  engagements  to  Him,  s« 
selves.      The   sins   of   teachers   are   teaching   sins.  I  turning  the  means  of  goodness  and  happiness  into 


Lord,  let  all  that  administer  unto  Thee  in  holy  things 
consider  that  they  have  not  only  their  own  sins  to 
account  for,  but  also  the  sins  of  their  people,  if 
committed  by  their  profligate  example. — Matthew 
Hexry  :  Tlie  greatest  obstructors  of  the  success  of 
the  Word,  are  those  whose  bad  lives  contradict  their 
good  doctrine ;  who  in  the  pulpit  preach  so  well, 
that  it  is  a  pity  they  should  ever  come  out ;  and  out 
of  the  pulpit  live  so  ill,  that  it  is  a  pity  they  should 
ever  come  in. — Doddridge  :  We  pity  the  Gentiles, 
and  we  have  reason  to  do  it ;  for  they  are  lamenta- 
bly blind  and  dissolute :  but  let  us  take  heed  lest 
those  appearances  of  virtue  which  are  to  be  found 
among  some  of  them  condemn  us,  who,  with  the  let- 


the  occasion  of  more  aggravated  guilt  and  misery.- 
Clarke  :  Ver.  17.  It  is  the  highest  honor  to  be 
called  to  know  God's  name,  and  be  employed  in  Hia 
service. — Hodge  (condensed) :  The  sins  of  the  pro- 
fessing people  of  God  are  peculiarly  oftensive  to 
Him,  and  injurious  to  our  fellow-men. — The  sins  and 
refuges  of  men  are  alike  in  all  ages. — Were  it  ever 
so  certain  that  the  church  to  which  we  belong  is  the 
true,  apostolic,  universal  Church,  it  remains  no  less 
certain,  that  without  holiness  no  man  shall  see  the 
Lord.  —  Barnes:  It  matters  little  what  a  man'a 
speculative  opinions  may  be ;  his  practice  may  do 
far  more  to  disgrace  religion,  than  his  profession  doea 
to  honor  it. — J.  F.  H.] 


Chapter  II.    25-29.— III.    1-20. 


Fifth  Section. —  The  external  Judmsm  of  the  letter,  and  the  internal  Judaism  of  the  spirit.  The 
OBJECTIVE  advantage  of  historical  Judaism.  The  subjective  equaU'y  of  Jews  and  Gentiles  before 
the  law  of  God,  according  to  the  purpose  of  the  law  itself — to  bring  about  the  knowledge  of  sin.  {The 
utility  of  circurncisiou  ; — an  accommodation  to  the  need  of  salvation  bg  the  knowledge  of  sin.  The 
circumcision  which  becomes  uncircumcision ,  and  the  uncircumcision  which  becomes  circumcision  ;  or, 
the  external  Jew  possibly  an  internal  Gentile,  while  the  external  Gentile  may  be  an  internal  Jew,  Not 
the  mere  possession  of  the  law,  but  fidelity  to  the  law,  is  of  avail,  llie  latter  does  not  create  pride 
of  the  law,  but  knoioledge  of  sin — that  is,  the  need  of  salvation.  The  advantage  of  circumcision  there' 
fore  consists  in  this,  that  to  the  Jew  were  committed  the  oracles  of  God — that  laio  by  which  all  men 
are  represented  m  the  guilt  of  sin.    Sin,  as  acknowledged  guilt,  represented  in  contrast  with  the  law.) 

Chap.  U.  25-29. 

25  For  circumcision  verily  [indeed]  profiteth,  if  thou  keep  [keepest]  the  law  :  but 
if  thou  be  [art]  a  breaker  [transgressor]  of  the  law,  thy  circumcision  is  made  [has 

26  become,  or,  is  turned  into]  uncircumcision.  Therefore,  if  the  uncircumcision 
[so  called,  i.  e.,  the  nncircumcised]  keep  the  rightcousncss  [dccrecs,  Commandments,  moral 
requirements,  brMumfiatci]    of  the   law,  shall  [will]   not  his  uncircumcision  be 

27  counted  for  circumcision  ?  And  shall  not  uncircumcision  which  is  by  nature, 
if  it  fulfil  the  law,  judge  thee,  who  by  '  the  letter  and  circumcision  dost  trans- 
gress the  law  ?  [He  who  is  nncircumcised  by  nature,  if  he  fulfils  the  law,  will 
even  judge  thee,  who,  with  the  letter  and  circumcision,   dost   transgress   the 

28  law.]  ^     For  he  is  not  a  Jew,  which  [who]  is  one  outwardly ;   neither  is  that 

29  circumcision,  which  is  outward  in  the  flesh :  But  he  is  a  Jew,  which  [who] 
is  one  inwardly ;  and  circumcision  is  that  of  the  heart,  in  the  spirit,  and 
[omit  and]  not  in  the  letter  ;  whose  praise  is  not  of  men,  but  of  God. 

Chap.  III.  1-20. 

1  "What  advantage  then  hath  [What,  then,  is  the  advantage  of]  the  Jew? 

2  or  what  profit  is  there  [Avhat  is  the  benefit]  of  circumcision  ?  Much  every 
way :   chiefly,  [First,  indeed,] '  because  that  unto  them  were  committed  [they 

3  — 1. «.,  the  Jews — were  entrusted  with,  miortvd^riGav]  the  oracles  of  God.  For 
what  [What,  then,]  *  if  some  did  not  believe  [were  faithless]  ?  shall  their  un- 
belief  [faithlessness,  or,  unfaithfulness]   make  the  faith  of  God  without  effect 

4  [destroy,  or,  nullify  the  faithfulness  of  God]  ? '  God  forbid  :  [Let  it  not  be  !]  * 
yea,  let  God  be  true,  but  every  man  a  liar  ;  as  it  is  written,  "  That  thou  might* 
est  [mayest]  be  justified  in  thy  sayings,  and  mightest  [mayest]  overcome  when 

5  thou   art   judged "  ^    [ps.  ii.  4].      But   if    our   unrighteousness    commend   [dotlj 


112  THE   EPISTLE   OF   PAUL   TO   THE   ROMANS. 

establish] '  the  righteousness  of  God,  what  shall  we  say  ?  Is  God  unrighteouH 
who  taketh  vengeance  [who  is  inflicting,  or,  bringing  doMTi,  the  wrath,  6  iTitq^Qoov 
Ti^y  ooyi,!]  ?  °      (I  s])eak  as  a  man  [after  the  manner  of  men,  y.((za  uiOna):Toi].) 

6  God   forbid :    [Let   it   not   be !]    for   then   how    shall   God  judge   the    world  ? 

V  For  [But]  if"  the  truth  [covenant-faithfuincsB]  of  God  hath  more  abounded  through 
mj  lie  [was  made  the  more  conspicuous  by  means  of  my  falsehood,  unfaithful^ 
ness]  unto  his  glory  [chap.  v.  20]  ;  why  yet  [still,  any  longer]  am  I  also  juiged  as 

8  a  sinner  ?  And  not  rather,  (as  we  be  [are]  slanderously  [blasphemousiy]  re 
ported,  and  as  some  affirm  that  we  say,)  Let  us  do  evil,  that  good  may  come  ? ' 
whose  damnation  [condemnation,  Judgment]  '^  is  just. 

9  What  then  ?  are  we  better  than  they  ?  "  No,  in  no  wise  [Not  at  allj  • 
for  we  have  before  proved  [charged]    both  Jews  and  Gentiles,  that  they  are 

10  [to  be]  all  imder  sin  ;    As  it  is  written,  "  There  is  none  righteous,  no,  not  one  : 

11  There    is    none   that   understandeth,   there    is    none   that  seeketh   after   God. 

12  They  are  all  gone  out  of  the  way,  they  are  together  become  unprofitable  ;  there 

13  is  none  that  doeth  good,  no,  not  one  "  [ps.  sir.  1-3].'*  "  Their  throat  is  an  open 
sepulchre  ;  "   Avith  their  tongues  they  have  used  deceit ;    the  poison  of  asps  is 

14  under  their  lips"  [rs.  v.  9;  cxi.  3].'°     "Whose  mouth  is  full  of  cursing  and  bitter- 
15,  16     ness  "  [I's.  X.  7]  : "    "Their  feet  are  swift  to  shed  blood:    Desmxction  and 

17  misery  are  in   their  ways:    And   the  way  of  peace  have  they  not  known" 

18  [isa,  lix.  7,  8]  : '«    "  There  is  no  fear  of  God  before  their  eyes  "  [rs.  xxxvi.  1]." 

19  Now  we  know  that  what  things  soever  the  law  saith,  it  saith  to  tliem  who 
are  under  the  law :  that  every  mouth  may  be  stopped,  and  all  the  world  may 

20  become  guilty  before  God.  [,]  Therefore  [because]  by "°  the  deeds  of  the  law 
there  shall  no  flesh  be  justified  [by  works  of  the  law  no  flesh  (i'.  t.,  no  person)  shall 
(can)  be  declared  righteous]  in  his  sight :  °'  for  [.  For]  by  the  law  is  the 
knowledge  of  sin  \comes  a  knowledge  of  sin]. 

TEXTPAL. 

'  Yer.  27. — [The  E.  V.  here,  as  often,  follows  Beza,  who  translates  hiA,  per,  wliich  is  its  fundamental  meaning  when 
It  roles  the  genitive.  But  hen*  it  expresses  the  state  or  the  circumstances  under  whicli  the  transpressioij  takes  place — 
i.  f.,  with  or  in  .'pile  nf,  notwilhstnruling,  the  Tixiltcn  law  and  circumcision  ;  comi>.  Si  iirronoviii,  with  patience  ;  Si  oKpo- 
fiv<rTia^,  while  in  circumcision,  Rom.  iv.  11:  Sia  jrpocrKouuaTos,  with  offence,  xiv.  20:  and  Wi.ier,  Oiamin.,  7th  ed.,  p. 
355  f.— P.  S.]  r        n  ,  ,  r 

»  Vcr.  27.— fLanpre,  with  Erasmus,  Luther,  Benpel,  De  Wettc,  Meyer,  Tholuck  (ed.  5),  Alford,  and  others,  takes 
ver.  27  to  be  categorical,  and  makes  a  period  after  "law."  Hence  xpivel  is  emphatically  put  fii-st,  and  xai  has  the 
sense  of  even:  Vea,  vrrily,  he  will  even  cotiilemn  ynu.  The  E.  V.  regards  ver.  27  as  a  continuation  of  the  question  in 
ver.  26,  and  supplies  oiixi  before  Kpivel.    So  also  Fritzsche,  Olshausen,  Luther,  Philippi,  Ewald,  Wordsworth.— P.  S.] 

^  Ver.  2.— [npiiror  ixkv  yap.  N.  A.  D.s  K.  L.,  Tischendorf,  Meyer,  Alford,  Lange,  insert  yap,  namily,  after  niv, 
B._D.*  O.,  Vulg.,  S>r.,  Lachmann,  omit  it.  npuirov,  first,  in  the  firsi  pictre,  is  not  followed  by  ucomlly,  i&c.  ;  comjp. 
irpi>Tov  itev,  i.  8.  To  avoid  the  anacoluthon,  Calvin  translates  :  prxcipuc ;  Beza  :  primaiium  illud  est.  So  also  the  K.  V. 
and  Dr.  Lange.— P.  S.] 

*  Ver.  o.— [Ti  yap  ;  a  phrase  used  to  start  an  objection  for  the  purpose  of  answering  it,  or  to  vindicate  a  prcvioua 
assertion;  coinp.  Phil.  i.  18.— r.  S.) 

*  Ver.  3.— (i^irio-TTjo-ai'- ojTio-Tta — nC<TTiv,  should  be  rendered  so  as  to  retain  the  paronomasia.  Lange  :  Denn  wiet 
Wenn  ellichn  die  G'tmb^mtreue  breche.n,  sollle  ihr  Ti-nibnich  die  Trrue  Go't's  nu/hebrn  f—F.  S.] 

*  Ver.  4. — [Or,  Far  6<'  it,  fur  from  it,  by  no  nnnns  ;  Vulg.,  absit ;  German  :  c<  toi  rde  nirhl,  or  (Luther,  Lange),  dat 
tei  feme  I  The  phrsuie,  /a  >)  ye'voiTO,  is  an  expression  of  strong  denial  or  pious  horror,  corresponding  to  the  Hebrew 
nb'^bn  (Gen.  xliv.  17  ;  Jos.  xsii.  29  ;  1  Sam.  xx.  2),  and  occurs  fourteen  times  in  Paul's  Epistles— ten  times  in  £oman8 
(lil.  4,  6,  31  ;  vi.  2,  15  ;  vii.  7,  13;  Ix.  14  ;  xi.  1,  II),  three  times  in  Oalatians  (ii.  17  ;  iii.  21  ;  \i.  14),  and  once  in  1  Cor. 
vi.  15  ;  but  elsewhere  in  the  X.  T.  only  Luke  xx.  1<!.  It  is  also  u.'^ed  by  Polybius,  Arian,  and  thi-  later  Greek  wi-iters. 
The  Oixl  forbid  of  the  Authorized  Version  (like  the  German  (roll  b'hiiie,  QiM  bexonhre)  is  almost  profane,  though  vrrv  ex- 
pressive, and  in  keeping  with  old  Iviiglish  ucage  ;  for  we  find  it  i'l  all  the  earlier  E.  Vv.,  including  that  of  Wiclit',  and 
also  that  of  Ilhoims.  Wordsworth's  tendering  :  "  IJnivni  forbid  that  this  should  bo  so,"  is  hai-dly  an  improvement. 
Remember  the  third  commandment,  as  explained  by  Christ,  Matt.  v.  34.— P.  8.] 

'  Ver.  4. — [Or,  in  Thy  judging,  when  Thoa  Judgxl,  as  the  E.  V.  ha«  it  in  Ps.  11.  4.  The  active  rendering  of  ev  t^ 
Kpivea0ai  (middle,  in  the  sense  of  liligare)  corresponds  to  the  Hebrew  TjIiElUS  ,  Ps.  li.  4  (comp.  LXX. ;  Job  xiil. 
19 ;  Isa.  xliii.  26  ;  Jor.  ii.  35  ;  Matt.  v.  40  ;  1  Cor.  vi.  1,  lO,  and  is  defended  in'this  passage  by  Beza,  Bcngol,  Tholuck, 
Meyer,  and  Ewald ;  while  Vulg.,  Luther,  Lange,  Hodge,  i:e.,  prefer  the  passive  rendering  :  tahm  Ttnu  art  jndo'd.  Sea 
£x'g.  A'n/>'.«.  'ne  quotation  is  from  the  penitential  Pdulm  ol  David,  composed  after  his  double  crime  of  adultory  uid 
murder,  and  reads  in  Hebrew  thua  : 


UWaUy: 


T|aEai3  nsTpi 


"To  Thee,  Thee  only,  I  have  sinned. 
And  done  the  evil  in  Tliine  cyos. 
In  order  that  Thou  mayest  be  just  in  Thy  speaking 
And  pure  in  Tliy  judging." 


CHAPTER  n.   25-III.    20.  113 


Paul  follows  the  translation  of  the  Septuagint,  which  renders  p'nSPl  hy  SiKauaSjj^  (that  Thou  mayest  he  justified— i.  e.. 
be  accounted,  declared  just),  suhstitutes  viKrjtrjii  (that  Thou  mayest  conquer,  prevail  judicially  in  Thy  ca\iBe)  for  HSTH 
(be  clear,  pure),  and  takes  the  active  riUEfw^  in  the  passive,  or  more  probably  in  the  middle  seuse,  ei'  tw  KpiviaOai  at. 
Tlie  sentiment  is  not  materially  altered.'  The  apostles,  in  their  citations,  frequently  depart  from  the  letter  of  tha 
llehrew,  being  careful  only  to  give  the  iiiiud  of  the  Holy  Spirit.— P.  S.] 

'  Ver.  5. — [2uvi'(7-njM.i,  to  make  grand  with,  to  place  logi-llur  (coiisliluo,  collocn)  •  and  thence  of  persons,  to  intrnduce,  to 
commend  by  letter  (svi.  1;  2  Cor.  iii.  1);  trop.,  to  set  forth,  to  moke  consxtieuous,  to  prove  ;  so  here,  and  Eom.  v.  8, 
miviaTqai  Tr)v  .  .  .  aya.Trr]V  ;  2  Cor.  vi.  4,  o-vvi.<rTi>VTi%  eauToiij  o)S  8tov  Siaxovoi ;  GaL  ii.  18,  irapojSdn)!/  ijjLavTov  irvvi<m)iu, 
and  often  in  Polybius,  Philo,  nnd  Josephus. — P.  S.j  , 

'  Ver.  5. — [Cod.  Sta.'  adds  auroD  alter  hpyriv,  His  wrath.  The  other  authorities  omit  it.  The  article  before  opr^rft 
points  to  the  well-known  wrath  on  the  day  of  judgment,  and  in  the  moral  government  of  the  world. — P.  S.) 

10  Ver.  7.— [The  usual  reading  is,  ei  yap  ;  but  Cod.  Sin.  reads,  ei  &i.  Lange,  in  his  translation,  reads,  warn 
ndmlich ;  but  in  the  Exeg.  J\'ote.i;  wenn  aber.    See  his  explanation  of  the  difficult  passage. — P.  S.] 

■'  Ver.  8. — [Dr.  Lange  makes  a  period  after  come,  and  translates :  And  so  let  ks  by  no  means — as  we  are  blasp?iemously 
charged,  and  as  some  pretend  Ih'il  we  say — do  evil,  that  good  may  come  1  The  condemnation  of  sueh  is  just.  See  the  Exeg. 
iVo/fs.  But  nearly  all  the  ci 'mmentators  regard  ver.  8  as  a  continuation  of  the  quohtion  commenced  in  ver.  7,  and 
assume  an  irregularity  of  construction.  noirjcTMixev,  then,  instead  of  being  connected  with  koI  (ji)iJ-ri  at  the  beginning  ol 
ver.  S,  is  connected  by  ort  with  the  preceding  kiyeiv.  "  And  why  do  we  not  rather  say,  as  we  are  blasphemously  re- 
ported (/3A.aa-i|)7;fioufie6a),  and  as  some  give  out  that  we  do  say,  '  Let  us  do  the  evil  things  (rd  koko.),  that  the  good  ones 
(TO  ayoida.)  may  come  1 '  —whose  judgment  is  just." — P.  S.] 

1^  Ver.  8. — [Conybeare  and  Howson  :  Of  such  men  the  doom  is  just.  KpCfia  occurs  twenty-eight  times  in  the  N.  T. 
and  is  generally  correctly  rendered  :  judgment,  in  the  E.  V.  The  word  damiiaii(jn,  in  old  English,  was  used  in  the  sense 
of  condemnation,  ensure,  but  is  now  equivalent  to  :  condemnation  to  everlasting  punishment,  or  state  if  everlasting  pun- 
ishment. Hence  the  E.  V.  here  conveys  a  false  meaning  to  the  popular  reader,  as  also  in  Rom.  xiti.  2  ("  shall  receive  to 
IheraselYes  judgment,"  i.  e.,  here  temporal  punishment  by  the  magistrate)  and  1  Cor.  xi.  29  ("eateth  and  drinketh  Jud^r- 
mtnt  to  himself"). — P.  S.] 

1'  Ver.  9. — npoKarexoiJiiv  nepurcrov  is  a  gloss  [D.*  G.,  Syr.  On  the  different  interpretations  of  npoexofieSa,  cnmp. 
the  Exeg.  Notes.  Trpoex",  in  the  active  voice,  means  :  to  hold  before,  or  intransitively,  to  sinpa'ss,  to  excel;  in  the  middle 
voice  :  to  hold  before  one's  sc?/— either  literally,  i.  e.,  a  shield,  or  figuratively,  in  the  sense,  to  use  as  a  pretext;  in  the 
passive  voice  :  to  be  surpassed. — P.  S.] 

I*  Vers.  10-12.— [Literal  version  of  Ps.  xiv.  1-3  from  the  Hebrew  : 

"  A  fool  hath  said  in  his  heart, 
'  There  is  no  God.' 
They  are  corrupt, 

They  have  done  abominable  things, 
There  is  not  a  doer  of  good. 
Jehovah  from  the  heavens 
Hath  looked  on  the  children  of  men, 
To  see  if  there  Ls  a  wise  one,  seeking  God. 
The  whole  have  turned  aside. 
Together  they  have  become  worthless  : 
There  is  not  a  doer  of  good,  not  even  one." — P.  S.] 

'•  Ver.  13.— [Ps.  v.  9,  according  to  the  Hebrew  : 

"  There  is  no  stability  in  their  mouth. ; 
Their  heart  is  full  of  mischief ; 
An  open  grave  is  their  throat ; 
Their  tongues  they  make  smooth."— P.  S.] 


»«  Ver.  13.— [Ps.  cxl.  3  in  Hebrew  : 
"  Ver.  14.— [Ps.  x.  7  : 


"  They  have  sharpened  their  tongues  as  a  serpent ; 
Poison  of  an  adder  is  under  their  lips." — P.  S.] 


"  His  mouth  is  full  of  oaths, 
And  deceit,  and  fraud."— P.  S.] 

••  Ver.  15-17.— [From  Isa.  lis.  7,  8,  which  reads  literally  : 


«»  Ver.  18.— [Ps.  xxxvi.  1 


'  Their  feet  run  to  do  evil, 
And  they  haste  to  shed  innocent  blood  ; 
Their  thoughts  are  thoughts  of  iniquity  ; 
"Wasting  and  destruction  are  in  their  highways ; 
A  way  of  peace  they  have  not  known, 
And  there  is  no  judgment  in  their  paths. 
Their  paths  they  have  made  perverse  for  themselves  ; 
No  treader  in  it  hath  known  peace." — P.  S.] 


"  The  transgression  of  the  wicked 

Is  affirming  within  my  heart : 
•  Fear  of  God  is  not  belore  his  eyes.' " — P.  S.] 


ac  Ver.  20. — [A  ion  may  mean,  (1.)  Si.'  o  ti,  prop'er  quod,  quam  ob  rem,  quare,  wesshaTb,  loesswegen,  on  account  of 


nam,  because,  /or— assigning  a  reason  for  a  preceding  assertion.  Both  views  suit  the  connection,  but  the  latter  is  more 
consistent  with  the  uniform  use  of  this  particle  in  the  N.  T.,  and  is  adopted  by  the  majority  of  modem  commentators, 
also  by  Meyer,  Lange,  Alford,  Wordsworth,  Hodge.     Hence  a  comma  only  should  be  put  after  fiew.    Aion  occurs 


ing  to  a  Hebraizing  syntactic  connection.    "All  flesh  shall  not  be  justified"  =  "nobody  shall  be  justified."    Comp. 
Matt.  xxiv.  22  :  ovk  av  eauOr)  irdaa  <rdp(. — P.  S.] 


114 


THE   EPISTLE    OF   PAUL   TO    THE   ROMANS. 


EXEGETICAIi  AXD  CEITICAIi. 

Snrvey. — 1.  The  use  of  circumcision.  Its  two- 
fold operation,  according  to  the  conflicting  conduct 
of  tlie  Jews.  Its  spiritual  significance,  by  wliicli  the 
Gentile  can  be  a  Jew,  and  tlie  Jew  a  Gentile  ;  vers. 
25-2'.».  2.  The  objective  advantage  of  historical  Ju- 
daism. Tiie  autliority  of  the  Word  of  God,  whicli 
remains  established  by  virtue  of  God's  faithfulness 
to  His  covenant,  though  many  of  the  Jews  become 
unfaithful.  By  this  unfaithfulness  they  must  even 
cause  the  glory  of  God's  faithfulness  to  abound. 
Nevertheless,  the  unfaithful  are  responsible  for  their 
guilt,  and  the  application  of  the  sin  of  unfaithful- 
ness to  the  glory  of  God  would  be  a  wicked  trans- 
gression ;  chap,  iil  1-8.  3.  The  subjective  equality 
of  the  Jews  with  the  Gentiles.  In  a  subjective  rela- 
tion, the  former  have  no  advantage,  since,  according 
to  tlie  witnesses  of  the  Old  Testament,  they  are  in 
a  severe  condemnation.  The  conclusion :  All  the 
world  stands  guilty  before  God ;  vers.  9-20. — The 
whole  section  contains,  briefly,  the  three  points : 
1.  Circumcision  (Judaism)  is  conditionally  either  an 
advantage,  or  not ;  2.  as  far  as  the  designed  mission 
of  Judaism  was  concerned,  it  was  an  advantage  ; 
8.  from  the  conduct  of  the  Jews,  as  opposed  to  the 
righteousness  of  God,  it  was  no  advantage. 


First  Paragraph  (vers.  25-29). 

Ver.  25.  For  circumcision  indeed  profiteth 
(or  availeth).  After  the  Apostle  has  portrayed  the 
corrui)tion  of  the  Jews,  he  comes  to  the  objection 
of  Jewish  theology,  or  also  to  the  argument  from 
the  theocratic  standpoint :  What,  then,  is  the  pre- 
rogative of  circumcision  ?  Does  not  circumcision,  as 
God's  covenant  promise,  protect  and  sustain  the 
Jews?  Answer:  The  advantage  of  circumcision  is 
(according  to  the  nature  of  a  covenant)  conditional. 
It  is  actually  available  (not  merely  useful);  it  accom- 
plishes its  complete  work  when  the  circumcised  keep 
the  law.  Plainly,  circumcision  here  falls  under  the 
idea  of  a  covenant.  It  is  a  mark  of  the  covenant 
of  the  law,  by  wiiich  God  will  fulfil  His  promise  to 
the  Jew  on  condition  tiiat  jtlie  Jew  keep  the  law  (see 
Exod.  xix.  7,  8  ;  Deut.  xxvi.  16).  But  afterward 
the  circumcision  of  God  is  made  prominent  as  God^s 
institution  ;  it  remains  in  force,  though  a  part  of  the 
Jew.s  become  faithless  to  the  covenant  relation.  But 
this  rests  upon  its  inner  nature  or  symbolical  signifi- 
cance, as  a  promise  and  pledge  of  the  circumcision 
of  the  heart ;  that  is,  a  continual  sincerity  and  hearti- 
ness in  the  fulfilment  of  the  law  (Deut.  x.  16  ;  xxx. 
6;  Jer.  iv.  4  ;  Col.  ii.  11;  Acts  vii.  51 :  "  Uncir- 
cumcised  in  heart  and  ears").  The  consequence  is, 
that  the  one  who  is  circumcised  is  received  into  the 
people  of  the  covenant.  But  the  idea  of  the  people 
of  the  covenant  gradually  becomes  more  profound, 
just  a.s  that  of  the  coveiiimt  and  the  n<'W  birth  itself, 
aa  the  time  of  their  fultihuent  in  the  New  Testament 
approaches.  It  is  from  this  point  of  view  that  the 
following  discussion  must  also  be  explained. — It  is 
of  nxi — that  is,  it  aceomplishes  what  it  should  ac- 
complish according  to  its  original  idea. — If  thou 
keep  the  law.  Here  the  question  is  plainly  not 
concerning  the  perfect  fiilfihnrnt  of  the  law  in  the 
Jewish  sense  (Tholuck) ;  which  is  opposed  by  vers. 
26  and  15.  Nor  can  the  Apostle  anticipate  here  so 
•OOD  the  New  Testament  standpoint  of  faith,  accord- 


ing to  which  believers  alone,  including  those  from 
the  Gentiles,  have  the  real  circumcision.  He  there- 
fore means  the  fulfilment  of  the  law  according  to 
the  measure  of  sincerity  and  heartiness  by  which 
either  Jew  or  Gentile  is  prepared  to  obey  tlie  truth 
of  the  gospel  (vers.  7,  8). — But  if  thou  art  a 
transgressor.  One  of  the  mystical  expositions  of 
the  Pentateuch,  S/iamoth  liabbak  (from  about  tiie 
6th  century),  expres.ses  the  same  thought  in  the 
same  figurative  drapery  :  "  The  heretics  and  the  un- 
godly in  Israel  should  not  say,  '  Because  we  are  cir- 
cumcised, we  do  not  descend  to  the  Gehenna.'  What 
does  God  do  V  He  sends  His  angels,  and  brings 
back  their  uncircumcision,  so  that  they  descend  to 
Gehenna  "  (Tholuck).*  The  expressions  tranxr/reS' 
sor  and  uncircmncision  were  especially  terrible  to 
the  Jews.  Uncircumcision  was  the  peculiar  charac- 
teristic  of  the  impurity  of  heathendom,  as  circum- 
cision denoted  the  consecration  and  holiness  of  the 
Jewish  people.  But  here  it  is  stated,  not  merely 
tliat  uncircumcision  takes  the  place  of  circumcision, 
but  that  circumcision  actually  becomes  uncircumcis- 
ion. That  is,  the  unbelieving  Jew  becomes  virtually 
a  Gentile.  [What  is  here  said  of  Jewish  circum- 
cision, is  equally  applicable  to  Christian  baptism  :  it 
is  a  great  blessing  to  the  believer,  as  a  sign  and  seal 
of  the  New  Covenant,  and  a  title  to  all  its  privi- 
leges, but  it  avails  nothing,  yea,  it  is  turned  into  a 
curse,  by  the  violation  of  the  duties  implied  in  this 
covenant. — P.  S.] 

Ver.  26.  Therefore,  if  the  uncircumcision. 
The  Apostle  here  uses  the  Jew's  mode  of  expres- 
sion. '.■i/.()o,9t'(rria,  uncircumcision,  stands  in  the 
first  clause  of  the  sentence  as  an  abstract  term  for 
the  concrete  az^JO/JifTTo?,  uncircumcised  ;  hence  the 
alrov  [i.  e.,  of  such  an  c5;x(»o,9r(TTot,]  after  the  sec- 
ond dy. (I  0  ft  i'(TT  la). ■[  —  To.  li i,y.at,(itii  ut a  x ov 
r  0/(0  II.  The  requirements  of  the  law  hi  essential 
matters,  as  rti  Tor  von.,  ver.  14  ;  as  they  can  be 
observed  by  the  Gentile  also.  [The  moral  require- 
ments, not  the  ceremonial,  among  which  circum- 
cision wiis  the  very  first.  The  E.  V.  here  mistakes 
iii,/.ai(iuia  for  <ii./.aio(Tvvri. — P.  S.]  Be  counted  for 
circumcision.  He  shall  be  accepted  as  a  Jew  wlio 
is  obedient  to  the  law  (Matt.  viii.  11;  1  Cor.  vii.  19; 
Gal.  V.  6).  The  clause  is  supposed  by  Philippi  to 
apply  to  the  Proselytes  of  the  (iate.  But  these  have 
ceased  to  be  Gentiles  in  the  full  sense  of  the  word. 
The  point  here  throughout  is  not  concerning  the 
form,  but  the  disposition.  Fritzsche  refers  the 
future  [/'.o;'i»T.')7)fff  TMi]  to  the  final  judgment ;  but 
Meyer,  and  others,  regard  it  as  applying  to  the 
abstract  future :  "  As  often  as  the  question  con- 
cerns justification."      Assuredly   the    Aposile    has 

*  [Rabbi  Berechins,  in  Shemolh  Rnbh.,  fol.  138,  pol.  IS: 
"  AV  harelici  el  npuslnleetl  impii  ex  hrnelitis  diennl:  qunndo 
qtiide.m  cirrumehi mimuf,  in  in/"iT«um  iion  ilescfwlimns.  Quid 
(ipil  D'H.i  S.  B.  t  Millit  iiiigrliim  el  jirwpiitin  eoriim  tillrnhit, 
iUl  III  ipxi.f  in  tiiferniim  rlfxr^ndnnl."  Al'rnliere,  or  ndihierrg 
prrepiliiiin,  moans  as  much  as  to  oWilerato  tho  cirrumcis- 
iim,  or  to  l)cootno  iiticirciiraoirscd.  It  was  done  by  ni)ost.it« 
.TewH  at  tho  time  of  the  Mnccuboes,  under  tho  porsocutiom 
of  Aiiticichiis  Epiphnno!*;  1  Mace.  1.1');  .Tosophus,  Aniiq. 
xii.  6,  S  2.  It  was  o  common  Jewish  opinion,  thnt  circum- 
cision, lis  such,  saves  from  hell.  Hab'u  Jtoiuiohom  (C'inm. 
nn  tlie  Ji.  n/  Mnsf.n,  fol.  -13,  col.  ?•)  :  "  Our  Rabl)in3  hava 
Hiiid,  thnt  no  circumoisod  man  will  boo  hi'll."  Mrdra/ch 
Tillin  (f  7,  c.  2)  :  "  Ood  sworo  to  Abraham,  that  no  one  who 
wa.-t  clrounicisod  should  be  sent  to  hell."  .Soo  these,  aud 
Himilnr  paH^npos,  In  Pvln'ittpon  nnd  Kisenmongor  (Entdeelcin 
Judnilh'im  Ii.  j).  .S30  f.)— 1*.  S.] 

f  [The  reverse  ia  the  cnso,  John  vili.  44  :  i/itiio-Tjjt  iirri 
Koi  6  narrip  ovToO,  where  tho  abstract  noun  \l/iv&ovt  iiiu.st 
1)0  supplied  from  tho  concrete  rptvmfi.  Comp.  Winer, 
Oramm.,  pp.  131,  132,  6th  ed.— P.  8.1 


CHAPTER   II.    25-29. 


115 


already  in  mind  the  definite  future,  the  day  when 
the  gospel  is  preached. 

Ver.  27.  And  he  who  is  uncircumcised  by- 
nature  [ex  gii'fffo)?  belongs  to  ax^ofivarla, 
not  to  xf/.oTaa]  will  judge  thee  [K()tvit,  rise 
up  in  judgment  by  his  example ;  conip.  Matt.  xii. 
41,  42,  where  y.aTaK(jivn)  is  used].  Analogies  to 
this  bold  word  can  be  found  in  the  Gospels,  Matt.  iii. 
9;  viii.  11  ;  xii.  41,  and  others;  and  even  back  in 
the  Old  Testament.  The  sentence  is  read  by  many 
as  a  question,  as  the  previous  verse  ;  while  the  ov/l 
is  again  supplied  in  thought  before  z^trfT  (Riick- 
ert,  Thuluck  [in  the  earlier  editions,  but  not  in  the 
fifth. — P.  S.],  Laehmann,  and  others).  On  the  con- 
trary, as  a  declaration,  it  is  a  definite  answer  and 
conclusion  to  ver.  26  (Luther,  Erasmus,  De  Wette, 
Meyer). — Uncircumcised  by  nature.  The  Gen- 
tile as  he  is  by  virtue  of  his  natural  birth,  as  is  the 
Jew  no  less.  The  tx  (pvcTfox;  is  erroneously  made 
by  Koppe  to  relate  to  t  6  v  r  o ,« .  t  f  /  o  T  it  «  ;  still 
more  artificial  is  Olshausen's  explanation :  "  The 
Gentile  world  observing  the  law  without  higher  aid." 
—Who  with  the  letter  [(Vta  y^a/( /taroi,]. 
The  di.d  reminds  us  of  the  declaration  in  chap.  vii. 
11:  "For  sin,  taking  occasion  by  the  command- 
ment, deceived  me,  and  by  it  slew  me  "  ((Ecume- 
nius,  Beza,  and  others).  Yet  it  should  be  urged 
here,  as  Meyer  properly  remarks,  that  such  a  Jew, 
in  spite  of  the  law,  transgresses  it.  But  that  he  be- 
comes a  transgressor  {na^a/JaTtji;),  and  not  merely 
a  sinner  {ut(a(JT<ii}.6q),  rests  upon  the  fact  that  he  is 
in  possession  and  knowledge  of  the  law  (chap.  v. 
13,  14).  The  expression  ypa///<a  defines  the  law 
in  its  specific  character  as  written  law  [not  in  a  dis- 
paraging sense,  in  opposition  to  nvi-vfia^  ;  circum- 
cision {nt^iTOfo'j)  is  the  appropriate  obligation 
to  the  same.  • 

Ver.  28.  For  he  is  not  a  Jew^  who  is 
one  outwardly.  We  here  have  a  succession  of 
brief  utterances  {breviloquentiw)*  Meyer  translates : 
*'  For  not  he  who  is  a  Jew  externally,  is  a  [genuine] 
Jew."  This  means,  in  complete  expression  (accord- 
ing to  De  Wette  and  others):  "Not  the  one  who  is  a 
Jew  externally  is  a  Jew,  that  is,  is  on  that  account 
already  a  Jew  internally,  or  a  true  Jew."  Thus, 
also,  the  second  clause  of  the  verse  should  be  un- 
derstood :  Neither  is  the  circumcision  which  is  ex- 
ternal in  the  flesh,  genuine  circumcision  ;  the  exter- 
nal sign  is  not  the  reality  :  it  is  the  symbolical  mask 
of  the  reality.  Tholuck  :  "  Mark  xii.  33,  as  well 
as  other  examples,  prove  that  this  view  was  not  un- 
known to  the  Scribes."  Yet  even  this,  and  the  ex- 
pression quoted  from  the  Talmud — '  The  Jew  con- 

*  [In  ver.  28  the  subject  is  incomplete,  and  must  be  sup- 
plied frorn  the  predicate  thus  :  ov  yap  b  iv  tw  (j>avepiZ  ['lov- 
Caiosl  'lovSaios  [ev  to!  KpVTrrw,  or,  aATj^iTOs]  etrriv,  oiiSe  r)  iv 
T<3  <j)avepM,  iv  (rapKi  [TreptTO/arj]  ireptTOfir)  [dArjSii'jj  €<7Ttv]. 
In  ver.  29  the  predicate  is  wanting,  and  must  be  inferred 
from  ver.  28  thus  :  aAAa  6  ei'  tw  KpvirTiZ  'lovSaiO's  ['lovSaio^ 
ecTTti'],  Ktti  TrepiToju-rj  KapSCa^,  ev  Treeu/xaTt,  ov  ypafi/nart  [nepi- 
TojuTj  eo-Tii'].  This  is  the  arrangtment  of  Beza,  E.  V.,  De 
Wette,  Tholuck,  Alford.  Dr.  Lange  (see  Exr(/.  iVo/*".?  on 
ver.  29)  differs  from  this  only  in  form,  by  supplying  'lov- 
Baio?  as  predicate  after  aAAa.  But  Fiitzsche  and  ifeyer 
make  ver.  29  strictly  parallel  with  ver.  28,  and  take  'lov- 
Saioi  as  predicate  thus :  aAAa  6  iv  Tcp  kpvtttw  [e<7^Tt]  'lov- 
Sato!,  bill  he  who  [is  a  .Jew]  inwardly  is  a  Jtw  [in  the  true, 
ideal  sense  of  the  word].  This  would  seem  the  best  ar- 
rangement,, if  it  were  not  for  the  following :  koX  jrcpiro/iTj 
itapSiai,  &J.,  which  Meyer  renders  :  and  the  circumcision 
of  the  heart  (is,  consists  in]  Ihi'  spirit,  not  in  the  letler.  But 
a  strict  pan'lelism  would  here  require  :  koX  -q  iv  tw  Kpun-Taj 
[.50.  icrri]  7repiTO|oiT).  Ewald  agrees  with  this  structure  of 
Meyer  in  the  first  clause,  but  would  make  KapSia^  the 
predicate  in  the  second  clause  :  circumcision  [is  that]  of  the 


sists  in  the  innermost  parts  of  the  heart '  * — is  faa 
from  resembling  tliis  Pauline  antithesis. 

Ver.  29.  But  he  is  a  Jew^  who  is  one  in- 
wardly. Explanations  :  1.  "  He  who  is  internallj 
a  Jew  is  a  Jew  ;  and  the  circumcision  of  the  hear^ 
in  the  spirit,  not  in  the  letter,  is  circumcision " 
(De  Wette,  Tholuck,  with  Beza,  Este,  Riickert). 
Here  the  absent  predicate  is  in  the  concluding 
word.  2.  But  he  who  is  one  inwardly,  is  a  Jew,  and 
circumcision  of  the  heart  rests  in  the  spirit,  not  in 
the  letter  (Luther,  Erasmus,  Fritzsche,  Meyer).  Id 
the  first  construction,  the  ellipses  are  very  strong; 
in  the  second,  circumcision  of  the  heart  creates  an 
anticipation  which  is  at  variance  with  the  parallel- 
ism. Therefore,  3.  But  he  is  a  Jew  (this  is  brought 
over  from  the  preceding  verse)  who  is  a  Jew  in- 
wardly ;  and  circumcision  (likewise  brought  ove>' 
from  tlie  preceding)  is  circumcision  of  the  heart,  in 
the  spirit,  and  not  in  the  letter.  We  nmst  therefore 
supply  'jordatoc;  after  a/J.cc,  and  nfoiTonin  after 
y.al. — A  Jew  in  secret,  tv  y.Qvmui  JovdaZoq. 
The  true  theocratic  disposition — that  is,  the  direc- 
tion of  legality  to  heartiness,  truth,  and  reality,  and 
thus  to  the  New  Testament.  This  is  not  quite  equal 
in  degree  to  6  y.Qvnrb';  t^c;  x«^f)/ac;  av&^oinoi; 
(1  Peter  iii.  4).  Circumcision  of  the  heart;  see 
Deut.  X.  16,  &c.  ;  Philo :  av/ipolov  tj()ovoiv  ix- 
To/itjq.  Circumcision  of  the  heart  does  not  mean 
"  the  separation  of  every  thing  immoral  from  the 
inner  life  "  (Meyer),  but  the  mortification  or  break- 
ing  of  the  natural  selfish  principle  of  life,  by  faith, 
as  the  principle  of  theocratic  consecration  and  direc- 
tion. [Even  the  Old  Testament  plainly  teaches  the 
spiritual  import  of  circumcision,  and  demands  the 
circumcision  of  the  heart,  without  which  the  exter- 
nal ceremony  is  worthless;  Deut.  x.  16  ;  xxx.  6; 
Jer.  iv.  4  ;  ix.  29  ;  Ezek.  xliv.  9  ;  comp.  Col.  ii.  11 ; 
Phil.  iii.  2.  The  same  may  be  applied  to  baptism, 
the  sign  and  seal  of  regeneration. — P.  S.] — In  the 
spirit.  Explanations  :  1.  In  the  Holy  Spirit  (Mey- 
er, Fritzsche,  Philippi  [Hodge]  ).  Incorrect,  since 
the  question  is  not  yet  concerning  the  Christian  new 
birth.  2.  In  the  spirit  of  mati  ((Ecumenius,  Eras- 
mus, Beza,  Reiche,  and  others).  [Wordsworth  :  the 
inner  man  as  opposed  to  the  fle,«h. — P.  S.]  3.  The 
Ifivine  spirit,  as  chap.  vii.  6  ;  2  Cor.  iii.  6  ;  the  spirit 
which  fills  the  heart  of  the  true  Jew  (Calvin,  De 
Wette ;  the  true  spirit  of  the  Jewish  Church  com- 
ing from  God  ;  Tholuck).  4.  The  new  principle  of 
life  wrought  by  God  in  man  (Riickert),  5.  When 
7ivfv,ua  is  placed  in  antithesis  to  y(jcifi/:<a,  or  the  life 
iv  nnviiari  to  the  life  tv  yqufuian — that  is,  the 
hfe  in  an  external,  slavish,  contracted  pursuit  of  the 
single  and  outward  prescriptions  of  the  law  accord- 
ing  to  the  letter — then  by  spirit  we  are  neither  to 
understand  the  Spirit  of  God  in  itself,  nor  the  spirit 
of  man,  but  the  spirit  as  life,  the  spirit-form  of  the 
inward  life,  by  which  the  human  spirit  moves  in  the 
Spirit  of  God,  and  the  Spirit  of  God  in  the  human 
spirit. — Whose  praise.  Explanations  of  the  o  i' : 
1.  neuter;  ciijus  rei  (Luther,  Camerarius,  Meyer: 
"ideal  Judaism  and  ideal  circumcision"  [Words- 
worth] ).  2.  More  fitly :  masculine ;  reference  to 
'JovSaloii  (Augustine,  and  others,  Tholuck,  De  Wette 

heart.  This  is  forced,  and  would  require  the  article  before 
n-epiTo/n^.  The  sense  is  not  materially  affected  by  the  dif- 
ference of  construction.  In  this  passage  the  authorized  E, 
v.,  upon  the  whole,  can  scarcely  be  impro^d.— P.  S.] 

*  [Tholuck  quotes  from  the  Talmud  {Nulda,  f.  iO,  2^ 
the  axiom  :  jb  ■'"iTPia  "^TUT^  ,  Judseus  in  jpenetralibu- 
cordis. — P.  S.] 


116 


THE   EPISTLE   OF   PAUL   TO   THE   ROMANS. 


fAlford,  Hodge]  ).  «;ratroe,  John  v.  44  ;  xii.  43. 
Tiie  expression,  according  to  chap.  xiii.  a  and  1  Peter 
ii.  14,  is  often  "  a  judicial  ternj  "  (Tlioluck).  Tlie 
Apostle  here  declares  not  only  that  the  genuine  Jew- 
ish  di>i|)ositiou  of  pious  Jews  and  Gentiles  is  far 
exalted  ahove  every  praise  from  below,  and  enjoys 
the  a|)proljation  of  God,  but  also  that  its  honor 
comes  from  God,  and  will  therefore  be  sanctioned  by 
God  by  a  judicial  act — whicli  can  at  last  be  nothing 
else  but  justification  by  faith.  To  Judah  it  was  said, 
as  tiie  explanation  of  his  name:  "Tliou  art  he  whom 
thy  brethren  siiall  praise."  But  God  Himself  will 
praise  this  genuine  spuitual  Judah. 


Second  Pahaorafh,  Chap.  ill.  1-8. 
Ver.  1.    What  then  is  the  advantage  of  the 

Jew  [  Ti    or)'    TO    y7  f  O  t  fj  (T  6  »'  T  O  T'    '7  O  I")  «  ('  O  I'  ]  ? 

After  the  Apo.stlc  has  shown  tiiat  not  only  the  Jews 
are  included  in  the  same  corruption  with  tiie  Gen- 
tiles, but  that  pious  Gentiles  liave  even  an  advantage 
over  ungodly  Jews,  he  comes  to  the  question  wiiich 
would  naturally  be  presented  to  him — whether,  then, 
Israel  hius  any  peculiar  prerogative,  and,  if  so,  in 
wliat  it  consists.  He  does  not  ask  in  the  name  of  a 
Gentile  Christian  (Seb.  Schmid),  or  of  the  Judaist, 
although  he  must  take  from  these  every  occasion  for 
accusation,  but  from  tlie  standpoint  of  the  true  the- 
ocracy. The  advantiif/e  in  the  sense  of  profit  (De 
Wette). — Or  \7hat  is  the  benefit  of  circumcis- 
ion {rit;  t]  Mifiikfia  rtji;  ti f  (» t t o /i ^ <; )  ?  The 
second  question  does  not  relate  merely  to  circum- 
cision as  a  single  means  of  grace  (De  Wette).  It 
makes  the  first  question  more  precise,  so  far  as  for 
the  Aposile  tlie  Jewish  economy  is  different  from  the 
Old  Testament  in  general  (chap.  iv. ;  Gal.  iii.). 

Ver.  2.  Much  every  vray.  First  of  all, 
namely.  [7in).v  refers  to  both  nffiiaaov  and 
OKft/.iia;  Meyer.  x.  arct  ndvra  r(>6nov, 
under  every  moral  and  religious  aspect,  wliichever 
way  you  look  at  it ;  tlie  opposite  is  hut  oi'()iiva  t(<6- 
jxov. — P.  S.]  All  that  he  could  have  in  mind  he  shows 
in  chap.  ix.  4.  But  from  the  outset,  apart  from  his 
train  of  thought  and  purpose,  he  had  a  further  object 
than  to  show  the  advantage  thai  to  them  the  Aoyict 
Tor  (•Jtov  were  committed.  We  therefore  accept, 
with  Theodoret,  Calvin,  Bengel,  and  others,  that 
nooiTov  means  here  pr(ec<puiim,  or  primarium 
illul  eat,  first  of  all.  Tlioluck  and  Meyer  [Alford, 
Hodge],  on  the  other  hand,  suppose  that  he  omitted 
to  enumerate  the  other  jioints  (to  which  the  /(  i  v 
refers),  and  (piote,  as  examples,  chap.  i.  S  ;  1  Cor. 
xi.  18. — They  were  intrusted  with  the  ora- 
cles of  God.  According  to  our  rendering  of  the 
niimTov,  T«  Aoyta  (significant  promulgations, 
/oti(T/ioi,  words  of  revelation,  Acts  vii.  38  ;  Heb.  v. 
12  ;  1  Peter  iv.  11)  can  by  no  means  denote  the  Old 
Testament  word  of  (lod  in  its  general  asjiect  (Coe- 
ceius :  qiii'lijuid  Driis  habitit  dlccruiuin),  but  this 
word  only  in  the  specific  direction  in  which  the  most 
of  the  Jews  were  unbelieving  in  respect  to  it.  What 
is  meant,  therefore,  is  not  the  law  alone  and  as  such 
(Theodoret,  (Ecumenius,  Beza) ;  for  the  law,  accord- 
ing to  Paul,  was  also  a  typical  gospel  (which  Tlioluck 
Bcems  to  overlook,  when  he  says;  Tlie  contents  of 
the  /.oyia  divide  into  the  twofold  ])art,  6  ro/ioi;  and 
a*  i,7nyyt/.iai) ;  nor  the  MesHianic  prophecies  alone 
(Grotius,  Tholuck,  Meyer),  but  properly  both  (De 
Wette),  as  one  was  the  condition  of  the  other,  and 
iMtU  constituted  a  covenant  of  Jehovah  with  the 


people  (Calvin,  Calov  [Hodge],  and  others).  Th«  > 
unity  of  these  elements  lay  chiefly  in  the  patriarchal 
promises ;  and  as  the  peojile  of  Israel  were  made  a 
covenant  people,  these  were  commixed  to  them  a# 
the  oracles  of  God  establishing  the  covenant,  which 
Israel,  as  the  servant  of  God,  should  proclaim  to 
the  nations  at  the  jiroper  time.  [The  Apostle,  in 
calling  the  Old  Teatanicnt  Scriptures  the  oracles  of 
God,  clearly  recognizes  them  as  divinely  in.spired 
books.  The  Jewish  Church  was  the  trustee  and 
guardian  of  these  oracles  till  the  coining  of  Clirist 
Now,  the  ycri|)tures  of  the  Old  and  New  Testament 
are  committed  to  the  guardianship  of  the  Christian 
Church. — P.  S.]  'EnttTTH'O  rjtjav.  They  icon 
entrusted  with,  //tcrrf rfn-  nvi  ri  in  the  passive  ; 
comp.  Winer,  §  40,  1  [§  39,  1,  p.  244,  7th  ed. ;  alsc 
Gal.  ii.  7  ;  1  Cor.  ix.  17. — P.  S.J  They  were  federally 
entrusted  by  the  faithfulness  of  God  {niaTu,  ver.  3) 
with  God's  promises,  or  were  autheiUicaled  in  their 
faith  in  order  that  they  might  exercise  it  with  fi.eU 
ity  to  faith. 

Ver.  3.  What  then  ?  If  some  were  faithless, 
&c.  In  these  words  the  Apostle  intimates  that  the 
Jews,  in  the  main,  still  have  the  advantage  just  men- 
tioned. The  statement  is  therefore  neither  an  objec- 
tion nor  a  proof,  but  it  establishes  the  previous  point 
against  doubt.  In  view  of  the  certain  fulfilment  of 
the  Divine  promise,  even  the  mass  of  the  apostate 
people  is  only  a  poor  crowd  of  individuals,  some; 
though  these  some  may  grammatically  be  many. 
Meyer,  taking  ground  against  Tholuek  and  Philippi, 
disputes  the  contemptuous  and  ironical  character  of 
the  expression  rn't',-.  The  contempt  and  irony  lies, 
of  course,  not  in  the  word,  but  in  the  idea.  Un- 
belief has  scattered  and  divided  Israel.  According 
to  De  Wette  and  Fritzsche,  the  expression  has  an 
alleviating  character.  Since  the  great  mass  of  the 
unbelievers  was  known  to  the  readers,  the  expres- 
sion has  rather  a  palpable  sharpness.  Meyer's  trans- 
lation :  "If  many  did  refuse  to  believe  {Glaube\ 
their  unbelief  ( f/wf/ZawAf)  will  not  annul  the  credi- 
bility [Glaubhaftigkcil)  of  God,"  expresses  the  cor- 
respondence of  the  different  designations,  but  it  is 
not  .satisfactory  to  the  sense.  The  Apostle  forces 
us,  by  the  niari-i;  (-Jtov,  to  bring  into  promi- 
nence here  the  moral  force  of  a.'itaria  ;  and  the 
assertion  of  Meyer,  that  amartif  and  aTTidxia  mean 
always,  in  the  New  Testament,  unbdief  not  un- 
faithfulness, rests  upon  a  false  alternative.*  KiilU 
ner  refers  the  (i/narin  to  the  unfaithfulness  of  the 
Jews  in  the  ante-Christian  time.  De  Wette  like- 
wise :  "  They  have  been  unfaithful  in  keeping  the 
covenant  (Theodoret,  CEcumenius,  Calvin,  and  oth- 
ers) ;  not,  they  have  been  unbelieving  toward  the 
promises  and  the  gospel  (Tholuck,  Olsliausen,  Mey- 
er)." This  view  is  very  .strange,  since  he  correctly 
observes  that  in  the  word  dTnaTtlv  there  lie  two 
meanings ;  as  niirTu;  is  at  the  same  time  fidelity 
and  /'(((//(.  Meyer's  objection  to  De  Wette  is  equally 
strange  :  "  Ttvit;  would  be  altogether  unsuited,  for 
the  very  reason  that  it  would  not  be  true.  All 
were  disobedient  and  unfaithful."  This  is  against 
history  ifnd  the  declarations  of  the  Bible  (see  the 
discoui-se  of  Stephen,  Acts  vii.).  If  we  distinguish 
between  the  ideas,  to  be  a  sirmer  and  to  be  an  apot- 

*  [Hodgo  :  That  aniartiv  may  Iiavo  the  scnso  to  b« 
unfiixllifnl,  is  plain  from  2  Tim.  ii.  13,  »nd  from  the  «cnM 
of  airurria,  in  lloh.  iii.  I'J,  19,  :ind  of  airt<7Tot,  In  Luko  xii. 
40;  ll<jv.  xxi.  8.  To  understand  Iho  paaatiKe  us  rcfi-rring 
to  want  of  Ciith  in  Chrut,  aecms  iBoooeiiitont  with  tbt 
wbolo  context.— P.  S.] 


CHAPTER  III.   1-20. 


IV 


fate,  then  it  follows  that,  according  to  the  Scrip- 
tures, the  numerical  laajority  of  apostates  was  always 
offset  by  a  (/ynamical  majority  of  persons  faithful  to 
the  covenar.t,  by  whom  the  covenant  was  continued 
on  the  ground  of  the  ni(rTi.<;  Otoo ;  and  it  would 
have  been  very  strange  if  Paul,  in  view  of  this  oft- 
repeated  history,  which  was  first  really  consum- 
mated in  his  time,  should  have  quite  ignored  the 
present.  But  as  iniaxfvaav  elsewhere  (for  exam- 
ple, John  viii.  30)  means,  they  became  believers,  so 
is  ijni(TX>jfTar  here,  they  have  become  unbelieving, 
not,  they  have  been.  The  niarn;  of  God  is  His 
fidelity ;  His  fidelity  to  the  covenant  certainly  in- 
volves "  credibility."  (2  Tim.  ii.  13 ;  m-aroii  6 
0(6%,  1  Cor.  i.  9  ;  x.  13,  &c.) 

Ver.  4.  Let  it  not  be,  // /;  yevoi,ro.  [Comp. 
Textual  Note  ^]  This  expression  of  impassioned 
repulsion  [solemn  and  intense  deprecation],  also 
common  to  tlie  later  Greeks,  is,  in  the  mouth  of 
the  Hebrew  (rti5">bn,  ad  profana),  at  the  same 
time  an  expression  of  a  religious  or  moral  repug- 
nance or  aversion.  Therefore  the  Apostle  repels 
the  thought,  as  if  the  rn't'i;  could  annul  the  nianii 
of  God,  and  therefore  also  nullify  the  realization 
of  the  eternal  covenant  of  grace  in  the  lieart  of 
Israel  and  in  a  New  Testament  people  of  God. — 
But  let  it  be :  God  (is)  true,  but  every  man 
£alse.  [Lange  :  So  abcr  .sei's  ;  Gott  ist  wahrka/tiff, 
je !er  Menscli  aber  falsch.']  Since  yivoi-zQ  relates 
to  one  sentence,  the  antitlietical  Ywia&m  must  re- 
late to  the  sentence  which  offsets  it,  and  must  be 
marked,  as  announcing  a  declaration,  by  a  colon.  Ac- 
cording to  Meyer  and  De  Wette,  it  means  logice  qavt- 
QoinOoi,  or  a.7TO(Ui/.viff0o)  (Theophylact).  [Tho- 
luck  prefers  OfO/.oyfiaOin  as  equivalent.]  But  then 
the  term  would  have  been  unfitly  chosen.  Koppe 
explains  :  Muck  ra  her  lei  it  be  (viehhnehr  so  sei  es). 
Meyer  objects  that  in  this  case  we  should  expect 
roi'To  or  TO  as  article  before  the  whole  sentence, 
and  remarks,  that  Paul  did  not  design  to  introduce 
any  sentence  from  the  Old  Testament.  But  Paul 
can  nevertheless  make  use  of  a  sentence  of  his  own 
on  the  future  of  Israel,  and  the  want  of  the  to  does 
not  outweigh  the  consideration  that  the  yn'tafiM,  as 
the  antithesis  of  fdj  yiroiro,  requires  a  formal  dec- 
laration. Moreover,  Ps.  cxvi.  11  (all  men  are  liars) 
furnished  already  one  half,  and  the  connection  the 
other  half  of  the  declaration.  This  point  was  to  be 
unfolded  in  all  its  amplitude  in  the  history  of  the 
New  Testament.  See  2  Tim.  ii.  13.  [I  prefer  to 
connect  yi,vt<T()-i<i  (Paul  does  not  say,  tdTo))  with 
&f6q,  and  to  take  it  in  the  subjective  sense:  Let 
God  become,  i.  e.,  be  seen  and  acknowledged,  even 
by  His  enemies,  as  true,  whatever  be  the  conse- 
quences. So  also  the  E.  V.  and  the  best  English 
commentators.  The  parallel,  2  Tim.  ii.  13,  is  strik- 
ing :  "  If  we  are  unfaithful  (aTnaTuTtinv),  yet  He 
abideth  faithful  {tthtto^)  :  He  cannot  deny  Himself." 
Comp,  also  the  phrase  :  Jiaf  justilia,  pereat  mundun. 
— P.  S.] — God  is  true  [according  to  Dr.  Lauge's 
view,  which  disconnects  {Ifoi;  from  yuvta Oro].  Ac- 
cording to  Tholuck,  oL/j'jOfia  here  comprehends  prac- 
tical and  theoretical  truth  ;  in  opposition  to  what  he 
denotes  as  the  usual  exposition,  that  the  Apostle 
expresses  the  wish  that  God  would  reveal  Himself 
continually  as  true  and  ftiithful  (according  to  Coc- 
ceius,  in  the  counsels  of  his  plan  of  salvation).  If 
the  question  is  on  the  truth  of  God  in  reference  to 
the  apparent  collision  between  the  Old  and  New 
Teslauients,  then  the  sense  must  be  that  even  in  this 
poweri'ul  antithesis,  which  to  the  view  of  man  ap- 


pears to  be  an  irreconcilable  contradiction,  God  wiB 
remain  consistent  with  Himself,  and  therefore  bfl 
truthful  and  faithful  (see  2  Cor.  i.  20  ;  Rev.  iii.  14 
the  name  Jehovah).  All  men  are  liars  so  far  as  the^ 
are  sinners  (sin  =  lie) ;  yet  unbehef  is  emphaticallj 
a  lie  (John  viii.  44),  since,  with  its  rejection  of  th« 
truth,  it  becomes  obedient  to  falsehood,  and  is  in> 
plicated  in  the  grossest  self-contradictious  (see  chap, 
ii.  21-23).  Unbelief  is  not  only  a  characteristic  of 
apostates,  but  also  a  tendency  and  manifold  fault 
of  believers ;  and  so  far  all  men  are  liars  through 
unbelief  Whenever  the  covenant  between  God 
and  man  is  shaken  or  broken,  absolute  faithful- 
ness  is  always  foimd  on  God's  side  ;  He  is  a  rock 
(Deut.  xxxii.  31,  <fcc.),  while  all  the  vibrations,  as 
well  as  all  the  breaches  of  faithfulness,  are  on  the 
side  of  men.  Also,  in  Ps.  cxvi.  11,  all  men  are  rep- 
resented  as  liars,  in  opposition  to  the  faithfulness  of 
God  ;  and  by  troubling  believers  they  oppose  faith. 

As  it  is  ■written  (Ps.  Ii.  4). — The  application 
of  the  passage  quoted  from  the  Psalms  gives  evi- 
dence of  the  most  profound  insight.  The  original, 
according  to  Hupfeld's  translation,  reads  thus : 

"  To  Thee  alone  I  have  sinned, 
And  done  what  is  wicked  in  Thy  sight, 
In  order  that  Thou  mayest  be  just  in  Thy  eay« 

ings, 
Pure*  in  Thy  judging." 

The  Sepluagint  translates,  "  In  order  that  Thou  may- 
est be  acknowledged  just  {()i,y.aut)Sf^c)  in  Thy  worda 
(in  Thy  sayings),  and  mayest  conquer  {vixi'jfrr^c,  instead 
of  nr-ri)  in  Thy  y.(,ivf<rOai,  (T^'^JiCz)."  Paul 
quotes  from  the  Septuagint.  The  sense  of  the  origi- 
nal text  is,  that  David  placed  himself  before  the 
judgment  of  God  and  His  revelation.  Viewed  ac- 
cording to  the  custom  of  Oriental  despots,  Nathan 
had  condemned  him  too  hai'shly ;  but  when  he  re- 
garded his  sin  in  all  its  depths  as  a  sin  against  God, 
and  before  His  eyes,  he  perceived  the  justice  of  the 
prophet's  charge,  and  the  holiness  of  his  judicial 
declaration  of  the  guilt  of  death.  The  translation 
of  the  Septuagint,  "  that  Thou  mayest  be  justi- 
fied, declared  just"  [dixauoOrii;  for  the  Hebrew 
p'n^P  ],  is  exegetical.  [In  using  the  word  dt./.cti.orv 
here  evidently,  like  the  hipliil  of  p"!!.  in  a  declara- 
tory  sense  (for  God  is  just  and  cannot  be  made  just, 
but  only  declared  or  acknowledged  as  just),  Paul  fur- 
nishes us  the  key  to  the  proper  understanding  of 
his  doctrine  of  justification  by  faith,  see  below,  ver. 
28. — P.  S.]  The  change  vr/.i'jar^c,  &.(.:,  is  a  peri- 
phrasis. "  Thou  mayest  be  pure' in  Thy  judgment," 
means  properly,  "  Thou  wilt  be  recognized  as  pure  ; 
therefore  Thou  overcomest,  since  Thou  wilt  be  jus- 
tified  in  Thy  judgment."  The  Septuagint  has  am- 
plified  the  slight  antithesis,  "  in  Thy  sayings,  in  Thy 
judgment,"  so  that  the  distinction  can  be  drawn  be- 
tween God's  word  and  His  judgment.  The  chief 
point  is  the  canon :  1/  God  is  to  be  thorovghly  knovni 
and  recognized  as  just  and  holy  in  His  word  and  in 
His  judgment,  then  must  sin,  which  stands  commit- 
ted a(',ainst  Him,  be  known  in  all  its  breadih  and 
depth.  The  defect  in  our  knowledge  here  is  what 
casts  a  shade  in  part  upon  God's  word  and  in  part 
upon  His  judicial  government.  Paul's  employment 
of  the  quotation  from  the  Psalms  corresponds  to  thia 


*  [  pTl£  indicates  the  righteoDsness,  HST  (properly,  it 
be  pure),  the  holiness  of  God.— P.  S.] 


118 


TUE    EPISTLE    OF   PAUL    TO   THE    ROMANS. 


canon ;  much  sooner  shall  all  men  be  liars,  than  that 
a  shadow  be  cast  on  God's  truth  or  fidelity  to  His 
covenant.  The  rix«»'  is  tiequentlv  used  in  the 
judieial  sense  (see  ilever).  Beza,  Piscat.,  and  re- 
cently Tholuek  and  Pliilippi  [also  Jleyer  and  Ewald], 
would  take  /.(littaOcu  in  the  middle  sense,  for  to 
litiyale.  But  the  Apostle  could  not  expect  that  his 
expression  would  be  understood  in  any  other  sense 
tlian  in  tiie  Septuagint.  [Comp.,  however,  Textual 
Note  \—\\  S.] 

[That  thou  mayest,  on  mi;  civ,  "k"?^,  in  Ps. 
li.  0  (ver.  4  in  the  K.  V.),  to  the  intent  that,  in  order 
that  (tj /.txo*,).  Tills  seems  to  mean  that  God  caused 
David's  sins  to  take  tliis  aggravated  form  for  the 
Very  purpose  that  He  miglit  appear  to  be  entirely 
ju^t,  wiien  He  pronounced  condemnation  of  it.  But 
such  an  interpretation  would  iruply  the  contradiction 
that  God  condemns  His  own  act.  Hence  most  com- 
mentators (even  Calvin)  take  ■>'?5  licre,  and  often, 
like  lira  and  orifx;  in  tlie  New  Testament,  of  the 
e^ect  or  consequence  (ix^^aTi^xoK)  =  so  that.  Hut  "iTIlb 
and  iva  grammatically  always,  or  nearly  always,  in- 
dicate the  dc'sign  or  pur|)ose  (see  Gesen.,  Thes., 
s.  1'.,  and  Winer,  Gramm.,  p.  426  ff'.,  7th  cd.) ;  and 
where  this  seems  inapplicable,  as  lieie,  we  must 
assume  a  logical  rather  than  a  granunatical  latitude. 
Design  and  effect  often  coincide.  The  Bible  no 
doubt  teaches  the  absolute  sovereignty  of  God,  yet 
never  in  a  fatalistic  or  pantiieistio  sense  so  as  to  ex- 
clude the  personal  freedom  and  responsibility  of 
man.  Hence  it  represents,  for  instance,  the  harden- 
ing of  Pliaraoh's  lieart,  as  tlie  judicial  act  and  pun- 
ishment of  God  (Exod.  iv.  21  ;  vii.  3),  and  at  the 
same  time  as  Pharaoh's  own  act  and  guilt  (ix.  34). 
David  certainly  could  not  mean  to  say  that  he  sinned 
with  tlie  intention  of  glorifying  (Jod — whicli  would 
have  destroyed  the  sincerity  of  Ids  repentance,  and 
exposed  him  to  tiic  just  condemnation  of  Paul  in 
ver.  8 — but  that  his  sin  was  overruled  by  God  for 
the  greater  manifestation  of  His  justice.  God  never 
does  evil,  nor  wills  any  man  to  do  evil,  in  order 
that  good  may  come  out  of  it,  but  He  exercises  His 
power,  wisdom,  and  love  in  overruling  all  evil  for 
good.  It  is  not  the  sinner  who  glorifies  God  through 
his  sin,  but  God  wlio  glorifies  Himself  tln-ough  tlie 
sinner.  Comp.  also  the  remarks  of  Huidcld  and 
Hengstenberg  on  Ps.  li.  (j. — P.  S.] 

Ver.  o.  But  if  our  unrighteousness,  &c.  [A 
new  objection  wiiicli  migiit  be  su;:ge.-.ted  by  the 
o;rfi)s'  in  ver.  4  ;  namely,  if  man's  sin  redounds  to 
the  glory  of  God,  and  sets  His  righteousness  in  a 
clearer  light  (a5  in  the  ciu-ic  of  David),  it  is  a  means 
to  a  good  end,  and  hence  it  ought  not  to  be  pun- 
ished. Paul  admits  tlie  premise,  but  denies  tiie  con- 
clusion, ver.  I). — P.  S.]  Meyer  lakes  here  tiiKxirt 
in  a  very  general  and  coniprehensive  sense,  without 
regard  to  the  legal  element  contained  in  it,  and  ex- 
plains: "an  aimormal  ethical  disposition."*  By  this 
definition  the  wicked,  the  unholy,  the  bad,  can  be 
denoted  ;  but  unriijhtcouxuexx  is  misconduct  in  oppo- 
sition to  the  law  ami  tiie  right.  On  (TrvtffTavat, 
see  tiie  Lexica ;  also  Kom.  v.  8  ;  2  Cor.  vii.  11,  &c. 
[iilso  Textual  Xote  "■]. 

What   shaU   we   say?      7't   ii>o'<fitv.      A 


•  [Comp.  lIo(l(?o  :  "aitKt'a  is  not  to  be  ttikon  in  the  re- 
rtricti'd  BoiiKc  of  iiijiifticr,  HOT  n»  cquiva'ont  to  aniaria  in 
the  prooeUliig  verso,  l)Ut  in  tln'  c'lnjiireliencivc  Hcnsc  of  im- 
righ'ioufnest,  vtickfiliitu.  It  ia  the  uppositc  of  hiHoxoavin), 
rrclilwlr,  rightfoutntsi,  which  incluJuit  ull  morul  exoel- 
loi.ce."— r.  8.J 


form  which  often  occurs  in  Paul  (chap.  iv.  1  ;  vi.  1, 
&c.).  It  is  peculiar  to  rabbinical  dialectics,  and  ii 
very  common  in  the  Talmud  {quid  est  dicendutn  *), 
It  is  a  formula  of  meditation  on  a  ditliculty,  a  prob- 
lem, in  which  there  is  danger  of  a  false  conclusion. 
It  was  also  in  use  among  tlie  clas>ies.  [8ee  Tho- 
luek.] Tlie  sentence,  if  our  unrighteousntsi^  kc,  is 
true,  but  the  following  conclusion  is  rejected  as  false. 
The  Apostle  certainly  assumes  tliat  an  unbelieving 
Jew  could  raise  this  olijeetion,  but  he  makes  it  him- 
self. Tliis  is  evident,  first,  iVom  the  interrogative 
form  ;  second,  from  the  position  of  the  question  in 
such  a  manner  that  a  negative  answer  is  expect- 
ed ;  f  third,  from  the  addition  :  humanly  speak- 
ing,  xara  uvO()iii7iov  /.iyio.  Tiiis  expression 
is  common  among  the  rabbis,  "  as  men  speak  "  (see 
Tholuek) ;  the  term  ctvO(Jif)/iirioi;  /.a/.nv  [humane 
loqui\  also  occurs  in  the  classics  [see  the  examples 
quoted  by  Tiioluck].  The  expression  y.aTo.  arfyo., 
resting  on  tlie  antitliesis  between  God  and  man,  de- 
notes, with  Paul,  now  the  opposition  betweim  the 
common  sinful  conduct  and  opinions  of  men,  and 
the  conduct  and  opinions  in  the  light  of  revelation ; 
and  now  the  opposition  between  common  human 
rights  and  customs  and  the  theocratic  rights  (GaL 
iii.  15,  and  other  places).  Prom  this  addition  it 
does  not  follow  that  the  question,  /i/y  o()izoc,  must 
be  regarded  as  affirmative  (see  Aleyer,  against  Plii- 
lippi). [Tiie  plirase  y.uTa  avO(>(o7Tov  proves 
nothing  against  inspiration.  The  Apostle  here  puts 
himself  into  the  place  of  otlier  hkhi,  using  their 
thouglits  and  arguments,  but  expressly  rejecting 
theiiK— P.  S.] 

Ver.  6.  For  then  how  shall  God  judge  the 
■world  ?  This  does  not  mean  :  God  would  then  not 
be  al)le  to  judge  the  world  ;  but,  according  to  the 
usual  explanation :  Since  it  is  universally  agreed 
among  religious  people  that  God  will  be  the  Judge 
of  the  world,  the  conclusion  alluded  to  must  be 
rejected.  Tlie  argument  is  therefore  a  reduclio  ad 
ahsnrdiim.\  (RUckert :  tlie  jiroof  is  weak  !)  Coc- 
ceius  [Reiehe],  t)lsliauseu,  and  others,  refer  /.ofTiioq 
(according  to  rabbinical  usage  of  language)  to  the 
Gentile  world,  and  the  proof  is  thus  conceived : 
Even  Gentile  idolatry  must  bring  to  light  the  glory 
of  the  true  God  ;  and  yet  God  will  judge  the  Gen- 
tile  world.  Therefore  the  unlielief  of  some  Jews 
cannot  escape  the  judgment,  even  though  tlieir  un- 
rigliieousness  corroborates  the  rigliteoiisness  of  God. 
But  there  is  no  ]»roper  foundation  for  this  explana- 
tion in  the  text ;  and  besides,  it  would  only  remove 
a  smaller  ditliculty  by  a  greater  one,  and  in  a  way 
that  woulii  commend  itself  only  to  Jewjsli  jirejudice. 
The  New  Testament  idea  of  the  general  judgment  is 
universal.  Even  the  antithesis  of  zofTiio,-  and, -7a- 
aUfia,  jov  fe/for  cannot  be  applied  here.     With  the 

t  [  M  >)  o5iitot  6  9t6%  ;  in  nrgnlivr  interro^ntions  uri  (m^'W 
)lm-h  tiichi  f)  is  used  when  a  nepitive,  ou  {imnni^  when  a 
))Os)tivo  :iiis»'i'r  is  expected.  See  Winer,  p.  470  ;  lliirtung, 
Piirlik.  ii.  88;  nnd  Meyer  in  Inc.;  npfiiist  HQckort  and 
Pliilippi.  Tiiul  does  not  !ii«k  :  Is  unl  (3oiI  uiijunt  I  but,  Is 
Ood  unjust  ?  expentiiiir  »  niCiitivc  reply  ;  nnd  he  apolo- 
gizes even  for  pU'tiiiR  the  qurstioii  in  this  foiin. — 1'.  .S.j 

}  iCiilvin  :  "  Snmil  oi-gumrntum  ub  ipsiiis  Dii  iiffirin  quo 
priihtl  id  efft  impiiitsibili' ;  jnilinihil  I)  us  hnnc  miinjum, 
ergn  iiijuflus  esse  nun  pntefl."  So.  sulwtnntiallv,  Oiotius, 
Tholuek,  De  Wetfe,  P.a.kert,  Knllner,  Meyei,  Uxlite.  It 
seem-  tlml  the  Apostle  here  iis-.unii's  the  very  tiling  lio  is 
to  prove.  Hut  lie  reasons  from  iicknowledvjod  premises: 
Ood  in  universally  conceived  as  the  Jud|;e  uf  nil  niiinliind  ; 
this  iiei'essiirily  Implies  thiit  He  is  ,jusi.  The  ojij^o-ite  it 
inconsistent  with  tlie  idea  of  Ood  us  Judge,  and  with  lh« 
nature  of  the  judgment.— I*.  S.] 


CHAPTER   III.   1-20. 


119 


usual  explanation  (Tholuck,  Meyer,  and  others)  it 
may  nevertheless  be  asked,  whether  a  sentence 
which  has  been  dismissed  with  /<?/  yivoiro,  stands  in 
further  need  of  a  proof.  According  to  our  construc- 
tion, the  sentence  can  also  be  explanatory,  and  stand 
in  connection  with  the  following  (see  below). 

Vers.  7,  8.  But  if  the  truth  of  God,  &c  The 
objection  of  ver.  7  appears  only  to  repeat  that  of 
ver.  0 ;  therefore  it  is  difficult  to  connect  it  with  what 
precedes.  The  difficulty  is  solved  as  follows:  (1.)  Cal- 
vin, Beza,  Grotius  [Bengel,  Riickert],  Philippi,  and 
otliers  think  tliat  the  objection  of  ver.  5  is  only 
continued  and  established  in  ver.  7 ;  and  the  words 
y.ara  av9(Jii)7Tov  Uy<t>  to  xda/ioc  (ver.  6)  should  be 
read,  according  to  Philippi,  parenthetically,  as  a  pre- 
liminary outburst  of  apostolic  indignation.  By  this 
means,  the  dialectics  assume  the  shape  of  an  in- 
volved controversy,  in  which  the  Apostle  prema- 
turely interrupts  the  opponent.  Tholuck  believes 
that  he  can  produce  similar  examples  in  proof  of 
this  (chap.  vii.  25,  and  Gal.  iii.  3,  4).  (2.)  Meyer : 
"The  inn  mTit;  /.(Jivfl  6  Otoe;  t'ov  /.oatiov  (ver.  6) 
is  now  confirmed  thus  :  The  fact  already  considered 
(ver.  4  f.),  that  God's  truth  is  glorified  by  the  lie  of 
man,  removes  every  ground  for  supposing  that  an 
unrighteous  God  (sic .'),  who  is  to  judge  the  world, 
will  judge  man  as  a  sinner,"  &c.  Apart  from  the 
quaint  construction  of  the  thought,  the  true  state- 
ment in  ver.  5  would  be  treated  as  untrue.  [De 
"Wette,  Alford,  Hodge,  though  differing  somewliat 
in  detail,  likewise  regard  vers.  7  and  8  as  the  ampli- 
fication and  confirmation  of  the  answer  given  in  ver. 
6  to  the  objection  stated  in  ver.  5.  If  this  olijec- 
tion  be  valid,  then  not  only  may  every  sinner  claim 
exemption,  but  it  would  follow  that  it  is  right  to  do 
evil  that  good  may  come.  This  is  certainly  a  more 
easy  and  natural  connection  than  the  one  under  (1.), 
and  best  explains  the  yaq.  But  if  we  read  ti  di, 
we  must  regard  ver.  7  as  introducing  a  new  ob- 
jection, as  in  a  dialogue  between  the  Apostle  and 
an  interlocutor — an  objection  which  is  indignantly 
resented  by  Paul  as  a  blasphemous  slander.  But 
see  the  remarks  under  the  next  heads.  —  P.  S.] 
(3.)  Even  if  we  find  here,  according  to  Thodoret, 
the  language  of  a  Jew  in  dispute  with  the  Apostle, 
the  sentence  does  not  appear  to  be  the  continuation 
of  the  thought  of  ver.  5.  Then  the  Jew  has  first 
drawn  the  conclusion  from  ver.  5  that  God  is  unjust 
if  He  punish  sins  by  which  He  is  gloiified.  Here 
he  would  deduce  the  conclusion,  from  ver.  4,  that 
the  man,  who  by  his  \('tt(jfiau  contributes  to  the 
glory  of  God,  is  neither  a  sinner,  nor  punishable ; 
rather,  that  he  may  do  evil  that  good  may  come. 
Thus  two  cases,  which  would  constitute  a  parallel 
to  chap.  ii.  3,  4 — the  first  case  denoting  fanaticism, 
the  other,  antinoniianism.  But  there  are  considera- 
tions presented  by  the  text  itself  against  this  view. 
First,  the  yd(j  at  the  beginning  of  ver.  7  ;  which, 
for  this  reason,  has  been  removed  by  many  Codd. 
(B.  D.,  &c.,  the  Vulgate,  &c.)  as  an  impediment  to 
the  proper  understanding  of  the  passage.  Then  the 
aorist,  i.nf()iann'af%',  which  Meyer  thinks  should 
be  understood  from  the  standpoint  of  the  general 
judgment  (Tholuck  regards  it  as  present,  with  Lu- 
ther). Further,  Meyer  must  interpolate  a  ti  before 
the  uTi  in  ver.  8  (rt  firi,  quidnl?).  Also,  if  Paul 
be  not  permitted  to  speak  in  the  name  of  the  un- 
believing Jew  and  interrupt  himself,  an  ijunii  must 
stand  before  fi/.ci(T(f>jf(orfi f&a.  We  are  therefore 
of  the  opinion  that  the  hypothesis  of  the  interlocu- 
tion of  the  obstinate  Jew  is  not  correct.     (4.)  Our 


explanation  is  contauied  already  in  the  translation. 
[See  Textual  Notes  '"  and  '\]  The  Apostle  says 
first,  God  does  not  declare  wrath  on  all  who  havt 
glorified  his  failhfulness  by  their  unfaithfulness. 
Granted  that  His  covenant  faithfulness  has,  by  meann 
of  my  unfaithfulness,  shown  itself  more  -powerful 
and  conspicuous  to  His  glory  (chap.  v.  8),  that  is, 
that  I  have  finally  become  a  believer — how  ?  am 
I  also  still  judged  as  a  sinner?  Answer  :  No.  And 
therefore  we  would  by  no  means  continue  in  un- 
belief, as  those  rn't'i,-  in  ver.  3,  in  order,  by  wicked 
conduct,  to  accomplish  a  good  purpose,  God's  glory 
— which  is  the  principle  laid  by  some  to  our  charge. 
Men  who  act  thus  (and  the  Tivii;  do  act  thus)  are 
justly  condemned.  Here  the  ay.i'jOfia  of  God  is  the 
agent,  and  ^'fZafia  is  the  object.  In  ver.  5  there 
was  the  reverse,  the  adixia  of  man  being  the  agent, 
and  God's  righteousness  the  object.  In  ver.  7  the 
question  is  concerning  the  predominance  or  conquest 
(see  V.  20)  on  the  side  of  the  ah'j&na  for  the  honor 
of  God ;  in  ver.  5,  the  question  is  merely  concern- 
ing the  bringing  of  the  truth  to  light.  The  solution 
of  the  difliculty  lies  in  the  tnftJtaan'Gfv. — On 
the  different  explanations  of  xaj-oi,  see  Tholuck. 
I  as  well  as  others  [De  Wette,  Alford]  ;  even  I,  a 
Jew  [Bengel] ;  even  I,  a  Gentile  [Coccej.,  01s- 
hausen]  ;  even  I,  Paul  [Fritzsche]  ;  even  I,  who 
have  added  to  the  glorification  of  God  [De  Wette, 
Tholuck]. 

Ver.  8.  [As  we  are  blasphemously  (not,  slan- 
derously) reported.  The  blasphemy  refers  not 
only  to  Paul,  but  in  the  last  instance  to  God,  whose 
holy  and  righteous  character  is  outraged  by  the  im- 
pious maxinj,  to  do  evil  that  good  may  come.] — In 
reference  to  the  oTt,  we  must  obscl've  that,  in  con- 
sequence of  attraction,  the  noutjaio/t  fv  is  united 
with  ?.iyfi,v.  —  The  y.aOoic  j] '/.aa  (fr,  ^(  ov  f  tOa 
leads  us  to  conclude  that  the  Jews  charged  the 
Apostle,  or  the  Christians  in  general,  with  the 
alleged  principle :  The  end  sanctifies  the  means 
(Tholuck,  Calvin).  Usual  acceptation  :  the  doctrine 
of  superabounding  mercy  (chap.  v.  20)  is  meant  (see 
Tholuck).  Meyer :  "  The  labors  of  the  Apostle 
among  the  Gentiles  could  occasion  such  slanders  on 
the  part  of  the  Jews."  According  to  the  view  of 
the  Jews,  the  Christians  converted  the  Gentile  world 
to  Monotheism,  by  betraying  and  corrupting  the 
covenant  of  the  Jews. — Whose  condemnation  is 
just.  The  (')v  does  not  refer  directly  to  the  slan- 
derers as  such,  since  this  is  an  accessory  notion,  but 
to  the  principle,  let  us  do  evil  that  good  may  come, 
and  to  the  fact  lying  at  its  root,  the  hardness  of  the 
Jews  in  unfaihfulncss,  as  they  more  clearly  showed 
the  covenant  faithfulness  of  God.  But,  indirectly, 
the  charge  of  those  slanderers  is  also  answered  at 
the  same  time.  Ver.  7  favors  our  explanation,  [dv 
refers  to  the  subject  in  7rot»/ff "»/'"'>  to  those  who 
speak  and  act  according  to  this  pernicious  and  blas- 
phemous maxim. — P.  S.] 

Thibd  Paragkaph,  vehs.  9-20. 

The  transition  of  the  covenant  of  law  to  th« 
covenant  of  grace  is  already  indicated  in  the  preced- 
ing  paragraph.  This  is  brought  to  pass  in  part  by 
the  constant  unfliithfulness  of  individuals,  and  in 
part  by  the  transitory  unfaithfulness  of  others.  In 
every  case  Israel's  sin  is  manifested  in  this  covenant. 

Ver.  9.  What  then  ?  It  must  not  be  read, 
with  fficumenius  [Koppe,  Hofmann,  Th.  Schott],  ri 
oiV    7i(Jor/6iiida   [omitting  the  interrogation  siga 


120 


THE    EPISTLE    OF   PAUL   TO    THE   ROMANS. 


after  orr] ;  against  which  is  the  ok  The  introduc- 
tion of  the  result  refers  to  the  foregoing  section 
jnder  tlie  point  of  view  that  Israel  certainly  lias 
advantages  on  tiie  objective  side,  but  none  on  the 
subjective.  This  is  now  extended  further.  II(>oi- 
j(  6  lit  Oct.  Explanations:  L  The  middle  voice  here 
has  tlie  signification  of  the  active :  Have  we  [the 
Jews]  the  ])reference  ?  do  we  excel  ?  have  we  an 
advantage?  (Tlicophylact,  (Ecumenius,  the  old  com- 
mentators in  general.)  Also  De  Wette,  who  says : 
This  is  the  only  suitable  sense.*  Theiefore  the  read- 
ing n(>oxaTi/oftfv.  Meyer  urges  against  this  view  : 
(a.)  Tne  us;ige  of  langujige  ;  f  (6)  the  previous  ad- 
mission of  Israel's  advantage  [ver.  2,  no/.'u  xara 
TtdvTu  TiioTToi',  which  seems  to  conflict  with  ov 
ndvTci^,  vcr.  9. — P.  S.].  2.  The  middle  voice  in 
the  signitieation  of:  to  hold  before,  to  hold  for  one's 
protection.  Hemsterlmys,  Venenia,  &c.  (Fritzsche, 
figuratively:  Do  we  need  a  pretext y)  Meyer:  Have 
we  a  protection  ?  That  is,  have  we  something  with 
which  to  defend  or  screen  ourselves?  Agiunst  this, 
Tholuck  raises  the  oljjection  that  the  verb,  in  this 
case,  should  have  an  accu.sative.  [Have  we  atti/ 
</</;/(/ for  a  pretext?  Answer:  Nothing  (instead  of : 
Not  at  all,  not  in  the  least). — P.  S.]  3.  The  pas- 
sive construction  (G-A-umenius  II.,  Wetstein,  Storr). 
[CEcuinenius  takes  the  word  as  the  question  of  a 
Gentile:  Are  we  surpassed  by  the  Jews?  Wet- 
stein, as  the  question  of  a  Jew :  At-e  we  surpassed 
by  the  Gentiles?  Reiche  and  Olshausen  :  Are  we 
prefrrid  by  God  ?  This  last  form  of  the  passive 
rendering  agrees,  as  to  sense,  with  the  active  ren- 
dering sub  No.  1.  But  the  Apostle  is  not  speak- 
ing here  of  God's  favor,  but  of  man's  sin,  and 
shows  that  the  Jews,  though  highly  favored  by  God, 
are  yet  subjectively  no  better,  and  even  more 
guilty,  than  the  Gentiles.— P.  S.]  4.  The  middle 
form  w;i3  most  easily  applicable  to  the  intransitive, 
to  be  pronihi'id,  to  excel ;  therefore  we  translate, 
^^  Are  we  aliecul,  or,  beltr?'"  Tiioluck  properly 
calls  to  mind  that  so  many  of  the  (Jreek  fatiiers 
have  taken  no  exception  to  the  middle  form.  It  is 
quite  against  the  context  when  Olshausen  [?]  and 
Reiche  read  the  word  as  a  question  of  the  (Jentiles 
(shall  we  be  preferred?). — ()v  ndvTwt;,  Not  in 
the  least.  Grotius,  and  others  [Wetstein,  Kiill- 
ner],  literally  :  not  altor/elJier,  not  in  all  respects  [as 
in  1  Cor.  V.  10,  where  navTioi;  limits  the  prohibi- 
tion.— P.  S. )  This  is  contrary  to  the  context.  [For 
the  Apostle  proves  the  absolute  equality  of  guilt 
before  the  law.  ol,  navrioq  is  here  =  Trarrwy  oi\ 
1  Cor.  xvi.  12 ;  ndvTox;  strengthens  the  negation, 
no,  hi  no  wise  ;  not  at  all  ;  oi'i)aiii'h;  (Tlicophylact) ; 
neqnarpiam  (Vulgate) ;  durchans  nicht  ;  ncin,  r/anz 
und  f/iir,  i.   e.,   nein,   in   keincr    Weise,   kcineswrgs. 

♦  [So  nlso  the  Vulpate  (pnrollimuy),  Lnther,  Calvin, 
Bez.a,  E.  V.,  Orotiiis,  Binsol,  Tholuck,  Ruckcrl  (2d  ed.), 
R/;ichc,  I'liilippi,  liuur,  Bluoinfluld,  Alford,  Wonlnworth, 
IIodKO,  who  -"iiVK,  Willi  1)0  Wette,  that  tliis  is  the  only  in- 
torpri'trition  which  suit^  here. — F.  8.] 

t  (HoTiietimes,  however,  the  middle  and  the  active  form 
of  the  rt.iiiie  verb  arc  iiscd_  witliout  a  perccptihle  difTeronco; 
as  in  Ijiike  xv.  0  (ruy«aA(t  rovi  ^iKovt  ;  ver.  !l,  irvyKaXtirai 
.T«  </>iAa<  (a-'coniinc;  to  Liieliiiiiinn  ;  while  'I'isrliendorf  reiulH 
th.'  ac-tive);  .JaracH  iv. '2  f.,  atT«rT«  and  aiTt'iTOt ;  ActH  xvi. 
16,  iraptlxt ;  xix.  24,  iraptiyfTo,  piiriiiihat.  Com'p.  Winer, 
0-"m„i.,  p.  '.>40  f.,  7th  ed.  IIi.t''  is,  it  is  true,  no  rxiimple 
of  till'  iioiive  use  of  npoixonat.  Jiut  the  luidille  voice  may 
havcheon  preferred  here  to  the  active,  hecause  the  Apostle 
iipoakH  of  11  iiuperiority  wliirh  the  .Iowh  claimed  for  them- 
selves, for  ihir  b'ni-fij  ;  com)>.  aeoMTov  iraptxoiitvot  Tviroi-, 
Titus  ii.7.  Thii",  then,  comes  to  ihe  interpretation  of  T,ani!e, 
rub  Xn.  4.  The  reading  of  Cod.  H  lemcr  :  n'poKaT/;^oM<i' 
wtftiaaov,  givott  the  name  Bcuiie.--r.  S.J 


This  sense  was  probably  indicated  by  the  emphatit 
pronunciation  of  navrim;,  and  a  stop  after  oi'.  In  1 
Cor.  V.  lu,  on  the  contrary,  the  Trco-ro/s',  non  omnino^ 
limits  the  prohibition  contained  in  ov.  Comp.  Winer, 
p.  olf),  and  -Meyer  in  loc. — P.  S.] — For  -we  have 
before  charged,  7i()orjri.a(Td/i  i  f>a.  Namely, 
in  the  previous  part  of  the  Einstle  [i.  18  H'.,  with 
reference  to  the  Gentiles ;  ii.  1  ff.,  with  reference  to 
the  Jews. — P.  S.].  The  7T^oai.Ti,a(T0ai  [from  atria, 
motive,  reaxon,  and  in  a  forensic  sense,  charge^ 
ground  of  accnsition]  is  a  compound  word  without 
example.* — Under  sin  [i'"/'  d/iaiiriav  u'cat].  Not 
merely,  are  sinners  (Fritzsche).  Meyer:  are  gov- 
erned by  sin.  He  denies,  against  Hofmann,  that  the 
question  here  is  eonccrning  the  punishal)leness  or 
guilt  of  sin  [which  is  to  be  infh-red  afterwards  from 
the  fact  of  v(p  diia^jriav  tirctt].  But  this  is  implied 
in  ixlrMdOcu.    The  atria  is  the  ground  of  the  charge. 

Vers.  10-19.  As  it  is  TO-ritten.  [y iyi^ian' 
rat,  occurs  nineteen  times  in  this  Epistle. — P,  S.l 
Paul  had  [ji-eviously  proved  the  guilt  of  the  Jews  from 
their  Uving  experience,  with  only  a  general  allusion 
to  the  Scriptures ;  he  now  confirms  his  declaration 
in  the  strongest  way  by  Scripture  proofs.  Under 
the  presupposition  of  exact  knowledge  of  the  Old 
Testament,  ral)binical  writers  also  connect  various 
testimonies  without  specifying  the  place  where  they 
may  be  found.  At  the  head  there  stands  Ps.  xiv. 
1-3,  from  ver.  10  to  ver.  12,  where  we  have  a  de- 
scription of  universal  sinfulness  as  well  of  the  Jewa 
as  of  the  Gentiles.  There  then  follows  a  combina- 
tion from  Ps.  V.  i)  and  cxl.  3  and  Ps.  x.  7,  in  vers. 
13,  14,  as  a  description  of  sins  of  the  tongue.  Then 
Lsa.  lix.  7,  8,  quoted  in  vers.  16,  17,  as  a  delineation 
of  sins  of  commi-ssion.  Finally,  Ps.  xxxvi.  1,  in 
ver.  18,  as  a  characterization  of  the  want  of  the  fear 
of  God  lying  at  the  root  of  all.f  The  quotations 
are  free  recollections  and  applications  from  the  Sep- 
tnagint  [yet  with  several  deviations].  Finally,  in 
ver.  19,  there  follows  the  explanation  that  these 
charges  were  throughout  just  as  applicable  to  the 
Jews  as  to  the  Gentiles,  and  indeed  chictly  to  the 
Jews.  [The  passages  quoted  describe  the  moral 
corruption  of  the  times  of  David  and  the  prophets, 
but  indirectly  of  all  times,  since  human  nature  is  es- 
sentially the  same  always  and  everywhere.  In  Ps. 
xiv.  the  general  application  is  most  obvious,  and 
hence  it  is  quoteii  first. — P.  S.] 

Ver.  10.  There  is  none  righteous.  [Paul 
uses  Ai/.at,oi;  for  21i:"n'l"- ,  LXX.  :  ttohTiv  /(irjrTTo- 
Ttjra,  do'T  of  good.]  Refers  the  ;TonTiy  /(it-nrortira 
of  the  Si'ptuagint  to  the  law.  I'/ic  want  of  right- 
eous7iess  is  the  inscription  of  Uie  whole ;  not  as 
Paul's  word  (KiJllncr,  &c.),  but  as  free  quotation 
from  Ps.  xiv. 

Ver.  11.  There  in  none  that  nnderstandeth. 
While  6  afviuivX  represents  the  >v<r/;//ii//i/ of  the 
religious  understanding,  txCi/roiv  §  denotes  the  de- 

•  [Tho  Greek  classics  use  npoieaTrjyopdv  inst.-ad  ;  Meyer. 

♦  (Meyer:  1.  Sinful  mmlilinn  (vers.  10-12);  2.  sinftil' 
mtinif-nliilirwx,  in  word  (13,  14),  and  ia  deed  (1.V17)  ;  3.  lh« 
anurcf  of  sin  (Is).  — 1'.  H.) 

J  [truviiav,  iiccordiiiR  to  tho  accentuaticm  of  I>achmann; 
or  wvimv,  as  Alford  nci-cnfuates.  It  is  tlie  usual  fonn  Id 
the  Septuapnt  for  <ruviti<t  (comp.  Rom.  iii.  11  ;  ifatt.  xiii. 
23,  var.),  and  is  derived  from  tho  obsolete  root  trvvtiut  for 
uvvirtm.  See  Winer,  p.  77  (§  H,  3).  It  answers  to  the 
Hebrew  b'S'^TS  ,  a  word  oflen  used  to  express  tho  righl 
understandiuK  of  relipious  truth.— P.  8.] 

%  iStronirer  than  the  simide  verb;  comp.  1  Vet  i.  10 
very  frequcut  in  tho  LXX. ;  Meyer. — r.  S.j 


CHAPTER  III.    1-20. 


121 


tire  aud  e^orf  of  the  spirit.  See  the  original  text, 
where  the  negation  is  characterized  as  God's  fruitless 
request.     [See  Textual  Note  '*.] 

Ver.  12.  They  are  all  gone  out  of  the 
way  (TID  ;  nbxj ). — The  ewi;  iv6<i,  down  to  one 
iiicl.  [A  Hebraism,  inN"723  ,  for  old't  di;,  not  so 
mud.  as  one.  Conip.  the  Latin  ad  unum  omnes, 
which  likewise  includes  all. — P.  S.] 

Ver.  13.  An  open  sepulchre.  Estius  [Ben- 
gel,  Tholuck,  Hodge]  :  breathing  out  the  noxious 
odor  of  corruption.  Meyer  prefers  the  meaning : 
As  rapacious  and  insatiable  as  a  grave  which  awaits 
the  corpse ;  in  this  sense,  the  quiver  of  the  Chal- 
deans is  called  "  an  open  sepulchre,"  Jer.  v.  16 — 
t.  e.,  destructive  (also  Calvin,  and  others).  But  thus 
ver.  15  would  be  anticipated. — They  have  used 
deceit.  The  imperfect  i  do  ki^ova  av*  denotes 
continuous  action ;  they  have  become  deceivers  for 
the  future ;  that  this  is  their  settled  character. — 
The  poison  of  asps.  Behind  the  cunning  of  false- 
hood there  is  deadly  malice. 

Ver.  14.  Full  of  cursing.  The  gross,  passion- 
ate form  of  ungodly  speech,  alternating  with  double- 
tongued,  false  language.  The  bitterness  or  ani- 
mosity of  their  hateful  selfishness  is  the  standing 
ground  of  their  cursing.  [Paul  here  condenses  the 
translation  of  the  Septuagint,  omitting  the  "  deceit," 
as  he  had  already  mentioned  it  in  ver.  13. — P.  S.] 

Vers.  15-17.  Their  feet  are  swift.  The  sym- 
bol of  their  excited  course  of  conduct.  [On  the 
slightest  provocation  they  commit  murder.  Paul 
here  again  condenses  the  sense  of  Isa.  lix.  7.]  Their 
many  different  ways,  full  of  destruction  [avv- 
r  (I  I /I, It  a,  literally,  concussion,  bruising  together, 
then  catamitv,  destruc.ion'\  and  misery  [ra^. at- 
71 II)  (>  I  a  ],  (destruction  the  cause,  miser;/  the  re- 
sult) are,  as  the  ways  of  war  of  all  against  all, 
contrasted  with  the  one  v^ay  of  peace  [6t)6r 
li^  ijvtji^^  By  this  we  must  undoubtedly  under- 
stand not  merely  a  way  in  which  they  should  enjoy 
peace  (Meyer),  but  an  objective  way  of  peace  in 
which  they  should  become  the  children  of  peace. 
[The  way  that  leads  to  peace,  in  opposition  to  the 
ways  which  lead  to  ruin  and  misery.]  Oh/,  eyvo)- 
aav,  Grotius:  Hebrceis  nescire  aliqnis  dicitur,  quod 
non  curat  (Jer.  iv.  22). 

[Ver.  18.  This  quotation  from  Ps.  xxxvi.  1  goes 
back  to  the  fountain  of  the  various  sins  enumerated. 
The  fear  of  God,  or  piety,  is  the  beginning  of  wis- 
dom and  the  mother  of  virtue ;  the  want  of  that 
fear,  or  impiety,  is  the  beginning  of  folly  and  the 
mother  of  vice. — P.  S.] 

Ver.  19.  Now  we  know.  The  Jews,  indeed, 
would  not  readily  admit  this,  but  were  inclined  to 
refer  such  declarations  exclusively  to  the  Gentiles. 
[But  the  passages  above  quoted  from  the  Psalms 
and  the  Prophets,  speak  not  of  heathen  as  heathen, 
but  of  fallen  men  as  such,  and  therefore  are  ajiplica- 
ble  to  Jews  as  well. — P.  S.] — The  law.  Tliis  is 
the  Old  Testament,  especially  in  its  legal  relation  [as 
a  norm  or  rule  to  which  they  should  conform  their 
faith  and  conduct ;  John  x.  34,  where  our  Lord 
quotes  a  Psalm  as  in  "  the  law,"  and  other  pas- 
sages].— Who  are  under  the  law.  That  is,  the 
Jews ;  also  particularly  from  the  legal  standpoint. 
Cilov  and  others  have  understood,  by  the  law,  the 

*  [An  Alexandrian  and  Hellenistic  form  for  i5o\iovv ; 
see  Suirz,  D:aK  A'ux.,  p.  Gl,  and  Winer,  p.  74,  where  simi- 
lar examp'es  are  quoted  :  as  tlxoaixv  for  eix""!  ^^i-^o<Tav  for 
i&iiovv,  Tt'^eKa^oaav,  i<f>dyo<Tav,  eiSotrav,  iiC. — P.  S.] 


law  as  distinguished  from  the  gospel ;  and  the  ex 
pression,  "  those  who  are  under  the  law,"  as  mean 
ing  all  men.  But  this  is  application,  not  expla 
nation. — That  every  mouth  may  be  stopped. 
On  the  question  whether  iva  may  be  understood 
iy. par  i/.iitq  \so  that,  instead  of  in  order  tlial^,  see 
Tholuck  aud  Meyer.  Here  it  evidently  designates 
the  one  purpose  of  the  law,  to  produce  the  knowl. 
edge  of  sin,  but  other  purposes  are  not  excluded. 
The  (f:()ci(Tafi,v  ro  aro/ita  (Ps.  cvii.  42)  means, 
in  a  religious  relation,  that  it  represents  men  aa 
avuTTo/.oyr'jTovt:  at  the  tribunal  of  Divine  justice ;  so 
that  they  "  cannot  answer  God  one  of  a  thousand." 
— The  whole  w^orld.  [Not  to  be  restricted,  with 
Grotius  :  maxima  pars  hominmn,  but  all  men,  Jews 
as  well  as  Gentiles.]  Paul  has  already  declared  this 
of  the  heathen  portion  in  chap.  i.  20,  32. —  [Should 
become  {y ivtixai, ),  in  their  own  conviction, 
guilty,  subject  to  justice.  i';r6()mo(,-  =  zotcc- 
x^troc,  'dvo/oq  dixri,  vno/.n/tavoq  nfmifjiaoQ,  i.  e., 
not  only  guilty,  but  convicted  of  guilt,  and  there- 
fore  obnoxious  to  punishment  [straffdUig). — Before 
God,  to  whom  satisfaction  for  sin  is  due. — P.  S.] 

Ver.  20.*  Because  {Desshalb  weil).  Since 
Si,6ri,  can  be  propterea  quod  (because)  as  well  as 
propterea  (therefore),  Tholuck  [with  Beza  and 
Morus]  prefers  propterea,  the  conclusive  form.  But 
the  Apostle  here  goes  farther  out,  and  comes  to  that 
universal  condemnatory  judgment  of  the  law.  [See 
Texti.-al  Note  -".] 

By  works  of  the  law.  Explanations  of 
1'  o  /<  o  c  : 

1.  The  ritual  law  (Theodoret,  Pelagius,  Cornelius 
a  Lapide,  Semler,  Amnion,  and  others).f  On  the 
contrary,  Augustine  \  and  Thomas  Aquinas  already 
referred  to  the  concluding  sentence  of  the  verse : 
"  by  the  law  comes  knowledge  of  sin."  Paul,  more- 
over, understands  the  word  laiv  throughout  in  its 
totality,  although  he  does  not  ignore  its  several  parts 
and  differences.  [The  decalogue  is  merely  the  quin- 
tessence of  the  whole  law.  The  antithesis  is  not : 
the  ceremonial  law  and  the  moral  law,  but :  works 
of  the  law  and  works  of  faith. — P.  S.] 

2.  The  Mosaic  law  alone  [but  as  a  whole,  both 
moral  and  ritual]  is  meant  (Meyer).  [So  also  Phi- 
lippi :  the  wliole  revealed  law  as  an  undivided  unity, 
yet  with  special  regard  to  the  moral  law. — P.  S.] 
But  against  this  is,  that  Paul  speaks  here,  and  in  the 


*  [On  ttis  importart  verse,  Dr.  Hodge  (pp.  125-133)  is 
very  full  and  clear ;  while  Alford  and  Wordsworth  pass  it 
over  very  slightly. — P.  S.] 

t  [Several  Roman  Catholic  and  Eationalistic  commenta- 
tors meet  from  opposite  extremes  im  Pelagian  ground,  and 
resolve  the  meaning  of  this  passage  simply  into  this  :  that 
men  are  not  justified  by  any  exteraal  rites  or  ceremonial 
works,  sucli  as  circnmcision  and  sacrifices,  but  only  by 
moral  acts  of  the  heart  and  will.  But  the  prevailing  Rom- 
ir-h  doctrine  is,  tliat  works  of  the  law  are  works  done  before 
regeneration,  which  have  only  the  merit  of  cougruity ; 
while  the  works  done  after  regeneration,  and  therefore 
under  the  impulse  oi  Divine  grace,  have  the  merit  of  con- 
dignity,  and  are  the  ground  of  acceptance  with  God. — P.  S.] 

X  [2>e  spirilu  ct  lilera  ad  Marcelliiunn,  cap.  8:  "Nee 
aiuHunl  quiid  leguiit :  '  quia  non  juslificabiUir  (x  Ige  omnii 
cam  coram  Deo''  (Rom.  iii.  20).  Potest  rnim  fieri  coram 
homuubus,  non  oulem  coram  iUo  qui  cordis  ipsius  et  intimm 
voluniatis  insjieclor  est.  .  .  .  Ac  ne  qnisquam  putarcl  hie 
apiislolum  ex  lege  dixisse  neminem  juxtificari,  qux  in  sacra- 
mentis  velenhus  ntulta  ointinetfigurala  prxcepUi,  unde  eliam 
ipsa  est  circumcisio  carnis  .  .  .  conlinuo  snbjunxil  quum 
legem  dixerit,  el  ait :  '  Per  legem  enim  cgnitiii  peccati '  (Rom. 
iii.  20)."  Augustine  agrees  with  the  Peformers  in  the  doc- 
trine of  total  depravity  and  salvation  by  fi-ee  grace  ivithout 
works,  but  agrees  ■n'ith  the  Roman  Catholic  view  of  the 
meaning  of  juftificat inn,  as  being  a  coi  linuous  processes 
sentially  identical  with  sanctification.— P.  S.J 


J  22 


THE   EPISTLE   OF  PAUL   TO   THE   ROMANS. 


previous  verse,  of  the  guilt  of  all  men  before  the 
law. 

3.  De  Wette  accepts  it  as  merely  the  moral  law, 
and  not  also  the  ritual  law.  Tiie  works  of  the  law, 
as  they  were  perforiiied  by  the  Jews,  and  would  also 
have  been  performed  by  the  Gentiles,  if  they  had 
been  placed  under  the  law  (Kiickert). 

4.  The  law  in  a  deeper  and  more  general  sense, 
as  it  was  written  not  only  on  the  Decalogue,  but  also 
in  the  heart  of  the  Gentiles,  and  embracing  moral 
deeds  of  both  Gentiles  and  Jews  (Tholuck  [also 
Storr,  Flatt,  Stuart] ).  Certainly  it  is  plain  from 
the  context,  that  the  Jewish  vouo^  here  represents 
a  universal  legislation.  [Tlie  Apostle  includes  the 
Gentiles  as  well  as  the  Jews  under  the  sentence  of 
condemnation,  because  they  do  not  come  up  to  their 
own  standard  of  virtue,  as  required  by  their  inner 
law  of  conscience;  ii.  15. — P.  S.] 

But  what  are  'works  of  the  law  [  e  (» y  a  ro^oc]  ? 
Explanations : 

1.  Works  produced  by  the  law,  without  the  im- 
pulse  of  the  Iloly  Spirit  [ro.ooi'  &&  genctivus  audorh 
or  caux(e'\.  So  especially  Roman  Catholic  exposi- 
tors, as  Bellarmiue  [Augustine,  Thomas  Aquinits]  ; 
and  also  some  Protestants,  as  Usteri,  Neander,  Phi- 
lippi  [Olshausen,  Hofmann,  even  Luther ;  see  Tho- 
luck, p.  137].  Philippi :  "  Not  the  works  whicli  the 
law  commnnds  —  for  he  who  does  these  is  reuUi/ 
riglUeous  (ii.  13) — but  those  which  the  law  effects 
(or  which  the  man  who  is  under  the  law  is  able  by 
its  aid  to  Ijring  forth)."  The  deeds  of  the  law  are 
ioya  vfx(jd  (lleb.  vi.  1);  the  vouoi;  cannot  t^oionooTj- 
aai,  [Gal.  iii.  21],  although  it  is  complete  iu  its 
method  and  destination.  On  Luther's  distinction 
between  doing  the  works  of  the  law  and  fuljilliug 
the  law  itself,  see  Tholuck. 

2.  The  deeds  required  or  prescribed  by  the  law. 
Protestant  expositors,  e,  g.,  Gerliard,  who  includes 
also  the  bona  opera  ralione  obj^'cti.  [So  iilso  Me- 
lanchthon,  Calvin,  Beza,  Riickert,  Fritzsehe,  De 
Wette,  Meyer,  llodge.  In  this  view,  the  i^jya  vo/iov 
include  all  good  works,  those  after  regeneration  as 
well  as  those  before.  Even  Abraham,  the  friend  of 
God,  was  not  justified  by  his  works,  ijut  by  faith. 
The  law  of  the  Old  Testament  is  holy,  just,  and 
good,  and  demands  perfect  conformity  to  the  will  of 
God,  which  is  true  holiness.  But  even  our  best 
works,  done  under  the  gospel  and  under  the  influ- 
ence of  Divine  grace,  are  imiierfect,  and  can  there- 
fore be  no  ground  of  justification.  Ilenee  the  most 
holy  men  of  all  ages  and  churches  never  depend  on 
their  own  works,  but  on  the  work  and  merits  of 
Christ,  for  final  acceptance  with  God. — P.  S.] 

3.  Tholuck  combines  the  two  explanations  [p. 
140] :  "  The  Apostle  includes  both  meanings,  so 
that,  in  some  passages,  the  meaning  of  the  deeds 
required  by  the  law,  and,  in  others,  that  of  the  deeds 
produced  by  the  law,  appears  more  prominent." 
But,  from  the  very  nature  of  the  case,  the  deeds 
required  by  the  law,  and  those  produced  by  the  law, 
correspond  to  each  other  on  the  legal  stand])oint. 
The  unity  of  both  are  the  works  of  the  legal  stiind- 
point,  )LS  it  may  be  found  also  among  the  heathen 
(e.  g.^  Creon  in  the  Antigone  of  Sophocles).  The 
law  is,  for  thoxe  subjected  to  it,  an  analytical  letter, 
which  is  related  to  the  external  work  ;  but,  on  the 
contrary,  for  those,  who  seek  God,  it  is  a  synthetical 
Bynil)()l,  wliicli  is  related  to  the  ilis[)osition  of  the 
heart.  Tlie  former  meaning  ap|)lies  certainly  to 
every  man,  but  only  to  introduce  him  to  the  uiuler- 
Btauding  of  its  second   signiQcatitu       Those   who 


know  it  only  in  the  former  meaning,  always  seek 
justification  tx  ru/<oi'  and  tj  itjyov,  until  tiiey  are 
e'i  i(j(,d^tLa(;  (cl'.ap.  ii.  8),  and  only  become  acquaint 
ed  with  an  apparent  righteousness  of  a  partisan 
chanieter.  So,  on  the  other  hand,  the  cKfOaijaiav 
LtjroTvTK;,  in  all  their  eflbrts  to  fulfil  the  law,  are 
more  and  more  convinced  of  the  impossibility  of  a 
righteousness  by  works.  The  requirement  of  the 
law,  therefore,  as  well  as  its  operation,  continually 
impels — in  the  moral,  still  more  in  tlie  religioua 
sphere — by  means  of  the  knowledge  of  sin,  far  b&» 
yond  the  legal  standpoint  to  faith  itself.  Therefore 
the  remark  frequently  made :  "  not  as  if  complete 
obedience  to  the  law  would  be  insufficient  for  jus- 
tification "  (Meyer),  is. apt  to  mislead.*  De  Wette 
properly  remarks :  "  It  lies  in  the  nature  of  man, 
and  of  the  law,  that  this  is  not  fulfilled,  and  con- 
sequently that  righteousness  cannot  be  obtained " 
(see  James  ii.  10).  Where  the  Old  Testament  Scrip, 
tures  speak  of  righteous  persons,  those  are  meant 
who,  in  their  observance  of  the  legal  letter,  are 
theocratically  and  ecclesiastically  irreproachable,  but 
yet  do  not  therein  find  their  comfort  (see  Luke'i.  ti). 

No  flesh.  No  human  being.  [With  an  allusion 
to  our  weakness  and  frailty,  as  we  s;iy :  No  mortal. 
The  parallel  passage  in  Ps.  clxxxiii.  2  has,  instead : 
no  man  living. — P.  S.]  Not  even  the  believer.  It 
never  occurs  to  him  that  he  might  perfect  his  justifi- 
cation by  faith  through  dead  works.  [The  phrase  o« 
nuoa  adiJi  is  a  strong  Hebraism,  "i'C3"b3  sib  ] 

[Shall  (can)  be  justified,  A  t  x  a  kd  5^  /;  o-  *  t  « t . 
The  future  refers  not  to  the  day  of  judgment 
(Reiche),  for  justification  takes  place  already  in  thia 
life ;  nor  to  the  indefinite,  abstract  future  (Meyer, 
Philippi :  whenever  justification  shall  take  place), 
but  to  the  moral  possibility,  or  impossibility  rather 
(can  ever  be  justified) ;  comp.  /.(jn'tl,  ver.  6. — P.  S.] 

[On  the  meaning  of  duxaiow,  to  just  if g,  comp. 
the  Exeg.  Notes  on  chap.  i.  17  ;  ii.  13  ;  iii.  24.  It 
is  perfectly  plain  that  here,  and  in  the  parallel  pas- 
sage,  Gal.  ii.  16,  it  can  only  mean,  to  dec/are  or  judi- 
cia/lg  pronotmce  just,  not,  to  make  just.  This  ap- 
pears (1.)  from  Ps.  cxliii.  2,  here  referred  to  {''^Enter 
not  into  judgment  with  tlig  servant ;  for  in  thy  sight 
shall  no  man  living  be  justified;")  (2).  from  tlie  aim 
of  the  pas-sage,  which  is  to  confirm  by  1)1671  the  pre- 
ceding sentence :  "  that  every  mouth  may  bo  sto[)ped, 
and  all  the  world  may  become  guilty  before  God  " 
(ver.  19);  and  (3.)  from  the  addition  lyioTnov 
al'ToT',  which  represents  God  as  Judge,  coram  Deo 
jiulice. — Dr.  Wie.seler,  in  his  exposition  of  the  par- 
allel pas.sage.  Gal.  ii.  16  (Commentar,  kc,  pp.  176— 
204),  enters  into  an  elaborate  discussion  of  the 
meaning  of  liixcuuw,  of  which  we  will  give  the  sub- 
stance in  English,  anticipating  in  part  our  own  re- 
marks on  iii.  24  : 

"  The  verb  dixntoTv  has,  in  the  Greek,  two  fun- 
damental significations : 

"(1.)  TO  ()lxai,ov  TToiflv  Tu'a  (ef  xaxoT>9 
TU'rt,  to  do  any  one  xnxov,  hiirm) ;  that  is,  to  do 
any  one  justice.  It  is  used  in  this  sense  especially 
of  a  judge,  and  signifies,  to  determine  justice  gen- 
erally ;  or  more  specially,  according  to  the  result  of 
the  judging,  on  the  one  hand,  to  condemn  and  putu 
ish,  as  with  peculiar  frecpieiicy  in  the  profane  writ, 
era ;  or  also  cither  to  declare  guiltless  of  the  charge, 

•  [  Meyor  says  this  in  view  of  the  principle  :  <h  novrfrcX 
WifLov  iiKaiutdrfiTovraK  (li.  I.'!),  but  ho  Immcdiiitoly  :u1(1h  that 
no  liiuniin  l>cinK  cim  fully  comply  with  tbo  luw  :  that  tb« 
liiw  onlv  miiko!)  U8  luoro  conscious  of  our  moial  iinpcrfoo- 
tions.— "p.  S.i 


CHAPTER  m.    1-20. 


123 


or  to  acknowledfje,  in  the  case  of  any  one,  the  claims 
of  right,  which  he  has ;  only  that  the  favorable  or 
unfavorable  judgment^  in  this  fundamental  significa- 
tion, is  always  conceived  as  his  dtjtatoi',  as  de- 
served by  him. 

"(2.)  diy.atov  noiilv  Tt,  or  riva,  to  make 
a  thing  or  person  righteous;  that  is,  either  to  ac- 
count and  declare  righteous,  or  to  transfer  into  the 
rlglit  condition  ;  for  the  verbs  in  6oj  express  also  a 
bringing  out  into  effect  that  from  which  the  verb 
is  derived ;  comp.  Sov'/.ob),  tik^Ioo}  =  doTlov  and 
Ti'^iAov  TTOiilv.  So  does  (Jmator'j'  T^  accordingly 
signify,  to  account  any  thing  right  and  equitable,  to 
approve,  wish,  require  ;  equivalent  to  ai,i,ovv. 

"The  biblical  usus  loquendi  of  di,/.ai,ovv  at- 
taches itself  to  the  Hebrew  p^'^,'^T]  (or  p^^J ),  of 
which  it  is  commonly  the  translation  in  the  LXX. 
This,  now,  for  the  most  part  signifies  to  declare 
righteous  (judicially,  or  in  common  life);  but,  to 
make  righteous^,  or,  to  lead  to  righteousness,  only  in 
Dan.  xii.  3  ;  Isa.  liii.  11. 

"Even  so  (ii,y.aiovv,  in  the  Septuagint,  fre- 
quently signifies,  to  declare  righteous  judiciallr/ ; 
Ps.  Ixxxii.  3 ;  Exod.  xxiii.  7 ;  Deut.  xxv.  1 ;  1  Kings 
viii.  32  ;  and  in  common  life  also,  to  acknowledge  as 
righteous,  or,  to  represimt  as  righteoua ;  Ezek.  xvi.  51, 
52 ;  and  is  interchanged  in  this  sense  with  anoqni- 
viiv  ()ixai.ov;  Job  xxxii.  2;  xxvii.  5.  On  the  other 
hand,  it  is  used  with  extreme  infrequency  in  the 
sense,  to  make  righteous^  to  transfer  into  the  con- 
dition of  rif/hteoiisness  ;  Ps.  Ixxiii.  13  ;  Is.  liii.  11  ; 
Su".  xviii.  22. 

"  Thus  far  our  examination  has  afforded  the  re- 
sult, that  Hvy.aiQvv  can,  it  is  true,  signify  also,  to 
make  righteous,  as  well  in  profane  Greek  (in  this, 
according  to  the  second  fundamental  signification), 
as  in  the  LXX.,  but  that  this  signification  has,  in  the 
use  of  the  language,  receded  decidedly  into  the  back- 
ground in  comparison  with  the  forensic  and  judicial. 

"  To  still  less  advantage  does  the  signification, 
to  make  righteous,  appear  in  the  New  Tedament 
use.  Leaving  out  of  view  the  passages  in  question, 
where  a  di,y.ai,ova&ai  eJ  t^yo)v  vofiov,  or  dt,a  nia- 
TKoi;,  is  spoken  of,  there  does  not  occur  a  single 
passage  in  which  the  signification  to  make  right- 
eous is  found.  (Besides  the  passages  mentioned 
above,  the  verb  occurs  Matt.  xi.  19  ;  Luke  vii.  29, 
35;  X.  29;  Rom.  iii.  4;  1  Tim.  iii,  16;  Rev.  xxii. 
11.*)  This  fact  cannot  but  be  most  unfavorable  to 
the  assumption  of  tlie  signification,  to  make  right- 
eous, in  the  remaining  passages." — P.  S.] 

For  by  the  lavr  (comes)  a  knowledge  of 
sin.  Tholuck  would  supply  only  (no  more  than)  a 
knowledge;  but  tnlyvoxrui;  is  exact,  living,  in- 
creasing knowledge.  The  antithesis  laid  down  by 
Chrysostom — that  the  law,  far  from  being  able  to 
take  away  sin,  only  first  brings  it  to  knowledge — 
needs  still  the  supplementary  thought,  that  it  is  just 
this  knowledge  which  is  the  preliminary  condition 
for  the  removal  of  sin.  [The  law,  being  the  revela- 
tion of  the  holy  and  perfect  will  of  God,  exhibits,  by 
contrast,  our  own  sinfulness,  and  awakens  the  desire 
after  salvation.  This  sentence  of  Paul,  together  with 
his  declaration  that  the  law  is  a  naidayioyo^  to  lead 
to  Christ  (Gal.  iii.  24,  25),  contains  the  whole  phi- 
losophy of  the  law,  as  a  moral  educator,  and  is  the 
best  and  deepest  thing  that  can  be  said  of  it.  Ewald 
justly  remarks  of  our  passage  :  "Mit  diesen  Worten 

*  [If  5tKotu)9r)Ti  In  should  be  the  true  readinsr,  against 
which,  see,  however,  Lachmann  and  Tischendorf. — P.  S.J 


t^-ifft  Paidus  den  tiefsten  Kern  der  Sache ;"  i.  e. 
with  these  words  Paul  liits  the  nail  on  the  head,  and 
penetrates  to  the  inmost  marrow  of  the  thing,  ydo 
is  well  explained  by  Calvin :  "^  contrario  ratiocu 
natur  .  ,  .  quando  ex  eadem  scatebra  non  prodeunl 
vita  et  mors." — ^P.  S.] 


DOCTEINAL  AND   ETHICAI/. 

1.  Chap.  ii.  25-29.  The  elder  theology  has 
properly  regarded  circumcision  as  a  federal  sacra- 
ment of  the  Old  Testament,  and  as  the  preliminary 
analogue  or  type  of  New  Testament  baptism  ;  just 
as  the  Passover  feast  was  an  Old  Testament  type  of 
the  Lord's  Supper.  And  thus  far  did  tlie  TTf^tTo/^jJ 
represent  the  whole  of  Judaism,  which  is  proved  by 
the  fact  that  Paul  used  this  term  to  designate  the 
Jews  (see  also  Gal.  v.  3).  But  it  is  easy  to  go  astray 
on  the  biblical  meaning  of  circumcision,  as  on  the 
law  of  the  Sabbath,  if  we  do  not  bear  in  mind  that 
we  have  to  deal  with  institutions  which  comprehend 
many  points  of  view.  Thus,  the  Sabbatic  law  is 
first  a  religious  and  moral  command  of  God  among 
the  Ten  Commandments  (Exod.  xx.  8  ff.).  But  it 
is  likewise  a  religious  and  liturgical,  or  Levitical 
command  on  worship  (according  to  Lev.  xxiii.  3), 
In  the  latter  sense,  it  is  abrogated  as  a  mere  Old 
Testament  form,  as  far  as  Christians  are  concerned ; 
or,  rather,  it  has  been  supplanted  by  the  divin&. 
human  creation  of  a  new  day  "  of  the  gi'eat  congre- 
gation"— the  Lord's  Day.  But  the  religious  and 
ethical  command  of  the  Sabbath  in  the  Decalogue 
has  become  a  religious  and  ethical  principle,  which, 
in  its  educating  and  legal  form,  has  connected  itself 
with  Sunday.  In  the  same  way  is  circumcision  a 
synthesis.  The  foundation  of  it  was  a  very  old, 
sporadic,  oriental  custom  (Epistle  of  Barnabas,  chap, 
ix.*).  It  was  made  to  Abraham,  according  to  chap, 
iv.  11,  a  symbolical  seal  of  his  faith;  which  is  cer- 
tainly the  sacrament  of  the  covenant  of  promise. 
But  then  Moses  also  made  it,  in  a  more  definite 
sense,  an  obligation  of  the  law  (Exod.  iv.  25  ;  Jos. 
V.  2  ff.).  The  law  was  the  explication  of  circum- 
cision, and  circumcision  was  the  concentration  of  the 
law.  While,  therefore,  the  law  was  annulled  in  re- 
gard to  Christians  by  faith,  circumcision  was  also 
annulled ;  or,  rather,  the  New  Testament  symbol 
took  its  place,  and  the  fulfilment  of  the  Abrahamic 
promise — the  new  birth  of  faith — was  connected  with 
it.  Tholuck  thinks  (p.  114)  it  is  a  contradiction, 
that,  according  to  the  elder  theology,!  faith  in  the 
Messiah  was  the  condition  of  the  Divine  promise  in 
circumcision ;  while,  according  to  Paul,  the  fulfil- 
ment  of  the  law  was  this  condition.  But  Paul  cer- 
tainly  knew  of  no  other  fulfilment  of  the  law  than 
that  in  the  Messianic  faith,  which  became,  finally, 
faith  in  the  vjlessiah.  On  p.  117,  Tholuck  himself 
refers  to  the  inward  character  of  the  requirements 
of  Judaism. 

2.  The  great  importance  which  the  Apostle  at- 

♦  [Pseudo-Bam.abas  says,  I.  c. :  "  Thou  (addressing  the 
Jew)  wilt  say,  '  Yea,  verily  the  people  are  circumcised  for 
a  seal.'  But  so  also  is  evei-y  Syrian  and  Arab,  and  all  the 
prit'sts  of  idols  :  are  these,  then,  also  wdthin  the  bond  of 
this  covenant  (or,  according  to  the  reading  of  Cod.  Sin. : 
their  covenant)?  Yea,  the  Egyptians  also  practise  circum- 
cision."'— P.  S.J 

t  [Tholuck  means  "  the  old  Liilhrran  conception  of  cir- 
cumcision," and  refers  to  Gerhard  (Lor.  Tlieol.,  vol.  ix.,  pp. 
12,  30),  wlio  teaches  that  circumcision  was  a  sacrament  of 
gt-acf,  in  which  the  verhalr  limehlnm  of  Divine  promise 
was  connected  with  the  material  element. — P.  S.J 


124 


THE   EPISTLE   OF   PAUL   TO   THE    ROMANS. 


taches  to  what  is  within — to  the  sentiment  of  the 
heart — is  plain  from  iiia  bold  antitiieses.  Notwith- 
standing iiis  uncircuaicision,  tiie  Gentile,  by  virtue 
of  hid  state  of  niiud,  ean  beeouie  a  Jew,  and  vice 
versa. 

3.  Tlie  witnesses  adduced  by  the  Apostle  on  the 
univertiality  of  corruption  in  Israel,  neither  preclude 
the  antitliesis  in  chap.  ii.  7,  8,  nor  the  degrees  on 
botli  sides. 

4.  On  chap.  iii.  3.  The  covenant  of  God  is 
always  pi-rfect  according  to  its  stage  of  develop- 
ment. H'  it  generally  fails  to  become  apparent,  the 
fault  always  turns  out  to  be  man's.  Tiie  covenant 
of  God  is  surely  no  coidrat  Social — no  agreement 
between  equal  parties.  It  is  the  free  institution  of 
God's  grace.  But  this  institution  is  that  of  a  true 
covenant,  of  a  personal  and  etiiical  mutual  lelation  ; 
and  whenever  the  hierarchy,  or  a  Komaniziiig  view 
of  the  ministry  obliterate  the  ethical  obligation  on 
the  part  of  man  in  order  to  make  the  sacraments 
magical  operations,  their  course  leads  to  the  desecra- 
tion and  weakening  of  the  covenant  acts. 

5.  Chap.  iii.  4.  For  our  consti'uction  of  the  pas- 
sage in  Ps.  Ii.  4  f ,  see  the  Ej-eij.  Xotex  on  chap.  iii. 
4.  For  another  view,  .see  Pliilippi,  p.  81,  witii  refer- 
ence to  Hengstenbcrg,  Pnaiina,  vol.  iii.,  p.  19.  [Both 
take  K*^3,  oTti'ii;,  in  the  usual  strict  sense  {rth- 
tu't^y  not  £>!/?aTtx(7»,-),  as  does  also  Gesenius,  7'hes..  p. 
1052  :  "  eum  in  Jinetn  peccavi,  ut  illustretur  justitia 
tua ; "  and  they  make  the  old  distinction  between 
the  matter  of  sin,  which  is  man's  work,  and  the 
form  of  .sin,  which  is  in  the  hands  of  God. — P.  S.] 
Hupfeld  also  rel'ers  the  passage  to  the  holy  interest 
of  God's  government  in  human  offences,  but  at  the 
same  time  has  definitely  distinguished  the  relative 
divine  and  human  parts.  Without  contending  against 
the  thougiit  per  se,  we  would  refer  the  on  on;  not 
to  sin  itself,  but  to  the  perception  and  knowledge 
of  sin.  Hence  we  infer  the  proposition  :  All  want 
of  a  proper  knowlcilge  of  sin  on  the  part  of  man 
obscures  the  word  of  God,  and  leads  to  the  miscon- 
ception of  His  judgments  (as  in  the  talk  about  fanat- 
ical ideas  of  revelation,  gloomy  destiny,  &c.). 

6.  On  the  truth  of  God,  see  the  Exeg.  Notes  on 
ver.  4. 

7.  On  iii.  20.  By  the  law  is  the  knowlcdr/e  of 
iin  (see  Gal.  iii.  24).  This  purpose  of  the  law  ex- 
cludes neither  its  u-^u.t  primm  nor  the  «.sm.s'  tertius* 
But  the  three  uhuk  mark  the  developing  progress  of 
the  law  from  without  inwardly,  as  well  in  a  historical 
as  in  a  psychological  view.  The  first  stage  [iisu.i 
politicii-t]  has  also  its  promise.  The  Jew  who  lived 
accor<ling  to  the  law  is  justified  in  the  tribunal  of 
his  |)rii"stliood,  and  has  also  his  earthly  blessing 
("  that  it  may  go  well  with  thee,"  &c.).  But  the 
suittilty  of  the  law — not  to  speak  of  its  first  and 
last  commandment — and  its  symbolical  transparency 
and  s|>intuali-/.ation,  impel  him,  if  he  be  upright, 
further  to  the  pajdagogieal  standpoint,  which  looks 
to  Christ.  An<l  with  thi.s,  he  receives  the  whole 
power  for  the  tertinx  iisus  [in  regulating  his  life  of 
(kith]. 

8.  While  the  elder  theology  separated  the  three 

♦  (The  old  Protestant  divines  speak  of  a  throofold  u»e 
of  the  law:  1.  Hsiut  piUliriix,  or  civilit  {in  tlio  state,  which 
can  only  ho  (fovorned  hy  lawR^  ;  2.  umi.*  flrnchtirus,  or  pm- 
diig'>ffciis  (leading  to  a  knowledge  of  sin  and  misery);  .1. 
umis  iliilaitiritf,  or  tinrmiUiviif  (roifulating  the  llf.-  of  the 
believer).  Comp.  the  F'lrmnhi  C'/nronlim,  p.  MH  sq.  Sim- 
ilar to  this  is  the  Qormm  sontenre,  that  tno  law  is  Zugrl, 
Spi'd'l,  and  Ri-ad,  a  restraint,  a  mirror,  and  a  rule— 
F.  8.1 


parts  of  tfie  law  (morals,  worship,  polity)  too  fal 
from  each  other,  at  present  the  idea  of  the  law  as  a 
unit  is  often  so  strongly  emphasized  as  to  lose  sighl 
of  the  fact  that,  both  in  the  Old  Testament  as  well 
as  in  the  New,  cognizance  is  taken  of  the  difference 
of  the  parts  (see  Matt.  xix.  17  ;  Kom.  vii.  7).  The 
view  to  the  unity  of  the  law,  however,  prevails  in 
the  Mosaic  and  legal  understanding  of  the  Old  Tes- 
tament revelation,  as  represented  by  the  letters  of 
the  two  tables. 

9.  The  incapacity  of  the  law  to  make  man  right- 
eous lies  chiefly  in  this :  First,  it  is  a  demand  on  the 
work  of  the  incapable  man,  who  is  flesh  (no  flesh 
shall  be  justified);  but  it  is  not  a  Divine  promise 
and  work  for  establishing  a  new  relation.  Then  it 
meets  man  as  a  foreign  will,  another  law  ;  by  which 
means  his  false  autonomy  is  inclined  to  resistance, 
because  he  is  alien  to  himself  and  to  the  concurring 
law  within  his  inward  nature.  Finally,  it  meets  him 
in  analytical  form  and  separateness.  Man  only  be- 
comes susceptible  of  Divine  influences:  1.  As  they 
are  founded  in  the  grace  and  gift  of  God  ;  2.  in  the 
spontaneous  action  of  voluntary  love ;  'S.  iu  syn* 
thetical  concentration. 


HOMILETICAL  AND  PRACTICAL. 
(From  Chap.  ii.  25  to  Chip.  ni.  20.) 

Either,  or.  As  this  applied  to  the  Jew  accord- 
ing to  his  position  in  the  Old  Testament,  so  does  It 
apply  to  the  Christian  according  to  his  position  in 
the  New  (ver.  25). — It  is  not  the  external  po.ssession 
of  a  saving  means  that  produces  blessings,  but  faith- 
fulness in  its  application  (vers.  25-29). — How  the 
fact,  that  the  Jew  becomes  a  Gentile,  and  the  Gen- 
tile a  Jew,  can  be  repeated  in  our  time  in  various 
contrasts  (vers.  25-27). — The  Jew,  proud  of  the  let- 
ter and  of  circumcision,  below  the  condemnatory 
sentence  pronounced  on  the  illegal  and  tmcircura- 
cised  (ientile — a  warning  for  evangelical  Christians 
(ver.  27). — Inner  life  in  religion  ;  already  the  prin- 
cipal thing  in  Judaism,  and  much  more  in  Christian- 
ity (vers.  28,  29). — He  who  is  inwardly  [lious,  re- 
ceives praise,  not  of  men,  but  of  (Jod.  —  (lod's 
pleasure  or  j)raise  of  inward  faithfulness  in  piety. 
Herewith  it  must  be  seen  :  1.  How  this  praise  can 
be  aer|uired  ;  2.  In  what  does  it  consist?  (ver.  29).^ 
The  i)raise  of  men  and  the  praise  of  (lod  (ver.  29). 

What  advantage  have  the  Jews  ?  This  question, 
and  its  answer,  exhibit  to  us  the  inttnitely  great 
blessing  of  Christianity  (chap.  iii.  1—1). — How  Paul 
never  iguorcs  the  historical  significance  of  his  peo- 
ple, but  triumphantly  defends  it  against  every  charge 
(comp.  chap.  ix.  4,  5). — The  historical  feeling  of  the 
Apostle  Paul  (vcr.s.  1—4). 

On  chap.  iii.  2.  (Jod  lia.s  shown  His  word  to 
Jacob,  his  statutes  and  judgments  unto  Israel  (Ps. 
cxivii.  19).  H7(V  ha.s  God  spoken  to  Israel*  1.  Be- 
cause He  chose  this  j)eople,  out  of  voluntary  com- 
piuwioti,  for  His  inheritance;  2.  Because  by  this  peo- 
ple, specially  appointed  by  Him  for  the  purpose.  He 
designed  to  prepare  salvation  for  all  the  nations  of 
the  earth. — Do  not  complain  too  much  at  the  un- 
belief of  the  world  !  For,  1.  The  unltelievers  alway.<i 
reniain  in  the  minority  in  real  significance,  let  their 
numl)er  be  ever  so  great ;  2.  Not  oidy  does  their  un- 
iM'lief  not  make  the  faith  (faithfulness)  of  (Jod  with, 
out  effect ;    but  3.   liather  contributes  thert  to,  b) 


CHAPTER  II.   25-III.   20. 


125 


radiantly  showing  God's  truthfulness,  in  contrast 
with  all  human  fiilsehood  (vers.  3,  4). . 

On  chap.  iii.  5-8.  Why  is  it  impossible  that  God 
should  have  desired  our  unrighteousness  for  His 
glory  ?  1.  Because  God  could  not  then  judge  the 
world ;  2.  Because  n-e  would  be  condemned  as  sin- 
ners by  an  unjust  method. — How  far  does  our  un- 
righteousness prove  the  righteousness  of  God? — 
God  cannot  be  the  author  of  sin  !  This  was  ac- 
knowledged, 1.  By  Abraham,  the  father  of  all  the 
faithful  (Gen.  xviii.  25) ;  2.  By  Paul,  the  Apostle  of 
all  the  faithful. — Through  God's  providence,  good 
continually  comes  out  of  evil ;  but  we  should  never 
say,  Let  us  do  evil,  that  good  may  come  ! — He  who 
says.  Let  us  do  evil,  &c.,  1.  Blasphemes  God ;  and 
therefore,  2.  Receives  righteous  condemnation. — The 
principle  of  the  Jesuits,  that  the  end  sanctifies  the 
means,  is  nothing  else  than  a  hypocritical  cloaking 
of  the  plain  words  :  "  Let  us  do  evil,  that  good  may 
come." 

On  vers.  9-18.  The  sinfulness  of  all,  both  Jews 
and  Greeks :  1.  Proved  by  Paul  himself  in  his  de- 
scription of  their  moral  depravity  ;  2.  Corroborated 
by  the  proofs  of  Holy  Scripture  from  the  Psalms, 
Proverbs  of  Solomon,  and  the  Prophet  Isaiah. — As 
Paul  appeals  to  the  Old  Testament,  so  should  we,  in 
order  to  authenticate  truths,  appeal  to  the  whole 
Bible,  though  first  and  contmually  to  the  New  Tes- 
tament.— Every  doctrine  must  be  scriptural. — Paul  a 
master  in  the  application  of  Scripture  :  1.  So  far  as 
he  grasps  the  fulness  of  the  scriptural  expression ; 
but,  2.  He  does  not  thoughtlessly  arrange  quotations 
from  the  Scriptures ;  but,  3.  He  skilfully  connects 
kindred  passages  into  a  beautiful  whole. 

On  vers.  18-20.  The  severe  preaching  of  the 
law :  1.  To  whom  is  it  directed  ?  2.  What  does  it 
accomplish  ? — How  far  does  the  law  produce  knowl- 
edge of  sin  ? 

Luther  :  Spirit  is  what  God  supematurally  effects 
in  man ;  letter  is  all  the  deeds  of  nature  without 
spirit  (chap.  ii.  29). — "God  is  a  sure  support;  but 
he  who  trusts  in  man  will  want "  (chap.  iii.  4). — 
David  says  (Ps.  li.  4) :  "  Against  Tliee,  Thee  only, 
have  I  sinned,"  kc.  These  words  would  seem  to 
mean  that  man  must  sin  in  order  that  God  might  be 
just,  as  Paul  would  also  seem  here  to  say.  Yet  this 
is  not  the  case ;  but  we  shall  acknowledge  the  sin 
of  which  God  accuses  us,  that  He  might  thereby  be 
confessed  truthful  and  just  in  His  law. 

Starke  :  A  true  Christian  must  not  despise  the 
means  of  grace :  as,  attending  church,  making  con- 
fession, and  partaking  of  the  Lord's  Supper ;  nor 
should  he  speak  derisively  of  them  because  they 
are  misused  by  most  persons  as  a  false  hope  (chap. 
ii.  25). — He  who  will  be  comforted  by  the  consid- 
eration that  he  has  been  baptized  in  the  name  of 
Christ,  must  examine  himself  whether  he  has  also 
been  newly  born,  and  walks  after  the  new  man : 
where  this  is  not  the  case,  holy  baptism  is  of  just 
as  little  use  to  him,  as  circumcision  was  to  the  un- 
believing Jew;  1  Peter  iii.  21  (chap.  ii.  29). — In 
worldly  courts,  injustice  often  rules ;  but  God  will 
judge  the  world  in  the  justest  manner  (chap.  iii.  6). 
. — When  our  misery  is  properly  uncovered,  com- 
passion is  near ;  and  when  we  are  truly  compas- 
sionate ourselves,  compassion  is  not  far  from  us 
(chap.  iii.  12). — The  way  to  grace  is  open  when  we 
stand  dumb  before  God  (chap.  iii.  19). — There  is 
only  one  way  to  salvation,  by  which  men,  before,  at 
the  time  of,  and  after  Moses,  can  be  saved  (chap. 
iii.  20). — Laxge  :  Oh,  how  many  Christians  are  put 


to  shame  at  this  day  by  honorable  heathen  I  And 
how  the  latter  will  ri.se  up  against  the  former  on  the 
judgment-day  !  (chap.  ii.  26). — Hedinger  :  The  new 
creature  must  be  all  in  all.  If  this  be  not  the  case, 
there  is  no  godly  sorrow,  no  faith,  no  Christ,  no 
hope  of  salvation  (chap.  ii.  25). — There  is  only  one 
way  to  salvation,  yet  God  is  at  perfect  liberty  to  say 
in  what  people  He  will  build  His  Church,  and  what 
measure  of  grace  and  gifts  He  will  give  (chap.  viii. 
2). — Here  stands  tlie  pillar  of  the  evangelical  Church, 
the  test  and  corner-stone  of  the  pure,  saving  gospel 
(chap.  iii.  20). — Quesnel  :  A  strong  proof  of  origi- 
nal  sin,  because  no  one  who  comes  into  the  world  ia 
righteous,  or  without  sin  (chap.  iii.  10). — Let  love  be 
in  the  heart,  then  will  loveliness  be  also  in  the  mouth 
(chap.  iii.  14). — Cramer  :  Learn  to  distinguish  M-ell 
between  true  and  false  Jews,  true  and  false  Chris- 
tians  ;  the  external  profession  does  not  constitute  a 
true  Jew  or  Christian  (chap.  ii.  28). — It  is  not  all 
gold  that  glitters,  and  not  all  show  is  wisdom.  Al- 
though  the  natural  reason  can  devise  many  conclu* 
sive  speeches  and  subtleties,  these  must  not  be  re- 
garded as  wisdom  in  divine  things  (chap.  iii.  5).— 
Nova  Bibi  I'iib. :  The  dead  members  of  the  Church 
depend  upon  its  external  advantages,  take  their  com- 
fort in  them,  and  make  their  boast  of  them,  without 
remembering  that  they  can  derive  no  good  fiom 
them  without  penitence  and  faith  (chap.  iii.  1).— 
Though  we  be  unfaithful,  God  remaineth  faithful. 
Oh,  let  us  therefore  rely  upon  His  faithfulness  and 
promise,  and  take  comfort  in  the  fact  that  we  alwaya 
have  a  ready  entrance  to  the  faithfulness  of  our  God 
(chap.  iii.  3). — Osiander  :  If  God  is  truthful,  but 
men  false,  why  do  some  men  believe  folly  sooner 
than  the  word  of  God  ?  But  to  God  alone  belonga 
the  praise  of  righteousness  and  truth  (chap.  iii.  4). 
— Those  who  boast  of  their  righteousness  before 
God,  know  neither  God's  will  nor  themselves  (chap, 
iii.  19). 

Gerlach  ;  The  usefulness  of  the  covenant  of 
grace  extends  on  all  sides  and  encompasses  all  the 
relations  of  life  (chap.  iii.  2). — God's  wisdom,  om- 
nipotence, justice,  and  love,  are  glorified  either  in 
the  punishment  or  conversion  of  the  sinner ;  the 
more  wicked  the  sinner,  the  greater  the  glory.  But 
this  glory  consists  precisely  in  the  death  of  the  sin- 
ner, since  he  either  dies  to  sin,  having  once  lived  to 
it ;  or,  with  all  other  sinners,  suffers  eternal  death 
in  perdition  (chap,  iii.  4.). — Description  of  men  of 
malignant  feeling,  who  strive  to  injure  others  by 
their  language.  Throat,  tongue,  and  lips — three  in- 
struments of  speech,  which  utter  the  words  from 
within  (chap.  iii.  13). — The  more  complete  and  deep 
the  command,  the  stronger  is  its  declaration  of  con- 
demnation, and  the  less  can  it  awaken  in  us  faith 
and  hope  for  salvation  (chap.  iii.  20). 

Lisco  :  The  Christian  is  aided  by  the  sacraments 
only  when  he  lives  in  faith  (chap.  ii.  25). — On  what 
the  moral  worth  of  man  before  God  depends  (vers. 
25,  26). — Israel's  advantages  (chap.  iii.  1-4). — He 
who  adopts  the  principle :  "  Let  us  sin,  that  good 
may  come,"  will  receive  righteous  condemnation; 
for  God  desires  to  be  glorified  only  by  our  obedi- 
ence ;  all  disobedience  is  dishonoring  His  majesty, 
but  terminates  also  with  the  sinner's  destruction, 
and  likewise  extends  to  the  justification  or  glo- 
rification of  the  holy  and  righteous  God  (chap 
in.  8). 

Heubner  :  External  ecclesiasticism  and  confes* 
sion  has  value  only  when  it  leads  to  religion  of  th* 
heart  and  life ;   otherwise,  it  is  only  the  same  at 


126 


THE   EPISTLE   OF  PAUL  TO   THE   ROMANS. 


heathenism  (chap.  ii.  25).* — The  great  difference 
between  outward  and  inward  Christianity.  True 
Christianity  is  internal  (cliap.  ii.  28). — Tiie  true 
Worshipper  of  God  is  inward,  is  concealed  Croni  the 
world,  and  is  known  only  to  God  (cliap.  ii.  29). — 
The  worth  and  merit  of  the  pious  person  is  exalted 
above  all  opinion  of  the  world :  1.  Because  true 
piety  by  no  means  passes  in  the  world  for  the  high- 
est good,  but  only  that  wiiich  is  profitable,  and 
shines ;  2.  Because  men  cannot  discern  this  inner, 
pure  condition  of  heart,  neither  can  tliey  credit  it 
to  others ;  3.  Because  the  world  cannot  reward  this 
piety  (ciiap.  ii.  29). — God's  word  is  committed  to 
us  ;  use  it  ariglit,  support  it,  propagate  it.  In  many 
places  it  has  disappeared  througii  tlie  fault  of  men 
(in  Asia  and  Africa),  chap.  iii.  2. — God's  honor 
cannot  be  touched.  Nothing  can  be  charged  against 
God  ;  it  would  be  blasplicmy  to  charge  Ilim  with 
blame  of  any  kind  (chap.  iii.  4). — God's  righteous- 
ness becomes  the  more  apparent  in  proportion  to 
the  manifestation  of  man's  unrighteousness  (chap. 
iii.  5). — Every  feeling  of  hatnjd  is  the  root  for  a 
willingness  to  shed  blood  (ciiap.  iii.  15). — Every 
man  is  guilty  before  God,  and  subject  to  His  pun- 
ishment ;  but  he  sliould  also  know  and  confess  it 
(chap.  iii.  19). — The  law  requires  obedience  to  all 
its  commands  (chap.  iii.  20). 

Si'KSKR :  Wiien  people  are  wickedly  taught  to 
Bin,  so  that  God  m.iy  be  lauded  because  of  the  for- 
giveness of  sins,  it  is  the  same  slander  which  the 
same  old  slanderous  devil  charged  at  that  time 
against  the  apostles,  and  which  is  still  east  against 
the  doctrine  of  the  grace  of  God  (chap.  iii.  8). 

Bksskr  :  Circumcision  of  the  heart  is  real  cir- 
cumcision (chaj).  ii.  29). — The  evangelical  theme  of 
joy  in  the  Epistle  to  the  Romans  is,  that  God,  in 
grace,  is  just  in  His  words  to  sinners  whom  He  has 
justified  by  faith  in  Jesus  (chap.  iii.  4). 

Laxgk,  on  vers,  lfi-24.  The  fearful  picture  of 
warning  in  the  fall  of  the  Jews. — How  this  picture 
was  again  presented  in  the  Church  before  the  Ref- 
ormation, and  now  appears  in  many  forms. — Vers. 
25-29.  Comparison  of  this  passage  with  Matt,  xxiii. 
21-28. — The  great  vindication  here  for  the  believer 
— that  God,  in  His  word,  confides  in  him  in  a  cer- 
tain measure. — God,  in  His  faithfulness  to  His  cove- 
nant, a  rock. — How  unbelief  is  against  God,  and  yet 
must  serve  God's  purpose. — Cliap.  iii.  1-S.  To  have 
an  advantage,  and  yet  not  to  have  one. — The  testi- 
monies of  Scripture  on  the  sinful  depravity  of  man. 
— Vers.  8-19.  How  vain  is  the  ett'ort  to  be  justified 
by  the  law  :  1.  Because  "  by  tlie  deeds  of  the  law," 
&c. ;  2.  "  For  by  the  law,"  &c. 

[BfRKiTT:  (condensed')  ii.  25.  The  heathen  have 
abused  l)ut  one  talent,  the  lir/hl  of  nature;  but  wc, 
thousands ;  even  as  many  thousands  as  we  have 
slighted  the  tiMiders  of  odered  grace.  What  a  fear- 
ful aggravation  it  puts  upon  our  sin  and  misery  ! 
Wc  must  certainly  be  accountable  to  God  at  the 
great  day,  not  only  for  all  the  light  we  have  had, 
but  for  all  we  might  have  had  in  the  g03|)el  day  ; 


♦  [Comp.  Arrhbisliop  Tim.otkon,  Sermon  on  2  Tim.  ii. 
19  (footed  liy  •liiiiK'S  Ford  on  Romaiif):  "  Ilaptinm  vrih/ 
pinjiteth,  If  wo  ol)cy  the  po-pel ;  Imt  if  wp  walk  contriiry  to 
the  prcepts  of  it,  our  bapli'^m  is  no  li:i))tiBm,  and  our  Clir  s- 
llBnity  is  hcatliciiism."  Wc  would  nay  :  to'irir.  than  no  biip- 
tiam,  iFiirS'-  hitii  hrathonism.  FcT  in  proportion  to  the  l)lt'.ss- 
IhK  Intoniled,  Is  tlio  curso  iiiourreil  by  abuse.  The  disc  of 
an  npo»t'»to  Christian  is  fnr  more  hopeless  than  the  case  of 
nn  un''on veiled  luMlhon.  Tlie  one  has  Chrisiinnitv  tiehind 
)iim,  the  other  bcfure  liim  ;  tlie  one  h;iH  delitienUuly  cast  it 
off,  the  other  may  thankfully  embrace  It.'— 1'.  S.] 


and  especially  for  the  light  we  have  siimed  undei 
and  rebelled  against. — Chap.  iii.  1.  Great  is  thai 
people's  privilege  and  mercy  who  enjoy  the  word 
of  God — the  audible  word  in  the  Holy  Scriptures, 
the  visible  word  in  the  holy  sacrament.s.  It  enlight* 
eneth  the  eyes,  rejoieeth  the  heart,  quickeneth  the 
soul.  It  is  compared  to  gold  for  profit,  to  honey 
for  sweetness,  to  milk  l\)r  nourishing,  to  food  for 
strengthening  ! — Chap.  iii.  3-7  :  God  is  never  in- 
tentionally, but  is  sometimes  accidentally  glorified 
by  man's  sins.  There  never  was  such  a  crime  as 
crucifying  Christ,  but  nothing  by  which  God  haa 
reaped  greater  glory. — Chap.  iii.  10.  T/ie  unright- 
eousness of  man:  1.  There  is  none  origiually  right- 
eous; 2.  None  effic  cnthj  righteous;  3.  none  vieri- 
torionsdy  righteous  ;  4.  None  perfectly  righteous.^ 
Mattiikw  Henry  :  The  Jews  had  the  tncaHit  of  sal- 
vation, but  they  had  not  the  monopoly  of  it. — On 
the  righteousness  of  God,  observe :  1.  It  is  mani* 
fested ;  2.  It  is  witliout  the  law ;  3.  It  is  witnessed 
by  the  law  and  the  prophets ;  4.  It  is  by  the  faith 
of  Jesus  Christ ;  5.  It  is  to  all,  and  upon  all  them 
that  believe. — Dodoridgk  :  We  pity  the  Gentiles, 
and  justly  so ;  but  let  us  take  heed  lest  those  ap- 
pearances of  virtue  which  are  to  be  found  among 
some  of  them  do  not  condemn  us,  who,  with  the 
letter  of  the  law  and  the  gospel,  ami  with  the  solemn 
tokens  of  a  covenant  relation  to  God,  transgress  His 
precepts,  and  violate  our  engagements  to  Him ;  so 
turning  the  means  of  goodness  and  happiness  into 
the  occasion  of  more  aggravated  guilt  and  misery. — 
Clarke  :  The  law  is  properly  considered  the  rule  of 
right ;  and  unless  God  had  given  some  .such  means 
of  discovering  what  sin  is,  the  darkened  heart  of 
man  could  never  have  formed  an  adequate  concep- 
tion of  it.  For  as  an  acknowledged  straight  edge  is 
the  only  way  in  which  the  strai:/htncss  or  crooked' 
iiess  of  a  line  can  be  determined,  so  the  moral 
obliquity  of  human  actions  can  only  be  determined 
by  the  law  of  God,  that  rufc  of  right  which  pro- 
ceeds from  His  own  innnaculate  holiness. 

[Hodge  :  When  true  religion  declines,  the  dis- 
position to  lay  undue  stress  on  external  rites  is  in- 
creased. The  Jews,  when  they  lost  their  spirituality,  ^ 
supposed  that  circumcision  had  power  to  save  (ii.  '^ 
25). — Paul  does  not  deny,  but  asserts  the  value  o< 
circumcision.  So,  likewise,  the  Christian  sacraments, 
baptism  and  the  Lord's  Supper,  are  of  the  utmost 
im[)ortanee,  and  to  neglect  or  reject  them  is  a  great 
sin  (ii.  25  ;  iii.  1). — It  is  a  mark  of  genuine  piety  to 
be  disposed  always  to  justify  God,  and  to  condemn 
ourselves.  On  the  other  hand,  a  disposition  to  self- 
justification  and  the  examination  of  our  sins,  how- 
ever secret,  is  an  indication  of  the  want  of  a  projier 
sense  of  our  own  unworthiness  and  of  the  Divine 
excellence  (iii.  4,  5). — There  is  no  better  evidence 
against  the  trutii  of  any  doctrine,  than  that  its  ten- 
dency is  immoral  (iii.  8). — Speculative  and  moral 
truths,  which  are  self-evident  to  the  mind,  should 
l)e  regarded  as  authoritative,  and  as  fixed  points  in 
all  reasonings  (iii.  8). — Barnes:  If  all  nu'ii  were 
willing  to  sacrifice  their  opinions  when  they  ap- 
jieared  to  impinge  on  the  veracity  of  God  ;  if  they 
started  back  with  instinctive  sliuddering  at  the  very 
stq)])os"tion  of  such  a  want  of  fidelity  in  Him  ;  how 
soon  woulil  it  put  an  end  to  the  i)oastings  of  error, 
to  the  pride  of  philosoiihy,  to  lofty  dictation  in  re> 
ligion  !  No  man  with  this  feeling  coidd  be  a  Uni- 
versalist  for  a  moment ;  and  none  could  be  an  in* 
fidel. 

[On  chap.  ii.  29,  see  Wkblbt's  sermon  Tlie  Cir- 


CHAPTER  III.   21-31.  121 


ettmciaion  of  the  Heart;  on  chap.  iii.  1,  2,  Pay- 
son's  sermon  on  The  Oracles  of  God;  Mklville's 
on  The  Advantages  resulting  from  the  Possession  of 
the  Scr'qdures  ;  and  Canon  Wordsworth's  Hulsean 
Lecture  on  What  is  the  Foundation  of  the  Canon  of 


the  New  Testament?  On  chap.  iii.  4,  see  Dwight's 
sermon  on  God  to  be  Believed  rather  than  Man  ;  and 
C.  J.  Vaughan's  on  The  One  Necessity.  On  chap, 
iii.  9-19,  see  Chalmers'  sermon  on  The  Importanct 
of  Civil  Government  to  Society. — J.  F.  H.] 


Sixth  Section. — The  revelation  of  God^s  righteousness  ivithout  the  law  by  faith  in  Christ  for  all  sinnei\ 
without  distinction,  by  the  represetitation  of  Christ  as  the  Propitiator  {'^mercy-seat").  The  right- 
eouKness  of  God  in  Christ  as  justifying  righteousness. 

Chapter  III,  21-26. 

Seventh  Section. — The  annulling  of  man's  vain-glory  (self-praise)  by  the  law  of  faith.  Justification  by 
faith  WITHOUT  THE  DEEDS  OF  THE  LAW.  First  pr 00 f  i  FROM  EXPERIENCE  :  God  is  the  God  of  the  Gen- 
tiles  as  well  as  of  the  Jetvs — proved  by  the  actual  faith  of  the  Gentiles.  True  renewal  of  the  law  by 
faith. 

Verses   2*7-31. 

21  But  now  tte  righteousness  of  God  without  the  law  is  manifested  [But  now, 
apart  from  the  law,'  the  righteousness  of  God  hath  been  made  manifest  °],  being 

22  witnessed  [testified  to,  attested]  by  the  law  and  the  prophets  ;  Even^  the  right- 
eousness of  God  icJtich  is  by   [by  means  of,  through]   faith  of  Jesus  Christ 

23  imto  all  and  upon  all  *  them  that  believe  ;  for  there  is  no  difference  :  For  all 
have  sinned  [all  sinned,  r.  c,  they  are  aii  sinners],^  and  come  [fall]  short  [yatdQovvrai, 

24  in  the  present  tense]    of  the   glory  of    God ;    Being  justified    freely  by  his   grace 

25  through  the  redemption  that  is  in  Christ  Jesus  :  Whom  God  hath  \jniit  hath]  set 
forth  [nQot&ero]  to  be  a  propitiation  [mercy-seat] "  through  [the ']  faith  [,]  in  his 
blood,  to  declai-e  [for  a  manifestation  (exhibition)  of,  Hig  trdtihv  z7ig  8i'/..'\  his 
righteousness  for  the  remission  of  sins  that  are  past  [because  of  the  prsetei  mis- 
sion (non-visitation,  passing  by)  of  the  former  sins,  8ia  tijv  (not  t/~c)  naQeoiv 
(not  acpeoiv)   rmv   nQny^yovorow  a^iaQTrniaxav^  ^  through    [in,   tV]   the    forbearance 

26  of  God ;  To  declare,  I  say,  at  this  time  his  righteousness  ;  that  he  might  be 
just,  and  the  justifier  of  him  which  believeth  in  Jesus  [v/ith  a  view  to  the 
manifestation  (exhibition,  nQog  tijv'  ndti^iv)  of  his  righteousness  at  this 
present  time,  in  order  that  he  may  be  (shown  and  seen  to  be)  just  and  (yet  at  the  same 
time)  be  justifying  him  who  is  of  the  faith  of  (in)  Jesus,  elg  ro  thai  avxov  Sixaiov 
y.ai  Sr/.aiovvta  top  va  nioremg  '///(Tov].'" 

27  Where  is  [the]  boasting  then?     It  is  excluded.     By  what  law?    \^By  the 

28  Imo]  of  works  ?  Nay  ;  but  by  the  law  of  faith.  Therefore  [For]  "  we  con- 
chicle   [judge]  that  a  man  is  justified  by  faith '^  without  the  deeds  [without 

29  Avorks]  of  the  law.'^     [Or,  ?/]  Is  he  the  God  of  the  Jews  only?  '*  is  lie  not  also 

30  of  the  Gentiles  ?  Yes,  of  the  Gentiles  also  :  Seeing  '*  it  is  one  God,  which  shall 
[who  will]  justify  the  circumcision  by  faith,  and  uncircuracision  through  faith. 

31  Do  we  then  make  void  the  law  through  faith  ?  God  forbid  :  [Far  be  it !]  yea, 
we  establish  "  the  law. 

TEXTUAL. 

1  Ver.  21.— [Or:  ind<'p(vder\Uy  of  the  law.  Lxither  :  ohne  Zulhnn  des  Gesetzes.  x^P'*  vrffi-ov,  opposed  to  6tik 
v6/iiou,  ver.  20,  is  emphatically  put  fiist  and  belongs  to  the  verb.  The  transposition  in  the  E.  V.  obscures  this  conneo" 
tion  nnd'flestroys  the  parrtllelism.— P.  S.l 

2  Ver.  21.— [Trec^avepcoTai.  The  perfect  has  its  appropriate  force  and  sets  forth  this  revelation  of  rightcousnesj 
as  an  accomplished  and  still  continued  fact.  Comp.  the  aTroKaAvTrreTot,  i.  17.  Meyer  :  "  isl  offerihor  getriar/il,  zii  Togi 
gelrff'.  .<■"  dmsitjedem  zur  Erkenntniss  sich  darstdlt;  das  Pracstns  der  vodendeten  Sandbuig,  Heb.  ix.  26.  Bernl.ardj",  p. 
37S.'"— P.  S.]  ' 

'  Ver.  '22.—[E\jen  (or,  I  say,  inquam,  und  zwar)  is  the  best  renderinsj  of  fi  e  here,  since  it  is  not  strictly  adversative, 
but  expltiuatory  and  reassutnptive  (if  I  may  coin  this  teim  for  epannleptic),  as  in  ix.  30  ;  Phil.  ii.  8.  The  coutrast  is  not 
between  the  riphteousness  of  Ood  and  the  righteousness  of  iiuni  (Wordsworth),  but  between  the  general  idea  of  the 
righteousness  of  God  and  the  specific  idea  of  righteousness  through  faith  now  introduced. — P.  S.] 

*  Ver.  22.— [Koi  tjr!  ttovtos,  text,  rec,  D.  F.  K.  L.  jS'.,  Syr.,  Vulg. ;  omitted  by  N>.  A.  B.  C,  Griesbach,  Lach- 


128  THE   El'ISTLE    OF   PAUL    TO    THE    ROMANS. 

nann.  Alford  brackets,  and  says  :  "  Possibly  from  homoeotel. ;  on  the  other  hand,  the  longer  tcrt  may  be  the  junction 
of  two  readings."  Lauge  retiins  the  received  text  without  remark.  It  is  redundant,  but  not  superlluous.  Kiphteoufl- 
neKs  is  represoKted  aa  a  flDod  extending  unto  all  (cis  Trayrai)  and  overall  («jri  ndvrai).  Kwald :  '•  beslimmt /ur  allt 
und koiniii'iKt  ubT  alh." — P.  S.J 

'  Ver.  23.— [Theaorist  Jj^iapToj',  not  the  perfect  tj^iapr^Kacri.  Luther:  Sit  rind  all zumal  Sunder.  Rurkcrt,  in  hi4 
ridiculously  presumptuous  pvoclivity  to  criticise  the  Apostle's  gniminar  and  logic,  calls  the  use  of  the  aorist  hen-  an 
inuci-uracy.  Jiengol,  OInhausen,  and  Wordsworth  refer  it  to  the  ori>,'inal  fall  of  the  race  in  Adam.  Meyer  in  loc. :  "  Tin 
Biniiini;  oi'  i-acli  m.iii  is  presented  as  a  histDrieiil  fact  of  the  past,  whereby  the  sinful  status  is  brought  about."  So  aUo 
ThoUaU,  I'bilippi,  I^iuge.     See  £j.p.  i\'o^«.— P.  S.) 

•  Ver.  ib. — [  i  Aoo'Tijpioi',  i xpialorium  (a  neuter  noun  from  the  adjective  iXaa-njpiot,  propiliatory,  rxpiatnry, 
from  tlie  verb  iAa^KO/iat,  to  oppiafe,to  cunciliale),  may  mean  Suhwpfur  (iA.  Bv/xa),  expiatoiy  sacrijlix;  or  SuliiimitUl 
(  =  iAacr/tof),  irpiaioit,  pidpiliatiun  ;  or  Suliinlrrkul  (tA.  iiriSey-a,  or  (jriOimo)  mircy-sritl  (cover  of  the  aik).  Dr.  L^mgo 
adopts  t:i.-  la.-.t,  and  translates  <S'«/i;ihw^<.v<'// (ca;//)"rr.7i;  Luther;  Giiodin-^iuhi).  The  word  occurs  but  twice  in  the  N. 
1'.,  here  an  I  Heb.  ix.  5.  In  the  latter  passage  it  certainly  signifies  the  mercy-seat,  or  golden  cover  of  the  ark  of  the 
covenant,  called  in  Hebrew  r~5r  (from  "B3,  (o pnpiliati ,  lo  alom).  This  is  also  the  technical  meaning  of  the  word 
in  the  L.\X.,  Ex.  xxv.  18,  19,  :0 ;  xxxi  7,  &c.,  and  in  I'hilo  {Vila  Mm.  iii.  G8,  p.  608;  D.\  Prxfug.  19,  p.  465:  t^«  U 
lAcoK  {uvafxcuit,  TO  eniSena  rrji  ki^uitov,  KoAet  Se  aiirb  iAoo'T^pioi').  A  fourth  interpretation  by  I'elagius,  Ambrose,  Semler, 
and  AVahl  takes  (AaaTijpioc  m  the  masculine  gender  =:  iAacrr^s,  piipilUitnr ;  but  tbis  is  contrary  to  the  use  of  the  word 
and  incousisteiit  with  the  context.  There  are  iAacrr^pia,  but  no  (Aaa-r^pioi.  The  choice  lies  between  prupittcUory  sacri' 
fice,  a. id  inmy-S'iit.     Sec  Ex  g.  AotfS. — P.  .S.J 

'  Ver.  25.— The  article  t^s  before  iriareus  is  supported  hy  Codd.  li.  and  A.,  Chrysostom  and  Theodoret.  [The  UxL 
ree.  also  reads  t^s  ;  but  Codd.  N.  C*.  1)*.  V.  O.  Orig.,  ICus.,  Bas.,  &c.,  Lachmann,  Tischendorf,  Alford,  omit  it.  Heyer 
thinks  it  may  have  been  omitted  in  view  of  5ta  niartun,  ver.  22.— P.  S.) 

"  Ver.  2.5. — [Or  a.s  Alford  tran-^lates  :  on  itccoiint  "/  the  ovrlonkiiig  of  Ih'.  sins  which  had  passed,  in  the  forh'oranct  of 
Ood.  Conybeare  and  Ilowvon  :  huausc  in  His  forljinrance  God  h' id  pushed  over  Ihi;  funner  sins  of  men.  Lange  :  vnn 
toepin  di'r  Vnrbf.ilassmig  {Nich'hfimsuihung)  der  vnrher  gRsdnheiifn  Ulinden.  The  Authoriled  Version  here,  following 
Beza  (/)«)•  tciiiissionim),  is  a  mistranslation.  Trapccrit  (from  itapirjixi),  which  occurs  but  once  in  the  X.  T.,  differs  from 
a0«r({  (from  a^irfiii),  which  occurs  seventeen  times,  in  tliis,  t!iat  it  is,  1.  a  Icmpmary  |)rajtermission  or  overlooking,  not 
a  tnlal  remission  or  pardon  ;  2.  a  work  of  the  Divine  avoyrj,  J'cibi'a ranee  (ii.  4),  not  of  the  Divine  xapK,  gi-acc  (Kph.  1. 
7) ;  3.  it  leaves  the  question  of  future  punisliracnt  or  pardon  undecided,  while  the  a<^c(n«  removes  the  gi»it  and  reniitf 
the  punishment.  The  same  idea  Paul  expresses.  Acts  xvii.  30:  tows  nev  ovv  xpiit'O"?  t^s  aycoiaf  untpiSlav  (having 
overlooked)  6  Be6<;,  &c.  Sid  with  the  accusative  cannot  mean  through,  by  iicirnji  of,  or  fur,  but  on  aanunt  if;  for  Paul 
clearly  distinguishes  (even  Rom.  viii.  U  ;  Gal.  iv.  13)  Sid  with  the  accusative  and  6ta  with  the  genitive.  The  Vulgate 
correctly  renders  Sid  propter,  but  mistakes  irdptait  for  ai^eo'if,  rcmissio.  So  also  Luther  :  in  deni  dass  er  Sunde  vergitbl.— 
P.  S.] 

»  Ver.  26.— r^i-  (before  eVJeifirl  in  Codd.  A.  B.  C.  D.  [D*.  N.  Lachmann,  Tischendorf,  Itfeyer,  Alford.  The  article 
was  omitted  to  conform  to  eis  ivlet^iv,  ver.  2.5.  But  the  article  distinguishes  the  ecSeifis  of  ver.  'X  from  the  former  "aa 
the  fuller  and  ultimate  object."  Dr.  Lange  ingeniously  distinguishes  between  ei?  et'fieifii'  and  jrpoj  tijc  ivhti^iv.  See 
Ex'-q.  .VolfS.—P.  8.] 

'">  Ver.  26.— The  addition  'It)o-oC  is  found  in  Codd.  A.  B.  C.  K.  [and  Sin.l,  Lachmann  [Alford.  Omitted  by  F.  O. 
52,  It.,  Fritzschc,  Meyer,  Tischendorf ;  while  other  authorities  read  XpurTou  'lri<r.,  or  tou  Kvpiov  ruiCiv  'I.  X.  A  usual 
insertion.  The  force  of  rbv  ex  nitTTttm  is  weakened  by  the  E.  V.  The  ««  Indicates  that  irioris,  or  Christ  rather  aa 
apprehended  by  wio-tis,  is  the  root  or  fountain  of  his  spiritual  life ;  comp.  the  ix  in  i.  17  ;  ii.  13.  Conybeare  and  llow- 
Bon  :  "It  means  'him  whose  es.senlial  characteristic  is  faith,'  'the  child  of  faith;'  comp.  Gal.  iii.  7,  9.  SixaLov 
would  perlraps  be  better  rendered  by  rigkVuus,  but  we  have  no  verb  from  the  same  root  equivalent  to  itKoioOrra. — P.  S.] 

'■  Ver.  28. — The  reading  y  op  is  supported  by  Codd.  A.  and  Sin. ;  but  B.  C,  &c.,  and  especially  the  context,  are  in 
&vor  of  the  recopta  ovv.  ['l"he  external  authorities  are  decidedly  in  favor  of  ydp.  Alford  regards  ovv  as  a  correction 
from  misundersia  iding  of  Aoyifo/toi  as  conveying  a  conclu.-^ion.     See  Exig.  Xotrs.—V.  S.] 

>''  Ver.  28. — The  rcadinu  S  iKaiovaBai  dvBp.  nicTei.  [The  recfpta  Tvaia  irio-rei  before  5  iicoio0<r6ai ,  to 
throw  emphasis  on  faith.     But  N'.  B.  C.  D.  read  Sik.   Trio-ret   dvBputnov. — P.  3.] 

'3  Ver.  JS. — ^[xwp'S  epyuiv  vofiov,  without  or  apart  from  law  (legal)  works  (Gesrlzisivrrki)  or  works  of  the  law. — P.  S.l 

>'  Ver.  ^9. — Lachmann,  with  Codd.  A.  C.  F.  [Sin.l,  and  many  others,  declare  for  iJi6vov.  Tischendorf,  with  B.  ana 
ancient  fathers,  favor  fioviov.  [This  is  too  poorly  supported  and  can  easily  be  accounted  for  by  the  preceding  'lovSaCu>v. — 
P.  8.] 

'*  Ver.  30.- «7reiTr«p  [recfp?<i],  instead  of  tlirtp,  which  probably  arose  because  the  former  occurs  only  hero  in  the 
K.  T.  (see  Meyer).     [But  tlire/>  is  better  supported  by  A.  B.  C.  I)'.  Sin'.,  &c.,  and  preferred  by  Alford.— P.  S.] 

"  Ver.  31.— [i(rTu>fi<i'  (indicative  from  io-Tdco.  a  less  usual  form  fir  iarantv,  from  timj/xi)  is  the  reading  of  N'.  D*. 
E.  I.  K.  and  Elz.,  and  is  defended  by  Fritzsche,  for  the  reason  that  it  closes  the  sentence  with  more  gra\-ity  and  power, 
and  corresponds  more  harmoniously  to  the  preceding  KaTapyovnev.  But  i<TTdvoii.ev  (a  late  form  of  the  same  verb) 
ia  better  supported  Ity  M'.  A.  li.  C.  D-.  F.  Orig.,  &c.,  and  is  recommended  by  Griesbach  and  adopted  by  Lachmannt 
Tischendorf,  and  Alford.  The  sense  is  the  same  :  to  make  stand  fast,  to  establish,  to  confirm,  =  fitfiaxovv,  stabilirt.^ 
P.  8.] 

'Forbes  arranges  the  important  section,  vers,  21-26,  in  this  way,  which  may  assist  somevhat  in  the  exegeaia : 

21.  Nucl  Si  x'^P'f  I'dftou 

Ai.KaiO(Tvvri  &tov  Trt<f>avipu>Tai, 
MapTvpou/xfVj)  iiiri)  tou  fo/iiou  icat  rCiv  npo<t)rjTu>v, 

22.  AixaiocrvfT)  Si  0coO  Sid  niirTeiot  'IrjooD  XptoroO, 

Eis  jrai'To?  Ka'i  eirl  ndvTat  Toiit  ni<rTevovTai  ' 

23.  Oil  ydp  iariv  iiaoToAij  • 

IIak'T«;  yip  ^^apTo*',  Koi  ixrrepovvrai,  T^s  4(Jf  ijt  ToO  8coO  • 

24.  a    i^iKaiovfiLtvoi  Stopedv  rjj  auToD  ydpiTi 

,     I  Aia  T>)(  airoAuTpiuatut  t>)t  (V  XpioTip  'IigvoAi 

25.  \'Ov  npoiBt-ro  o  ©eb«  lAao'Tijpioi' 
a   Aici  irtVrcuf  iv  T<f  avToD  aifiaru 

Et?  ivSti^iv  Tij?  Jtxatoo'Oiijt  outoO, 

Aia  7't)v  ndptaiv  riiv  rrpoytyovoTaiv  anaprrfnirmf 

'Ev  7Jj  afoxn  TOU  tjeou, 

V    J  TIpbt  TJjv  tvSti(iv  T^s  jucaKxrvnjt  avro3 
I  'Ev  rif  vuv  Kaipip, 

fi       Elf  rh  tlvai  aiirhv  Sixaiov 
Km  tiKaioivTo,  rbv  ix  niartut  'li)aov. — P.  8.) 


CHAPTER   III.   21-31. 


12« 


JRXEGETICAIi  AJSTD   CRITICAL. 
FiiisT  Paeageaph,  Chap.  hi.  21-26. 

Contrast  between  the  saving  time  of  justification  and 
tlie  old  time  of  sin  and  death. 

Ver. 21.  But  now,  vvvi  Si. — Explanations  of 
vnvi:  1.  Contrast  of  times  [at  this  time,  under  the 
go.spel  dispensation,  =  iv  n'l  vTiv  ■/.ai.^(J),  ver.  26]  ; 
(Grotius,  Tliolucl\,  Pliilippi  [Olshausen,  Wordsworth, 
Hodge],  and  others) ;  2.  contrast  of  circumstances 
[as  thiiiris  are^  :  earlier  dependence  ou  the  law,  now 
independence  of  the  law  [/iia.  vo/iov — /(o^jiq  r6fiov'\, 
(Pareus,  Piscat.,  Meyer,  De  Wette  [Fritzsclie,  Alford. 
In  this  sense  the  classics  use  only  vt^',  not  vrvl, 
but  the  latter  is  so  used  repeatedly  in  Hellenistic 
Greek]  ) ;  3.  in  soteriology  the  two  contrasts  of 
time  and  condition  coincide. — Apart  from  the  law 
[of  Moses,  /lofjit;  ro/foi']:  1.  It  is  referred  to 
7ii(pave('0)rai,  (Luther,  Tholuck,  Meyer,  and  oth- 
ers) ;  2.  to  di,y.aioat'vtj  (Augustine,  Wolf  [Rciche, 
Hodge],  and  others) :  the  righteousness  of  God 
which  the  believer  shares  without  the  law  [or  rather, 
without  u'orks  of  tiie  law,  ym^Jiq  E(jy«tv  vo/tnv,  Gal. 
ii.  16].  The  latter  view  is  not  correct,  [Comp. 
rfiM  vouav  in  ver.  20,  which  likewise  belongs  not  to 
the  noun  iTiiyvmai,!;,  but  to  the  verb  to  be  supplied. 
Also  Text.  Note  '.—P.  S.] 

[The  righteousness  of  God.  Comp.  the 
Exeg.  Notes  on  chap.  i.  17.  It  is  the  righteousness 
which  proceeds  from  God  {gen.  auctori.s),  which  per- 
Bonally  appeared  in  C^i'ist,  "  who  is  our  Righteous- 
ness," and  which  is  communicated  to  the  believer 
for  Christ's  sake  in  the  act  of  justification  by  faith. 
It  is  both  objective,  or  inherent  in  God  and  realized 
in  Christ,  and  subjective,  or  imparted  to  man.  It  is 
here  characterized  by  a  series  of  antitheses :  inde- 
pendent of  the  law,  yet  authenticated  by  the  law  and 
the  prophets  (ver,  21) ;  freely  (<)i(,)()Kiv)  bestowed  on 
the  believer,  yet  fully  paid  for  by  the  redemption 
price  (f)t«  T^i;  aTTohrQo'xTHttq)  of  Christ  (24) ;  intrin- 
sically holy,  yet  justifying  the  sinner  (26) ;  thus 
uniting  the  character  of  the  moral  governor  of  the 
universe,  and  the  merciful  Father  who  provided  a 
free  salvation. — P.  S.] 

Has  been  made  manifest,  n iqtaveQoyrat. 
This  is  now  the  complete  revelation  of  righfeounness ; 
as  John  i.  17  represents  the  complete  revelation  of 
grace  and  iru  h ;  and  as  Eph,  i.  19  represents  the 
complete  revelation  of  omnijjofence.  All  are  single 
definitions  of  the  completed  New  Testament  revela- 
tion itself.  The  expression  does  not  absolutely  pre- 
suppose "  the  previous  concealment  in  God's  coun- 
cil "  (Meyer).*  For  the  Old  Testament  was  the 
increasing  revelation  of  God,  also  in  reference  to 
righteousness.  But  compared  with  this  completeness, 
the  growing  revelation  was  still  as  a  veil. — Being 
testified  to  [fi  a^r  tiQovjuivtj,  put  first  with 
reference  to  y<o(jii;  vo.kov,  which  it  qualifies] 
by  the  law  and  the  prophets  [i.  e.,  the  Old  Tes- 
tament Scriptures;  Matt.  v.  17;  vii.  12;  xxii.  40, 
&c. ;  just  as  we  now  say  the  Bible,  vo/iov  has  here, 
as  Bengel  remarks,  a  wider  sense  than  in  the  preced- 
ing /I'l^lt;  voi'ov. — P.  S.]  There  is  therefore  no  con- 
tradiction  between  the  Old  and  New  Testaments. 


*  [So  also  Hodge :  "  This  righteousness  which,  so  to 
speak,  had  lonpr  boon  buried  under  the  types  and  indistinct 
Utterances  of  the  old  dispensation,  has  now  in  the  gospel 
been  made  clear  and  apparent."— P.S.]. 

9 


The  Old  Testament  is  in  substance  a  prophetic  wit 
ness  of  the  New,  and  therefore  also  of  the  righteous- 
ness of  faith  (see  chajj.  iv.,  and  x.  6  ;  Acts  x.  43  ; 
chap.  XV.).  And  not  only  do  the  prophets  (Isa 
xxviii.  16  ;  Habak.  ii.  4)  testify  to  this  righteous, 
ness,  but  so  does  the  law  also  in  its  stricter  sense 
(the  patriarchs,  &c.) ;  yea,  even  its  strictest  sense  ; 
for  example,  the  law  of  the  sin-offering  (Lev.  xvi.). 
[Augustine :  Novum  Testamentmn  in  Vet<re  latsi ; 
Vetus  T.  in  Noro  paiet.  See  the  proof  in  chap,  iv, 
from  the  case  of  Abraham  and  the  declarations  of 
David.— P.  S.] 

Ver.  22.  Through  faith  of  Jesus  Christ.*  The 
usual  explanation  is,  through  I'aith  in  Jesus  Christ 
[genitive  of  the  ol)ject].f  Meyer  produces  in  its  favor 
the  usage  of  language  (Mark  xi.  22  ;  Acts  iii.  16  ; 
Gal.  ii.  20 ;  iii.  22  ;  Eph.  iii.  12,  &c.),  as  well  as  the 
essential  relation  of  the  Triari^i;  to  the  di^y-avoirvvrj. 
[Tliese  parallel  passages,  to  which  may  be  added 
Gal.  ii.  16  ;  Eph.  iv.  13  ;  Phil.  iii.  9  ;  James  ii.  1  ; 
Rev.  xiv,  12,  seem  to  me  conclusive  in  favor  of  the 
usual  interpretation  that  our  faith  in  Christ  is 
meant  here;  comp.  also  TO  V  ix  niarfwi;  'J  tjaovy. 
ver.  26.  But  Dr.  Lange  strongly  fortifies  his  new 
interpretation :  Christ's  faithful nesx  to  us,  taking 
^ltj(ToT'  X(ji,(jToTi  as  the  genitive  of  the  subject. — 
P.  S.]  The  explanation  of  Benecke,  the  faithful- 
ness of  Christ,  is  overlooked  even  by  Tholuck.  We 
make  it,  Chri.st''s  believing  faithfulness  [Glaubens- 
treue'].  Reasons :  1.  The  Tr/rrTtt;  .9? or  (chap.  iii.  3),, 
and  the  coherency  of  the  ideas,  niinfvfffOat,,  ma- 
Tf I'f tr,  and  nhri^q  Stov,  in  opposition  to  the  ideas : 
aTnarcoi,  anifTTtn,  and  corresponding  with  the 
ideas:  righteousness  of  God,  righteousness  of  Christ, 
righteousness  by  faith,  2.  The  addition  in  this  pas- 
sage of  ftq  TzciTTai;  y.al  tni  ndvTuc; ;  with  which 
we  must  compare  chap.  i.  17,  ix  niarnoi;  *(<,•  ■kIgti.v. 
3.  The  passages.  Gal.  iii.  22  ;  Eph.  iii.  12  ;  comp. 
Heb.  xii.  2.  As  to  His  knowledge,  Christ  of  course 
did  not  walk  by  faith,  but  b)  siglit ;  but  as  regards 
the  moral  principle  of  faith — confidence  and  faith- 
fulness— He  is  the  Prince  of  faith.  4.  We  cannot 
say  of  the  righteousness  of  God,  that  it  was  first 
revealed  by  faith  in  Christ.  The  revelation  of  God's 
righteousness  in  the  faithfulness  of  Christ  is  the 
ground  of  justifying  faith,  but  faith  is  not  the  ground 
of  this  revelation.  5,  So  also  the  fita  riii;  niaxfog 
Iv  T<7)  ainov  aif<ari,,  ver.  25,  cannot  be  regarded 
as  substantiating  the  'i}.a(7Ttj(Juov. 

Unto  all  and  upon  all..  The  ftq  denotes  the 
direction,  the  ideal  dynamic  determination  of  the 
di/.ai,offiivti ;  the  in  I,  the  fulfilment,  the  appro- 
priation. [This  must,  of  course,  not  be  understood 
in  a  Universalistic  sense.  See  Textual  Note  *. — 
P.  S.]  Both  prepositions  have  been  combined  in 
various  ways  as  identical,  and  explained  as  strength. 
ening  the  thought  for  all  (thus  Riickert,  and  oth- 
ers) ;  on  the  contrary,  Theodorct,  fficumenius,  and 
others,  have  arbitrarily  referred  fh  to  the  Jews,  and 
ini  to  the  Gentiles ;  according  to  Morus,  and  others, 
xal  ini,  &c.,  is  construed  as  a  further  explanation 
of  the  fit;  ndrrac. 

For  there  is  no  difference.  On  account  of 
ydq,  this  clause  refers  to  the  former.      There  is 


♦[8ta  7ri'<TTe<i>?,  bt/  means  of,  throvgh  ;  not  Siol  m<r- 
Tiv,  on  account  of.  Faith  is  the  apiiropriating  organ  and 
subiective  condition,  not  the  ground  and  cause  of  our  justi- 
fication.—P.  S.]  ,        .  , 

t  [Berlage,  Scholten,  V.  Hengel,  take  "Irjo-oO  Xpi<rTov  aa 
gen.  of  the  author:  fides  rjux  oucfore  J'su  diiislo  De« 
habetur.    See  agaiust  this  Meyer  in  loc,  footnote.— P.  S.J 


130 


THE    EPISTLE   OF   PAUL   TO   TUE   ROMANS. 


neitlier  a  difference  between  Jews  and  Gentiles,  nor, 
in  rcterence  lo  the  necessity  of  justification,  is  there 
a  dlHcrcnce  between  tiioae  wiio  liuve  siiown  theni- 
Belvcs,  according  to  chap.  ii.  7  ft".,  doers  or  transgress- 
ors "t  the  l.iw. 

Ver.  -28.  For  all  sinned  [they  are  all  sin- 
ners ;  Liitlicr :  sie  shul  allznmul  Sunder^  Tlicy 
sinned,  in  tlie  sense  that  tiiey  have  become  sinners. 
Tlierefore  nor.  (II.),  and  not  pirfrct.  They  sinned  in 
8Jch  a  way  tliat  they  are  stiil  sinning.*  But  their  right- 
eousness was  altogetlier  lost  when  their  transgression 
began. — And  fall  short  of  the  glory  [ruTf- 
(lorrrftt,  in  the  present  tense.  All  xiiined,  and 
consequently  tliey  come  short],  riji;  (^oi  ;/(,•.  E.v- 
planations  :  1.  Glorying  before  God,  f/loriado  \ 
(Erasmus,  Lutlier,  Rosemniiller,  and  others).  2.  The 
«Voi«  fytor  as  the  image  of  God  (Flicius,  Chemnitz, 
Riicl<ert,  Olsliausen ;  see  1  ('or.  xi.  7).  3.  The 
glory  of  eternal  life  [as  in  vi^r.  2],  (Gicumcnius, 
Gliickler,  &c.,  Ik'za,  Bengel,  as  sharing  in  the  glory 
of  God).  4.  Honor  before  God,  i.  e.,  in  the  estima- 
tion of  <fOii  (Calvin  [r/loria  qnre  coram  Deo  locum 
Imbfl]^  KiJllner).  5.  Tlie  iionor  which  God  gives, 
i.  e.,  the  ajjprobation  of  God  (the  gcnit.  auct.); 
Piscat.,  Grotius,  Piiilipj)!,  Meyer  [Fritzsche,  De 
Wette,  Alford,  Hodge].  Tliolucli :  Tlie  declaration 
of  honor,  like  the  declaration  of  rigiiteousness.:^  Tliis 
would  give  tlie  strange  sense:  because  they  lack  the 
declaration  of  riglUeousncss  on  tlie  part  of  God,  they 
are  to  be  declared  righteous.  It  must  not  be  over- 
looked that  men  belong  here  who,  as  inward  Jews, 
according  to  chap.  ii.  29,  have  already  t'/rau'oi,-  ex 
^for.  Certainly,  the  question  is  concerning  right- 
eousness before  God,  because  the  question  concerns 
Go<l's  judicial  tribunal.  But  what  men  were  want- 
ing since  Adam's  fall,  is  not  the  riglUeousncss  of 
justification — for  it  is  by  this  that  that  want  is  to  be 
•supplied — but  the  righteousness  of  life  (not  to  be 
^confounded  with  tlie  righteousness  by  the  works  of 
ithe  lawj,  as  the  true  glory  or  radiance  of  life  [()o$a  in 
nhe  sense  of  splendor,  majesty,  perfection.  Lange 
itranslates  it  :  Gerec/itirf  eltiighim^  Ixbensrithm.  — 
P.  S.].  But  as  the  dixamnrvr;  of  man  must  come 
froni  the  fVizMtorriW'/;  of  (Jorl  in  order  to  avail  before 
Him,  S')  also  tlie  do^n.  Therefore  the  alternative, 
from  (rod  or  lief  ore  God,  is  a  wrong  alternative.  § 
But  the  supply  is  equal  to  the  want :  the  <)i./.ai,ofTi'vt] 
of  Christ  becomes  the  iHixaunni'ivij  of  the  believer, 
and  therefore  ('hiisl's  rViirt  his  i),',irt  (Rom.  viii.). || 

"Ver.  2i.  Being  justified  freely-Tf  The  par- 
ticiple   fVtzato  I'/t  f  vot,    in    connection    with   what 


*  [Moyor  :  "futapTOV .  Dm  Sundiffn  eincs  Jedfti  tst 
ala  liistoi isch  s  Puclum  drr  Virgnvqinheil,  wndurch  dir  siin- 
diff'-  Ziixlini'l  hiwirlit  ixl,  d'liffrgtrlU.  Das  P-  rfirl.  wUrdf  fa 
aln  rollinde'  dustclnndi'  Tlia'X'icIf  bizi'ichinH."  Sec  Tfxt. 
AoU  *,  and  Ext.^.  jV'>/e<  on  ira.vrt<;  fniapoi'  iti  vor.  12. — 1*.  S  ] 

t  fTliirt  would  1)0  cxprossed  rnther  by  (caii^'jo'i?,  or  kou- 
XT)Mo  ;  vor.  27  ;  iv.  2  ;  1  Cor.  v.  0,  &c.— 1*.  S.] 

J  (Til  )liic-k  (p.  Hi)  cxplnins  :  Di'  vni  0<iU  anngehnide 
Ehrp,iirrfhii}>i,  dm  S  nnf  nneh  dir  Gi'riehlrrk'drung,  and 
quotps  from  S<;lilichtiii)r :  "hue  hun  iignifir.iil  enm  yltirinm, 
qtciini  f)  Id  liomiifm  piimfinrint juxliim." — P.  S.] 

I  (Only  the  honor  which  proc<'e<l« /rf<m  Ood  cnn  stand 
b<-/o,c  God.  So  far  tho  expln nations,  No.  4  corcm  Deo,  and 
No   .')  "  Deo,  nmouiit  to  the  same  thing,  us  Meyer  remarks. 

I  (Still  another  exposition  is  that  of  TToftnnnn  of  Kr- 
Unei-n  <S  hn/ff  wif,  vol.  i.  p.  ti32,  2d  o<!.) :  thi-  iofa  whirh 
l>elon'.rs  to  Ood,  n«  His  own  attritaite,  likr  tho  SiKaioa-vyri. 
Kwnid  :  the  ^t^a  whirh  man  had  through  creation,  I's.  viii. 
8,  liiit  wliirli  Ii..  lost  through  sin.— 1*.  S.J 

^  [WordHworth  liivs  slrosK  on  the  prrsml  tense,  as  in- 
dic<tin?  thnt  tho  work  of  jiistillriition  is  ever  poin^  on  liy 
thf  applic-ation  r.f  tho  clrnn.-iincr  I'fBcary  of  Chnat'i  blood  to 
ull  who  lay  hold  on  Uim  by  faith.— P.' 8.] 


follows,  specifies  both  the  mode  by  which  their  tpani 
of  Divine  fiola  becomes  perfectly  manifest,  and  tha 
opposite  which  comes  to  supply  this  want.  Tho 
(V^/.«^o^(Tl>rtl■  does  not  merely  come  to  sui^ily  the 
want  of  glory  (according  to  Luther's  translation : 
and  are  justified  [Peshito,  Fritzsche,  —  xui  {iixa.^ 
ori'Tat]  ),  but  by  the  i)i,xai,ol(rOxu,  tlie  fact  of  that 
vrjTf(toriTOcii.  becomes  perfectly  apjiarent.  The  in- 
dividual judgment  and  the  individual  deliverance 
are,  in  fact,  joined  into  one :  repentance  and  faith ; 
hunger  and  tliirst  after  righteousness,  and  fulness. 

[Note  ox  the  Scripture  meaning  of  i)i,xat6(ii.— 
//(.>!«to  i'/(  f  rot  depends  grammatically  on  iVt*- 
(lovi'Tcii,,  but  contains  in  fact  the  main  idea  :  ut  qui 
j udijicentur  (Beza,  Tlioluck,  Meyer).  This  is  the 
lociis  classtciis  of  the  doctrine  of  justification  by  free 
grace  through  faith  in  Christ,  in  its  inseparable  con- 
nection with  the  atonement,  as  its  objective  basis. 
The  verb  dtxatoi;)  occurs  forty  times  in  the  New 
Testament  (twice  in  Matthew,  five  times  in  Luke, 
twice  in  Acts,  twenty-seven  times  in  Paul's  Epistles, 
three  times  in  James,  once  in  the  Aiiocalypse.  In 
the  Gospel  and  Ejiistles  of  John,  as  also  in  Peter 
and  James,  the  verb  never  occurs,  although  they 
repeatedly  use  the  noun  (Jiznttorrriv;  and  the  adjec- 
tive c)t'zatos).  It  must  be  taken  iiere,  as  nearly 
always  in  the  Biide,  in  the  declaratory,  foreusic  op 
judicial  sense,  as  distinct  from,  though  by  no  means 
opposed  to,  or  abstractly  separated  from,  a  mere 
executive  act  of  pardoning,  and  an  efficient  act  of 
making  just  inwardly  or  sanct'/i/ing.  It  denotes  an 
act  of  jurisdiction,  the  pronouncing  of  a  sentence, 
not  the  infusion  of  a  quality.  This  is  the  prevail- 
ing Hellenistic  usage,  corresponding  to  the  Hebrew 
p"'^sn .  Coinp.,  for  the  Old  Testament,  the  Septuv 
gint  in  Gen.  xxxviii.  26  ;  xliv.  16  ;  Ex.  xxiii.  7  {ov 
()i.y.aui'irTfK;  rov  a<Tf[i7j) ;  Dent.  xxv.  1  ;  2  Sam.  xv. 
4  ;  1  Kings  viii.  32  ;  Ps.  Ixxxii.  3  ;  Prov.  xvii.  15  ; 
Isa.  V.  23  ;  for  the  New  Testament,  Matt.  xii.  37  ; 
Luke  X.  29;  xvi.  15;  xviii.  14  (where  iin)i,xni.«uiiroii 
evidently  refers  to  the  publican's  prayer  for  forgive- 
ness of  .sin);  Acts  xiii.  39  ;  Rom.  ii.  13  ;  iii.  4,  20, 
24,  26,  28,  30;  iv.  2,  5  ;  v.  1,  9  ;  viii.  3n,  33  ;  1  Cor. 
iv.  4;  vi.  11;  Gal.  ii.  16,  17;  iii.  8,  11,  24;  v.  4; 
Titus  iii.  7 ;  James  ii.  21-25  ;  Apoc.  xxii.  11.  There 
is,  to  my  knowledge,  no  passage  in  the  New  Tes- 
tiiment,  and  only  two  or  three  in  the  Septuagint 
(Ps.  Ixxiii.  13:  iiiixaiutan  rfjv  Kao()inv  fiov\  Isa. 
liii.  11:  <)i.xni,i7t(Tni,  t\txai.ov ;  conip.  Dan.  xii.  8: 
c^3Hn  ^ir"T:i"!3  ),  where  di.xai.6o)  means  to  make 
just,  or,  to  lead  to  righteousness.  The  declarative 
.sense  is  especially  apparent  in  those  pas.sages  where 
man  is  said  to  justify  God,  who  is  just,  and  cannot 
be  mrnie  just,  but  only  accounted  and  acknowledged 
as  just ;  Luke  vii.  29,"  35  ;  Matt.  xi.  19  ;  Rom.  iii.  4 
(from  Ps.  Ii.  5) ;  coinp.  also  1  Tim.  iii.  16,  where 
Christ  is  said  to  be  justified  in  spirit. 

The  declarative  and  forensic  meaning  of  the 
phrase,  {iixmoTafycu  tx  nitTTnit^,  may  be  jirovcn  (1.) 
from  the  opposite  phrase,  i)ixtuova!yni  ix  r6/ioi\ 
which  is  equivalent  to  (\i.xr(io7(Tf>ai.  nana  no  fhitji 
iv  vuiiM,  Gal.  iii.  11  (or  t;  i'liymv  voiior,  Gal.  iii.  10), 
or  ivo'i mo  y  arroT-,  Rom.  iii.  20  ;  i.  e.,  to  be  justified 
in  the  sight  or  in  the  judgment  of  (Jod  ;  (2.)  from 
the  term  /.oyHlnv  f(\-  thxaiorTi'rtjr,  to  account  for 
righteous,  which  is  used  in  the  same  sense  as  (Itxnt- 
oi^r,  Rom.  iv.  3,  5,  9,  23,  24  ;  Gal.  iii.  6  ;  James  iL 
23,  and  is  almost  equivalent  with  am^ny,  to  save 
feoinp.  Rom.  v.  9,  10;  x.  9,  10,  13  ;  Eph.  ii.  6  ff.); 
(3.)   from  the  use  of  the  opposite  word  lo  condemn^ 


CHAPTER   m.   21-31. 


131 


f,  g.,  Prov.  xvii.  15  :  "  He  that  justifieth  (  p'''^sa  , 
LXX. :  diy.(xt.ov  x(>lvfi,)  the  wicked,  and  he  that  con- 
demneth  (  S''i:J«Ti;  )  the  just,  even  they  both  are 
abomination  to  the  Lord,"  in  the  translation  of  the 
Vulgate  :  "  Qui  justijicat  impimti  et  qiti  candernnat 
justiim,  ahonnnahiUe:  est  uienjue  apnd  Deum."  He 
who  would  implant,  righteousness  in  a  wicked  man, 
or  lead  liim  into  the  way  of  righteousness,  would 
doubtless  be  acceptable  to  God.  So  also  Matt.  xii. 
87  :  "  By  thy  words  shalt  thou  be  justified  (fVtKwto)- 
S-ijiTfi),  and  by  thy  words  thou  shalt  be  condemned 
{KaTa<)i,xaiTl}t'jtTii). 

The  corresponding  noun,  (ii,KaimffiQ  (which 
occurs  only  twice  in  the  New  Testament,  viz.,  Rom. 
iv.  25  ;  V.  18),  justificatinn  {Rechtfertigung\  is  tlie 
opposite  of  /.ardx^tfia,  condemnation  ;  comp.  Matt, 
xii.  37  ;  Rom.  viii.  1,  33,  34 ;  hence  the  antithesis 
of  x(jT,i(a  fit;  f%/.aiiii(nv  and  x/jtim  fit;  xaTcixQifta, 
Rom.  V.  16, 18.  Justification  implies,  negatively,  the 
remission  of  sins  {liqeffit;  rm'  a/iaiiTiAv),  and,  posi- 
tively, the  imputatitm  of  Christ's  righteousness,  or 
the  adoption  (iioflfff/a,  Gal.  iv.  5  ;  Eph.  i.  5). 

No  human  being  can  so  keep  the  law  of  God, 
which  demands  perfect  love  to  Him  and  to  our  neigli- 
bor,  that  on  the  ground  of  his  own  works  he  could 
ever  be  declared  righteous  before  the  tribunal  of  a 
holy  God.  He  can  only  be  so  justified  freelg,  with- 
out any  merit,  of  his  own,  on  the  objective  ground  of 
the  perfect  righteousness  of  Christ,  as  apprehended, 
and  thus  made  subjective  by  a  living  faith,  or  life- 
union  with  Him.  This  justifying  grace  precedes 
every  truly  good  work  on  our  part,  but  is  at  the 
same  time  the  actual  beginning  of  all  good  works. 
There  is  no  true  holiness  except  on  the  ground  of 
the  atonement  and  the  remission  of  sin,  and  the  holi- 
ness of  the  Christian  is  but  a  manifestation  of  love 
and  gr?titude  for  the  boundless  mercy  of  God  already 
received  and  constantly  experienced. 

This  I  take  to  be  the  true  evangelical  or  Pauline 
view  of  justification,  in  opposition  to  the  interpreta- 
tion of.  Roman  Catholics  and  Rationalists,  who,  from 
opposite  standpoints,  agree  in  taking  {)i.xai,6i<i  in  the 
sense  of  making  just,  or  sanctifying,  and  in  regard- 
ing good  icorks  as  a  joint  condition,  with  faith,  of 
progressive  justification.  Tiie  oly'ection  that  God 
cannot  pronounce  a  man  just  if  he  is  not  so  in  fact, 
has  force  only  against  tnat  mechanical  and  exclu- 
sively forensic  view  which  resolves  justification  into 
a  sort  of  legal  fiction,  or  a  cold,  lifeless  imputation, 
and  separates  it  from  the  broader  and  deeper  doc- 
trine of  a  life-union  of  the  believer  with  Christ. 
Certainly  God,  unlike  any  human  judge,  is  absolutely 
true  and  infallible  ;  He  speaks,  and  it  is  done  ;  His 
declaratory  acts  are  creative,  efficient  acts.  But 
mark,  the  sinner  is  not  justified  owtetVe  of  Christ,  but 
only  in  Christ,  on  the  ground  of  His  perfect  sacri- 
fice, and  on  condition  of  true  faVh,  by  which  he 
actually  becomes  one  with  Christ,  and  a  partaker  of 
His  holy  life.  So,  when  God  declares  him  right- 
eous, he  M  righteous  potentialhi,  "  a  new  creature  in 
Christ ; "  old  things  having  passed  away,  and  all 
things  having  become  new  (1  Cor.  v.  7).  And  God, 
who  sees  the  end  from  the  beginning,  sees  also  the 
full-grown  fruit  in  the  gerra,  and  by  His  gracious 
promise  assures  its  growtli.  Justifying  ft^ith  is  itself 
I  work  of  Divine  grace  in  us,  and  the  fruitful  source 
of  all  our  good  works.  On  the  part  of  Goil,  then, 
and  in  point  of  faet,  the  actua  declaratorias  can 
indeed  not  be  abstractly  separated  from  the  actus 
efficiens :  the  same  grace  which  justifies,  does  also 


renew,  regenerate,  and  sanctify ;  faith  and  love,  ju9« 
titication  and  sanctification,  are  as  inseparable  in  th« 
life  of  the  Christian,  as  liglit  and  heat  in  the  rayi 
of  the  sun.  "  When  God  doth  justify  the  ungodly," 
says  Owen  (on  Justijication,  vol.  v.  p.  127,  Goold'a 
ed.),  "  on  account  of  the  righteousness  imputed  unto 
him.  He  doth  at  the  same  instant,  by  the  power  of 
His  grace,  make  him  inhefctitig  and  subjectivelif 
righteous,  or  holy."  Nevertheless,  we  must  distin- 
guish in  the  order  of  logic :  Justification,  like  re- 
generation (which  is  the  corresponding  and  simulta- 
neous or  preceding  inner  operation  of  the  Holy 
Spirit),  is  a  single  act,  sanctification  a  contimioni 
process ;  they  are  related  to  each  other  like  birth 
and  growth  ;  justification,  moreover,  depends  not  at 
all  on  what  man  is  or  has  done,  but  on  what  Chriti 
has  done  for  us  in  our  nature  ;  and,  finally,  good 
works  are  no  cause  or  condition,  but  a  conseguerice 
and  manifestation  of  justification.  Comp.  Doctrinal 
and  Ethical,  No.  5,  below  ;  also  the  Exeg.  Notes  on 
i.  17 ;  ii.  13  ;  iii.  20.— P.  S.] 

Freely,  dtn^ifav,  as  a  gift,  gratis,  not  by 
merit  (chap.  iv.  4  ;  comp.  2  Tliess.  iii.  8).  [Comp 
also  ij  (iMQfo.  T^<;  fVtxato(T('i'A/(,',  Rom.  v.  17,  and 
S(ov  TO  <)mqov,  Eph.  ii.  3. — P.  S.] — By  his 
grace.  The  idea  of  grace  denotes  the  union  of 
God's  love  and  righteousness,  the  highest  manifesto, 
tion  of  His  favor,  which,  by  its  voluntary  operation, 
as  love,  destroys  the  sinner's  guilt  freely,  and  which, 
as  righteousness,  destroys  the  j^uilt  on  conditions  of 
justice.  [Grace — i.  e.,  God's  love  to  the  sinner, 
saving  love,  is  the  eflScient  cause,  redemption  by  the 
blood  of  Christ  tlie  objective  means,  faith  the  eub' 
jective  condition,  of  justification,  cc  vrou  is  em- 
phatically put  before  /cc^trt.  Justification  on  the 
part  of  God  is  an  act  of  pure  grace  (Eph.  ii.  8-10 ; 
Gal.  ii.  21),  and  /«()w,-  is  the  very  opposite  of 
/(KT.9oc  eijyoiv  or  6'ffi).i],iia  (iv.  4  ;  xi.  6).  Faith, 
on  our  part,  is  not  a  meritorious  act,  but  simply  the 
acceptance  and  appropriation  of  God's  free  gift,  and 
is  itself  wrought  in  us  by  God's  Spirit,  without 
whom  no  one  can  call  Jesus  Lord  (1  Cor.  xii.  3). — 
P.  S.] 

Through  the  redemption,  a7i:o?.vr(to>(Tt,i;. 
The  grace  of  God  is  marked  as  the  causality  of 
this  anohWQoxTic.  This  is  therefore  to  be  regard- 
ed here  as  the  most  general  view  of  the  fact  of 
redemption,  as  is  also  plain  from  the  addition,  t^? 
iv  X.'J.  [t?i  Christ,  not  tlirongh  Christ;  comp.  Eph. 
i.  7  ;  iv  ID  e/oiifv  rijv  ano/.iTQiixni'  dt.a  toT'  ai/<a- 
TO?  avToT'].  The  ano'/.vTftKxnc,  or  redemption,*  in 
the  wider  sense,  and  viewed  as  a  fundamental  and 
accomplished  fact,  comprehends  :  1.  xa-raD.ayri 
[change  from  enmity  to  friendship,  reconciliation], 
Rom.  v.  10;  2  Cor.  v.  18:  freedom  from  the  enmity 
and  rancor  of  sin.  2.  //aff/zot;  [propitiation,  expia- 
tion], 2  Cor.  V.  14;  ver.  21;  Gal.  iii.  13  [fi?;yo- 
pantv  ix  Ttjq  xardfjnq  ToT<  ro/'oc]  ;  Eph.  i.  7  [rr/i' 
aTToi.vTQioaiv  .  .  .  Ttjv  ci'f'ffTiv  TiTiv  7Tcn>anru)iici.- 
T(')i']  ;  Col.  i.  14;  Heb.  ii.  17:  freedom  from  the 
guilt  of  sin.  3.  aTro/rT^fifftt;  in  the  narrower  sense, 
Rom.  v.  17  ;  vi.  2  ;  vi.  18,  22;  viii.  2,  21 ;  Gal.  v. 
1  ;  Titus  ii.  14;  Heb.  ii.  15 ;  ver.  18 :  freedom  from 

*  [Literally,  release  or  delivrnnce  of  prisoners  of  wnr  or 
others  /mm  (an-d)  a  state  of  miPcry  or  d.iupcr  by"  the  pay- 
ment of  a  ransi.m,  (AiiTpof.  or  a.vTi\vTpov)  as  an  equiva.ent; 
the  ransom  in  our  case  is  the  life  or  blood  of  Christ,  Matt. 
XX.  28 ;  Eph.  i.  7  ;  1  Tim.  ii.  6  ;  Titus  ii.  14 ;  1  Peter  i.  18 ; 
ii.  24.  The  synonymous  veibs,  ayopa^eii',  1  Cor.  vi.  20; 
vii.  23  ;  efayopd^cif,  Gal.  iii.  13  ;  irepiiroielaSai,  Acts  XX. 
28:  AvTpouo-flat,  Titus  it.  14,  all  imply  the  payment  of  « 
price.— P.  S.] 


132 


THE    EPISTLE    OF   PAUL   TO    TEE    ROMANS. 


tlie  dominion  of  sin.  Tlie  sume  a.To/.i'Toi.xTK,  viewed 
iu  its  ultiiiKite  aim  and  cttect,  means  the  transpo- 
sition from  the  condition  of  the  mihtant  to  the  tri- 
umphant Cliurch  :  Luke  xxi.  28  ["  the  day  of  re- 
demption drawetii  nigli  "j  ;  Kom.  viii.  23  ;  Eph.  i. 
7,  14  ;  iv.  3iJ.  Tiie  i/.«(T,»o,-  is  justly  represented 
here  as  tlie  central  saving  agency  of  the  whole 
«/To/.rr^>ri(fTii,'.  [llodgc:  Redemption  from  the  »/"a</t 
of  God  by  tiie  blood  of  Christ.  rhilipi)i,  Alford, 
and  others  :  deliverance  from  the  yuili  and  punUfi- 
men'  of  sin  by  the  propitiatory  sacrifice  of  Christ. 
The  one  of  course  implies  the  other. — P.  S.] 

Ver.  25.*  Whom  God  set  forth.  Explana- 
tions of  TUfoiOfro:  1.  Previously  purposed,  de- 
signed, decreed  (Clirysostom,  U'Jcumcnius,  Fritzsche 
[Porlies],  and  others,  witl»  reference  to  Epli.  i.  9j ;  f 
2.  Kyi)Ue  :  xubstilnlt,  nostra  loco  dedit.  Against  the 
meaning  oi  7T(>oTintiiii..\  3.  Publicly  set  forth  (Vul- 
gate, Luther,  Beza,  Bengel,  De  Wette,  Pliilippi, 
Meyer,  Tholuck  [E.  V.,  Alford,  Hodge;  also  De- 
litzsch,  Comin.  on  Ht'b.^  ix.  5]  ).  Meyer  :  "  Tliis 
eignificati'jn  of  n()OTiO-tj,in,  well  known  from  the 
Greek  usage  (Herod.,  iii.  1-48  ;  vi.  21  ;  Plato's 
JVuedr.,  p.  115,  E.,  «Scc.),  must  be  decidedly  accepted, 
because  of  the  correlation  to  ti^  ii'()fti'n'."  §  The 
peculiar  interest  of  God  is  indicated  by  the  middle 
voice.  It  was  manifested  through  tiie  crucifixion  ; 
comi)are  the  discourse  of  Jesus,  in  John,  where  He 
com|)ares  Himself  with  the  serpent  of  Moses ;  John 
iii.  II 

This  explanation  acquires  its  full  weight  by  the 
following  l/.uar t'l^tov,  a  suijstantive  of  neuter 
form,  made  from  tlie  adjective  i/.aiTTti(>toi;,  which 
relates  to  expiatory  acts  ;  see  the  Lexicons.  In  the 
Septuagint  especially  it  is  the  designation  of  tlie 
mercy-seat,  or  the  lid  or  cover  of  the  ark,  n"iQS  , 
which  w;is  sprinkled  by  the  high-priest  with  tiie 
blood  of  the  sin-otfering  once  a  year,  on  the  great 
day  of  atonement  [and  over  which  appeared  the 
shekinah,  or  c)d;«  ror  y.i'itiof,  Lev.  xvi.  13-16;  Ex. 
xxv.  17-22.  Comp  Biihr  :  Sinidinlik  dex  inomischen 
C'uUus,  1837,  vol.  i.,  p.  379  ft.,  387  ff.,  and  Lundius, 


♦  [Olshausen  calls  this  verse  the  "  Acropolis  of  the 
Christian  faith."  Among  English  commentators  Woids- 
wipitli  and  IIo<lge  are  very  full  on  this  verse,  cnpccially  the 
formor,  wli()><e  i-ommentary  is  very  unequal,  passing  \>y 
fiKiiiy  important  passages  without  a  word  of  explanation, 
and  dw(dling  upon  otiiers  with  disproixjitioimto  K'ngth. 
Ilodip  is  much  more  symmetrical,  but  cipLilly  d<)l.^n:lti<■,•^l. 
Of  (iennan  commentators,  comp.  Olshausen,  Tholuck,  I'hi- 
lilil)i,  Meyer.— I'.  S.J 

+  ( Wlierc  TTpoTifljiAii  is  used  of  Ood's  eternal  purpose.  In 
the  third  passagi^  wlicre  Paul  employs  this  verb,  Rom.  i.  13, 
he  means  his  own  jiurpose.  The  E.  V.  translates  coirectly, 
Uiiitli)  ft  f'liUi,  l)Ut  BiiBTgests  in  the  margin, /o/fo/v/ai/ierf. 
This  interpretation  woubl  not  necessarily  require,  as  Meyer 
nsserts,  the  i  ■fiiiitive  elvai  (qwm  issr  viliiil  D'ii<),  comp. 
irpoopi^eii',  iK\dyt<Tdai.  Ttfd  Ti,  and  Rom.  viil.  29;  .Tiimes 
ii.  5.  liut  it  is  ioconsistent  with  the  context;  for  I'aul 
refers  to  a. /'Ill  rather  than  a  purpose,  and  emphasizes  the 
ji'ihliriiy  of  the  fact ;  Comp.  irt(j>avipuiTai,,  ver.  21,  and  tit 
fv6t^{l.v,  ver.  25.— P.  8.) 

;  [Kypkc  quotes  Euripides,  Iphig.  Anl.,  1502;  but  iu 
this  passage  irpovdrjic(  moans  cither  simply  :  Diana  set  forth 
(t  CO  sacrificial  animal),  or  she  preferred.  See  Meyer. — 
V.  9.1 

$  [Meyer  adds  examples  from  Euripides,  Thncydides, 
Demosthenes,  and  also  from  the  LXX.,  and  romarlis,  in  a 
U'lte,  that  the  Oreekg  use  it(iori9<a9a.i  especially  of  the  ex- 

Sosure  of  C()rpsi!8  to  public  vi'w,  and  that  the  Apostle  may 
ave  had  this  in  mind. — P.  S.] 
I  {\lpoTi9ta6ai  ri  means  to  set  f  >rtli  something  as  his 
ewn  to  others.  Comp.  J.  Chr.  K.  v.  Uuhnann  :  Dtr  Schri/I- 
b  W'i',  ii.  I,  J).  337  (2d  ciL)  :  "  >Vi'c///  bins  ehi  Jnlcrexu,  hat 
0>i't  iliibei  (Meyer,  achmid),  .ioiidi:rn  si  in  ist  uml  von  ihin 
Ifimntl  e.r,  dvn  ir  hinstellt,  und  iT  maclU  ihii  zu  dcm,  ah  vaat 
er  iliti  hiiutelU."—r.  8.] 


JuJ.  HeVigthumer,  Humb.  1711,  p.  33  If.— P.  S.].  ' 
Besides,  the  settle,  or  lower  platform  [  '"TitJ  ]  of  the 
altar  of  burnt-olfering  [Ezek.  xliil.  14,  17,  20]  waa 
so  named  [because  tiie  Asnm/i,  like  tlie  C'app</rvi/i, 
was  to  be  sprinkle<l  with  the  blood  of  atonement,  or 
because  it  was  tlie  |)latform  from  wiiicli  the  sin-offer- 
ing was  offered. — P.  S.].  See  also  Exod.  xxv.  22, 
and  other  [ilaces.  Explaiiiitions:  1.  Ej-junturii  !<acri- 
fice^  sin-ojfrrliiff  {Su/iiio/ifir).*  Some  supply  Ovfia 
[which,  liowever,  is  unnecessary,  //.arrr/yoVo)'  being 
used  as  a  noun].  (So  Clerieus,  Reielie,  He  Wette, 
KoUner,  Fritzsche  [.Meyer,  Alford,  Conybeare  and 
Howson,  Jowctt,  Wordsworth,  Hodge,  Ewald]  ).  2. 
Jfeans  of  pro/iitia/iou  [Suhniiiiiiif\  (Vulgate:  pro- 
pit  ialio  ;  Castellio  :  pliHainentuiii ;  Moru.s,  Usteri, 
Riiekert).f  3.  The  mercy-seat,  or  covering  of  tho 
ark  of  the  covenant  [Origen,  Theodoret,  Theophy- 
lact,  Augustine],  (Erasmus,  Luther,  Calvin,  Grotius,  , 
Calov.,  Olshausen,  Pliilippi  [Tholuck,  Porbes]  ). 
Against  tiie  first  exriosition  it  may  be  urged  :  (a.) 
The  expiatory  offering  is  not  brought  to  man  ou 
God's  part,  but  man  brings  it  to  God  by  the  high- 
priest  (see  Pliilippi).:^  (6).  The  offering  is  not  pub- 
licly set  forth,  (c).  The  |)ermanence  of  the  opera- 
tion of  the  offering  reciuires  another  expression,  and 
this  is  Christ  crucified  as  tiie  permanent  atonement 
itself.  Tills  sets  aside  also  the  second  explanation, 
whicli,  moreover,  is  too  abstract  (.Meyer).  Argu- 
ments in  favor  of  the  tliird  explanation :  (a.)  The 
^'yv^Mrt^r/n/ [uniformly]  has  translated  r"iE3,  D.aa- 
rt](,Lov  (Exod.  xxv.  18,  19,  20,  21,  &e.  [twenty- 
six  passages  according  to  Fiirst's  Hebrew  Concord- 
ance] ).§     (6.)  In  Heb.  ix.  5,  i/aor/y^noi'  means  the 

*  [This  meaning  of  cAocrT^piov  docs  not  occur  in  the 
LXX.,  but  often  in  the  later  Greek  writers.  See  tho  ex- 
amples q^uoted  by  Meyer  in  loco,  who  himself  adopts  this 
exi>lanation.  Comp.  also  the  analognns  tenns  xopi<rr>)pior 
and  eiip^apicTT^pioi',  Ihtiik-nff.ring,  Ka0ap<Tiov,  nJT'  ring  fur 
pnrijiiiiiiiin,  <Tij>rqpi.ov,  fwrijiiium  pro  xnhi'e  {Heilnj-f^r). 
The" sense  then  is  this  :  God  set  forth  Jesus  Christ,  in  the 
sight  of  the  iutcUigenl  univcrec,  as  a  propitiatory  sacrifloa 
for  the  sins  of  the  world.  The  choice  lies  between  this  and 
the  third  view  ;  the  second  having  no  support  in  thfc  use  ol 
language,  besides  being  too  alis;ract.  ~i)r.  Jjaiige  has  made 
the  third  interi)retalion  (mercy-seat)  more  plausible  than 
any  other  ciiminentator.  See  liolow.  Comp  also  Philippi, 
p.  105  f.,  and  Forbes,  p.  16G,  for  the  same  view. — P.  S.l 

t  [So  also  Ilofmann,  /.  c,  i.  1,  p.  .'UO.  He  takes  l\<ur- 
Tt)piov  to  be  essentially  the  same  as  iAao-iio?  in  1  John  iv. 
10  :  anioTtiKev  t'ov  v'ibv  auroC  iKaaixov.  The  E.  V.  trans- 
lates both  words  prnpilinlion.  Dr.  Morrison,  in  a  mono- 
gr-aph  on  Rom.  iii.,  as  I  ler.m  from  Forbes  (p.  1G6),  main- 
tains that  iAacTTiipiof  is  never  used  substantively  in  the 
meaning  of  jiropitiatnry  sacrifice,  an<l  coiiclu'les  for  the 
adjective  meaning  of  "set  forth  as  pinpi'inlnrji,"  which, 
as  applied  to  Christ,  would  designate  ilim  as  the  anti- 
typical  fulfilment  of  all  the  symbols  of  propitiation.— 
P.  9.] 

I  (Philippi,  p.  108,  remarks:  "Tho  Scripture  says,  that 
Christ  offered  Himself  to  God  as  a  propitiatory  si  .-offering, 
Heb.  ix.  14,  2M;  Eph.  v.  2;  John  xvii.  19,  but  not,  that 
God  offered  and  exhibited  Jlim  to  mankind  as  a  sacrifice. 
'I'he  sacrifice  is  not  offered  by  God,  bnt  to  God."  But  there 
is  a  difference  between  God  nffermn  Ilis  Siui,  and  God  stt- 
ling  fiirlh  Jlis  Son  as  a  sacrifice  to  the  conteinplution  of  the 
worid.— P.  S.] 

i  [The  LXX.  uses  iKatTrrjpiov  in  no  other  sense,  except 
in  the  isolatrd  ptussaue,  Ezek.  xliii.  II,  17,  20,  so  that  every 
Jewish  Christian  reader  of  the  Jtnmnns  must  at  once  h.ive 
been  reminded  of  tho  Cipporrlh  in  the  Holy  of  holies.  Dr. 
Hodge,  p.  H.'l,  asserts  that  this  use  of  iXao-niptoi'  in  the 
LXX.,  arose  from  a  mistake  of  tho  HeWrew  term,  which 
means  a  cover,  and  never  the  mercv-seat,  (8o  also  Oese- 
nius,  Fritzsche,  De  Wette,  and  Bleek,  Conivi.  on  Heb.  ix.  6, 
vol.  Hi.,  p.  4D0,  note  6.)  But  n"iD3  is  not  derived  ftom 
the  unusual  Knl  of  the  verb  "lEp  ('"  cower,  Gen.  vi  14), 
but  from  tho  Pitl  "C3  ,  which  always  means,  tn  forgive, 
In  prnpiliair,  In  nlonr  (Ijev.  xvi.  3.'i  J  Deut.  xxxli.  13  ;  Ezek. 
xliii  20,  20,  &c.),  and  la  the  tecbnioal  term,  in  the  Moiaia 


CHAPTER   III.    21-31. 


133 


mercy-ssat.  (c.)  This  view  is  sustained  by  the  idea 
pervading  the  whole  Epistle,  of  the  contrast  between 
tlie  old  worship,  which  was  partly  heathen  and  partly 
only  symbolical,  and  the  real  New  Testament  worship. 
The  verb  7Z(Joe9iro  [«af  Hpectandum  propnnere] 
likewise  favors  it.*  As,  according  to  John  i.  1-1,  the 
()6i«,  or  Shckinah,  openly  appeared  in  tlie  person 
of  Christ  from  the  secrecy  of  ihe  Holy  of  holies, 
and  has  dwelt  among  men,  so,  according  to  the  pres- 
ent passage,  is  the  i/.ci(nij^i,ov  set  forth  from  the 
Holy  of  holies  into  the  publicity  of  the  whole  world 
for  believers.  See  Zech.  xiii.  1  ;  the  open  fountain. 
(d.)  The  i/.a(TT/j(Ji-ov  unites  as  symbol  the  ditterent 
elements  of  tlie  atonement.  As  the  covering  of  the 
ark  of  the  covenant  itself,  it  is  the  throne  of  the 
divine  government  of  the  cherubim  above,  and  the 
preservation  of  the  law,  with  its  requirements,  be- 
low. But  with  the  sprinkled  blood  of  expiation,  it 
is  a  sacrifice  offered  to  God,  and  tiicrefore  the  satis- 
faction for  the  demands  of  tlie  divine  law  below. 
Also  Philo  called  the  covering  of  the  ark  of  the 
covenant  the  symbol  of  the  gracious  majesty  [//fn* 
()vvciitfo>i:1  of  God  [  ]"U.  J/o.s'.,  p.  608  ;  comp.  Jose- 
phu!^,  Anf/q.  iii.  6,  5. — P.  S.]. 

Meyer  [admits  that  this  interpretation  agrees  with 
the  usage  of  the  word,  especially  in  the  LXX.,  and 
gives  good  sense  by  representing  Christ  as  the  anti- 
tj'pical  Cajipordk,  or  mercy-seat ;  but,  nevertheless, 
he]  urges  against  it  the  following  objections  :  f  (a.) 
That  D.aarijijvov  is  without  the  article.  But  this 
would  exclude  the  antitype,  the  Old  Testament 
i/.c.aTij()iov.  The  requisite  articulation  is  here  in 
iv  rui  uiiTor  cci/(aTo.  [With  more  reason  we  might 
miss  a'/.iiOvrov  or  ij/tiin'.  Christ  may  be  called  our 
pascha,  or  the  true  pascha,  or  the  tkue  merci/-yeaf^ 
rather  than  simply  pascha  or  mercn-seat.  Yet  this 
is  by  no  means  conclusive. — P.  S.]  (6.)  The  name, 
in  its  application  to  Christ,  is  too  abrupt.  Answer : 
Since  there  must  be  a  place  of  expiation  for  every 
expiatory  offering,  the  conceptions  of  places  and 
offerings  of  expiation  must  have  been  quite  familiar 
to  the  readers,  not  merely  to  the  Jews,  but  also  to 
the  Gentiles,  although  here  the  idea  is  connected 
with  the  Old  Testament  symbol,  (e.)  If  Christ 
should   be   conceived   as    Capporeth^   then   the    il^i 

ritu:il,  for  the  object  and  intent  of  sacrifice.  If  tte  word 
were  foimed  from  the  Kal,  it  would  be  r~S3.  "The 
golden  liJ  was  called  mE3,  not  because  it  covered  the 
open  ark,  but  because  it  subservtd  the  act  of  expiation 
which  was  here  performed  "  (Biihr,  Si/mbolik  des  JUo.<.  Cul- 
iiis,  i.,  p.  381).  The  Capjionth  was  the  cenire  of  the  pres- 
ence and  revelation  of  God,  and  His  t'lory  dwelt  over  it 
between  tlie  two  cherubim  which  ovei  shadowed  the  ark, 
and  represented  the  creation.  Hence  the  Holy  of  holies 
was  called  p-i'ssr  ni3  (lChrou.xxviii.il).  The  Pe- 
Bhito  and  Vulgate  (^pnipiiDlnrhim)  have  followed  the  LXX. 
Comp.  also  Tholuck.  Rom.,  5tli  ed.,  p.  157,  note  ;  and  Ewald, 
AHerlh.,Tp.  \G6.  But  Ewald  and  Meyer  derve  T" 53  from 
^S3  in  the  sense  of  scabere,  to  rub  off.  In  forgive  ;  against 
which  Tholuck  protests  in  favor  of  the  usual  derivation 
from  133  .  Ewald  (/.  c,  p.  165,  3d  ed.  of  1866)  maintains 
that  Cnpjjnrrlh  cannot  mean  the  plain  cover,  as  if  the  ark 
had  no  olhsr,  but  a  second  cover  or  a  separate  settle  (the 
footstool  of  Jehovah),  which  was  even  more  important  than 
<he  ark  itself,  and  is  so  described,  Ezek.  xxv.  17-21  ;  xx\-i. 
31,  &c.  Hi'  derives  it  from  ""£3,  as  seainnum,  or  scabel- 
lum  from  scabire,  and  refers  to  'CSS ,  2  Chron.  ix.  18, 
md  to  an  Ethiopic  verb. — P.  S.] 

*  (Wordsworth,  on  the  contrary,  urges  npoeB^ro  as  an 
argii.nent  against  this  interpietation,  since  tlir  mercy-seat 
Was  not  set  tbrth,  but  concealed  fiom  the  people  and  even 
!rom  tbe  priests.    But  this  hus  no  force. — 1  .  S.] 

t  lUepeatcd  by  Jowett  in  loc. — P.  S.] 


i'viht,ii.v  T/Js;  ()t,/.ui,o(7  vvrji;  acTor  would  be  im« 
proper,  since  the  Capporelh  must  much  rather  ap« 
pear  as  ir<)ii,'ii,i;  of  divine  grace.  This  objection 
rests  simply  on  a  defective  understanding  of  the 
Pauline  idea  of  righteousness  (see  above).  Accord- 
ing  to  Paul,  righteousness  is  not  merely  condemna- 
tory and  putting  to  death,  biit,  in  its  perfect  reveb- 
tion,  also  delivering  and  quickening.  Grace  itself  ia 
called,  on  one  side,  righteousness,  on  the  other,  love. 
(</.)  The  conception  of  Christ  as  the  antitype  of  the 
mercy-seat  nowhere  returns  in  the  whole  New  Tes- 
tament, Answer :  Likewise  the  types  of  Christ  as 
the  antitype  of  the  brazen  serpent  (John  iii.  14),  and 
Christ  as  the  curse-offering  ((ial.  iii.  13),  and  others, 
only  occur  once.  {<:.)  It  has  also  been  objected  [but 
not  by  Meyer],  that  the  image  does  not  suit,  because 
the  covering  of  the  ark  and  the  sprinkling  of  the 
blood  were  two  different  things.  [Hodge :  "  It  ia 
common  to  speak  of  the  blood  of  a  sacrifice,  but 
not  of  the  blood  of  the  roei'cy-seat."]  In  reply  to 
this,  even  Meyer  observes :  Christ  is  both  sacrifice 
and  high-priest, —  On  the  ignorantly  contemptuoug 
manner  in  which  Riickert  and  Fritzsche  criticise  the 
proper  explanation,  see  Tholuck.  [Fritzsche  dis- 
misses this  interpretation  with  a  frivolous  "  valeat 
absurda  ex/iHcatio.'''' — P.  S.] 

Through  faith  in  his  Isloo d  [lUa  nicrrt «t i; , 
Iv  TO)  civToT  «(/<«Tt].  Different  interpreta- 
tions: 1.  By  faith  on  His  blood  {Iv  instead  of  f  tc; 
Luther,  Calvin,  Beza,  Olshausen  [Tholuck,  Hodge], 
and  others).  Although  the  language  will  permit  this 
view,  the  thought  is  not  only  obscure,  but  incorrect, 
that  God,  by  faiih  on  the  blood  of  Christ,  should 
have  made  Christ  himself  the  throne  of  grace  for 
humanity.  Faith,  in  this  sense,  is  a  cnsegnevs,  but 
not  an  anlecedcns,  of  the  established  propitiation. 
2.  The  same  objection  hoids  good  against  the  con- 
struction of  Meyer,  and  others,  by  which  both 
clauses,  fVtct  r^i,'  Tiirsr.  and  Iv  n't  uItq~<  a'inaTi; 
should  refer  coi'irdiiiatcly  to  n^oiOno  ;  namely,  so 
that  faith  would  be  the  subjective  condition,  and  the 
blood  of  Christ  the  objective  means  of  the  setting 
forth  of  Christ  as  the  expiatory  offering.*  An  ob- 
jective condition  should  precede  the  sulijective  one, 
and  the  propitiation  exists  before  faith,  in  the  sense 
of  the  New  Testament  idea  of  salvation.  Faith  is 
therefore  the  completed  faithfulness  of  Christ  (see 
ver.  22),  which,  in  the  blood  of  His  sacrificial  death, 
has  become  the  eternal  spiritual  manifestation  and 
power  for  the  world.  [As  in  ver.  22,  I  beg  leave 
here  to  differ  from  this  unusual  interpretation  of 
nlfTTtc;,  and  understand  this,  with  other  commenta- 
tors, more  naturally  of  our  faith  in  Christ ;  comp. 
rov  ly.  nlarfox;  'JtjaoT'  at  the  close  of  ver.  26,  If  it 
meant  the  faithfulness  of  Christ,  the  Apostle  would 
probably  have  added  alroT;  as  he  did  belbrc  uiiiaTt,. 
It  is  better  to  separate  the  two  classes  by  a  comma 
after  "  faith." — The  blood  of  Christ  means  His  holy 
life  offered  to  God  as  an  expiatory  sacrifice  for  the 
sins  of  the  world.     It  is  like  a  healing  fountain  send- 

♦  [Meyer,  in  the  third  and  fourth  editions,  connects 
5ia  T7)S  TriaTeuis  with  tAao-T^ptoc,  and  iv  tw  avrov  at/mart 
only  with  npoee^ro  :  God  set  forth  Christ  in  His  blood 
(i.  ■».,  by  causing  Him  to  shed  His  blood,  in  which  lies  the 
power  of  the  atonement)  as  a  sin-offering,  wh'ch  is  effec- 
tive through  faith  De  Wette  connects  botii  Sia  ttiVt.  and 
ei*  T(p  air.  a'iix.  alike  with  ov  Trpoe'Sero  iKaari'ipiov,  the 
former  expressing  ,the  means  of  the  sulijective  :i]ipr<>pi'ia- 
tion  (diis  siiOJic'ive  Anetgiiuugsiiiiiler),  the  latter  the  means 
of  the  objective  exhiliition  {dus  ohjiclive  D'irslcUiuigsmithI) 
of  Christ  as  a  propitiatory  sacrifice.  So  also  Alford,  wh« 
geems  to  follow  He  Wette  (at  least  in  the  Romaius)  mora 
than  any  other  commentator. — P.  S.] 


134 


THE    EPISTLE    OF   PAUL   TO   THE    ROMANS. 


\u'^  forth  8treiims  tlirougli  tlic  ehaiiiiel  of  faith  to  wash 
away  the  guilty  8t;iiiis  i)f  sui. — P.  S.] 

For  the  demon-stration  of  his  righteous- 
ness [  f  1 1;  t  y  t)  1 1  i  I  V  T  /^  (,•  d  I.  X  a  I,  o  (T  I'  V  //  c  a  r  - 
T  I)  I  ].  In  order  to  i)erfectly  rev^'ul  and  cstabHsh  it. 
Tlie  divergent  interpretations  of  the  word  dixai- 
0 (TV  VII  indieate  iiow  ditHuuIt  it  has  been  for  tiie- 
oh)gy  to  regard  God's  righteousnests  as  grace  which 
produces  righteousness.  Trutiifuhiess  [contrary  to 
tlie  meaning  of  i)i,/.cti,oavvii'\,  (Ambrose,  Beza  [Tur- 
retin,  Hammond],  and  otliers) ;  goodness  (Theodo- 
ret,  Grotiu-s  [Koppe,  Relche,  Tittniann],  and  others); 
holiness  (Neander,  Fritzsehe  [Lipsius]  ) ;  judicial 
righteousness  (Meyer*  [I)e  Wctte,  Tholuck,  Phi- 
hp|)i,  Alford,  Wordswortli,  Hodge]  ) ;  justifying,  or 
sin-torgiving  righteousness  (Cln-ysostom,  Augustine, 
and  others) ;  tlie  ■  rigliteousness  whicii  God  gives 
[which  would  be  a  superfluous  ntpetition  of  ver.  21, 
and  inconsistent  with  ver.  20,]  (Luther,  and  others); 
[Stuart,  and  others :  God's  method  of  justification, 
which  (Uz«io(T/'r/y  never  means. — P.  S.].  It  is  rather 
the  riiikttoiisiicxs  of  God  in  the  fulness  of  Us  revela- 
tion, as  it  proceeds  from  God,  requires  and  accom- 
plishes through  Christ  tiie  e.\])iation  of  the  law,  and 
institutes  the  righteousness  of  faith  by  justification  iis 
the  principle  of  the  righteousness  of  the  new  life.f 
For  the  righteousness  of  God,  like  His  truth,  om- 
nipotence, and  love,  forms  an  unbrolcen  and  direct 
beam  from  His  lieart,  until  it  appears  in  renewed 
humanity. 

Because  of  (or,  on  account  of)  the  prae-. 
termission  (passing  over),  [i.  e.,  because  He  had 
allowi'd  the  sins  of  the  race  which  were  committed 
before  Christ's  death  to  pass  by  unpunished,  whereby 
His  righteousness  was  obscured,  and  hence  the  need 
of  a  demonstration  or  manifestation  in  the  atoning 
sacrifice,  that  fully  jusiified  the  demands  of  right- 
eousness, and  at  the  same  time  eflected  a  complete 
remission  of  sins,  and  justification  of  the  sinner. — 
P.  S.].  Tlu!  nd{>Kji.i;  must  not  be  confounded 
with  the  ciqifffni.  as  Coceeiiis  has  proved  in  a  spe- 
cial treati.se,  JJe  utililale  distinction's  inter  ttuokti-v 
el  a(inri,v  (0pp.  t.  vii.).  [Coinj).  Textual  Note  ".']  The 
judicial  government  of  (iod  was  not  administered  in 
the  ante-Chri.stian  period,  cither  by  the  sacrificial  fire 
of  the  Israelitish  theocracy,  or  by  the  nianifestations 
of  wrath  to  the  old  world,  i)oth  Jews  and  Gentiles, 
as  a  jierfect  and  general  judgment.  Notwithstand- 
ing all  the  relative  [)unishment3  and  propitiation.s, 
God  allowed  sin,  in  its  full  mea.sure,  esi)ecially  in  its 
inward  character,  to  pa.ss  unpunished  in  the  prelimi- 
nary stages  of  expiation  and  judgment,  until  the  day  of 
the  eoiii|)leti'ii  revelation  of  His  righteousness.  For 
this  rea.son,  the  time  of  the  nuifffnt;  is  denoted  as 
the  time  of  the  «»'o///.  God  permitted  the  Gentiles 
to  walk  in  their  own  ways  (Ps.  l.\xxi.  12  ;  cxivii. 
20  ;  Acts  xiv.  10) ;  He  overlooked,  or  winked  at,  the 
times  of  this  ignorance  (Acts  xvii.  30).     But  among 

♦  [Mevnr,  p.  146  (4th  ed.) :  "  In  the  etrict  soniic,  the  jii- 
dlciiil  (morn  pnrtlcularly  the  punilivr)  rinhlmii.mets,  which 
di-m.aiiil.-il  n  ho'y  !j;itinfiictif>ii,  and  secured  it  in  the  atoiiinu 
B  irrince  of  Christ."  Do  Wi-tin  (and,  after  him,  Alford)  : 
"This  iile.i  alone  suits  the  JucatoOi',  wliich  in  liki'wlso  jii- 
diciul.  A  Biii-oir(!rini;  I'xoitcs,  on  the  om-  Hhnd.  tho  feeling 
of  Kuilt.  and  i.s  expiation  ;  on  tlie  other,  it  proJucos  piiidon 
and  ))rMne  ;  aii.l  thus  Chrisi'M  death  i.s  not  only  ii  proof  of 
Ood's  nmoe,  hut  also  of  [lis  judicial  righteousness,  which 
requires  puni-lunent  and  I'xpi.itlon  (-2  Cor.  v.  il).  Hero  is 
a  If.iindni.ri  for  the  An-elinie  tlicorv  of  siiti-slaction,  but 
not  for  it-"  ifrossly  anthn-popathii;  execution."— P.  S. ) 

t  {KorlH-s,  p.  ir.S:  "  (Jod's  jiidieial  li^'hfeousness  in  hnth 
its  osju'cts,  of  sin-condeinniug  and  siu-forgiviDg  righteous- 
neds."— 1'.  S.] 


the  Jews,  one  of  the  two  goats  which  was  let  loose 
in  the  wilderness  on  the  great  day  of  atonement, 
represented  symbolically  the  ttuokji^  (Lev.  xvi.  10). 
This  is  not  only  a  transcendent  fact,  but  one  that  is 
also  immanent  in  the  world.  The  fact  that  the  ad- 
niinistrators  of  the  theocracy,  in  connection  with  the 
Gentile  world,  have  crucified  Ciirist,  proves  the  in- 
ability  of  the  theocracy  to  afford  a  fundamental  re- 
lief  of  the  world  from  guilt.* — Of  sins  previ- 
ously committed.  The  sins  of  the  whole  world 
are  meant,  but  as  an  aggregate  of  individual  sins ; 
because  righteousness  does  not  punish  sin  until  it 
has  become  manifest  and  mature  in  actual  individual 
sins.  [Comp.  the  similar  expression,  Heb.  ix.  16  : 
Hi;  uno).i<ri>i<>(Ti,v  nor  iTzl  rfj  n(>ii)Tii  dial) i-z.ii  7ru(ia- 
[jdanitv.  This  parallel  passage,  as  well  as  tlic  words 
IV  TO)  vrv  xaioi't,  in  ver.  20,  plainly  show  that  the 
TTiJoytyovoTa  a/ia(iTi^iiata  are  not  the  sins  of  each 
man  which  precede  his  conversion  (Calov.,  Mehring, 
and  others),  but  the  sins  of  all  men  before  the  ad- 
vent, or,  more  correctly  speaking,  before  the  atoning 
death  of  Christ.  Comp.  also  Acts  xv.  30 :  Tnii; 
/l>6voi%  Ttj^  ayro/at,-  v7Tf(ji,i)i7iv  6  Oto;.  Philippi 
confines  the  expression  to  the  sins  of  the  Jewish 
people,  in  strict  conformity  to  Ueb.  ix.  Ih  ;  but  here 
the  Apostle  had  just  proven  the  universal  sinfulness 
and  guilt,  and  now  speaks  of  the  universal  redemp- 
tion of  Christ.— P.  S.] 

Vers.  25,  20.  Under  the  forbearance  of  God 
for  the  demonstration  [ Un/er  dir  Gcdnkl  Gotta 
zu  der  Erwcinuinj,  iv  r  i^  dvo/ii  ror  •Ofor, 
&c.].  Construction  :  1.  (LVumeuiu.-*^  Luther  [Kiick- 
crt,  Ewald,  HodgcJ,  and  others,  refer  the  dvuxri 
to  7i(Joyfyov6Tii)v  [i.  e.,  committed  durinff  the  for- 
bearance  of  God  ;  comp.  Acta  xvii.  20.  This  gives 
good  sense,  but  would  recpiire,  as  ^eyer  .says,  a  dif- 
ferent  position  of  the  words,  viz.,  nrn-  ci/'rt^»T.  Twf 
7T{toytyov.  Iv  ttj  dv.  t.  0. — P.  S.].  2.  Meyer  re- 
fers the  forbearance  to  jidiiKn,':,  in  consetjumce  of 
indulgence  or  toleration,  as  the  ground  of  the  pass- 
ing over.  [So  also  Philippi].  3.  Reichc :  tt;  ev- 
(Vftjtr  T^i,'  ()i,xaioavvti<; ;  the  t%xai,o(T.  liaving  been 
manifested  partly  in  the  forgiveness  of  sins,  and 

*  (Ilr.  IIod^'o,  from  fear  of  Romanizing  inferences,  takes 
iropeo-ts  in  the  sense  of  d(/)«o-iv,  and  adoptB  the  false  transla- 
tion of  the  WviXpnXc  pinpu  ,■  ti  misximiem,  "  because  God  had 
overlooked  or  pardoned  nin  from  ihe  lietrinnintr."  .  .  .  "To 
say  Ood  did  no>  punish  sins  un^ler  the  Old  Dispensation,  ia 
only  a  difl'orcnt  way  of  naying  that  lie  prirdoned  them.  So, 
'  no"t  to  impute  iniquity,'  is  the  nepitive  statement  of  ju.s- 
tiflcation."  Comp.  against  this,  Txiunl  SVof-  8.  Hodge 
g)C.s  on  to  sny  (p.  150):  "This  passage  is  one  of  the 
few  which  the  Ilomanists  quote  in  supiH>rt  of  the  r  doc- 
trine t  nr  there  was  no  reol  pardon,  jusiiticniion,  or  sal- 
vation before  the  advent  of  Christ.  The  ancient  be- 
lievers, at  death,  according  to  their  doctrine,  did  not  pass 
into  heaven,  but  into  the  limbiis  pilrum.  where  ihey  con- 
tinued in  a  scini-conscious  stale  until  Christ's  (/<•.«■.  H.VMX  n,i 
inferos  for  their  ilelivenince.  The  modern  tninscendontal 
theoloL'ians  of  (iermaiiy,  who  apjaoach  Konvinism  in  bc 
m  my  other  points  [?],  aaive  with  the  I'aiu.sts  also  here 
Thus  Olshausen  sayn,  '  Under  the  Old  Testament  there  was 
no  real,  hut  only  a  symholical  forgiveness  of  Hinn.'  Our 
Lord,  however,  sjieaks  of  Alirahnm  as  in  heaven;  and  the 
I'salins  are  filled  with  petitioiiH  and  thanksgiving  for  Ood'g 
pardoning  mercy."  But  how  will  Dr.  IIod);e  oo  his  theory 
exp  ain  the  Old  Testament  do(  trine  of  Sheol  or  Hades  be- 
fore ChrlHt's  resurrection,  and  such  passages  as  Hob.  ix. 
15;  xi.  39,  40;  Acis  xiii.  3»,  which  likewise  plainly  teach 
the  incompleteness  of  the  Old  Testament  salvation  before 
tho  advent  of  Clirist?  There  certainly  can  he  no  remission 
of  sin  without  the  sacrifice  of  Christ  ;' and  whatever  remis- 
sion there  was  under  the  Old  r>ispen.sation,  wius  cranted  and 
enjoyed  only  by  reason  of  the  retrospective  ellicacv ,  and  in 
trustful  anticipation  of  that  sacritiee.  Hut  aiitieiiiatioi.  fallD 
far  Bhort  of  tho  actual  reality.  Tholuck  CJiIls  thi-  atonemcnl 
of  Christ  not  unaptly  "  the  Divine  theodicy  for  tho  past  h.» 
tory  of  the  world."— r.  8.1 


CHAPTER   III,    21-31. 


1^ 


partly  in  the  delajiof  punishment.  [Tliis  implies  a 
wrong  view  of  dia  and  di-xai-oa. ;  Meyer. — P.  S.] 
4.  We  eonnect  the  dvo//j  with  the  following  n^bi; 
T^v  trdniiv  (ver.  26)  into  one  idea,*  and  suppose 
here  a  brief  form  of  expression,  by  whieh  7T(Joytyo- 
voron  must  be  again  supplied  before  avo/ij.  Tlie 
ndiJKSi,^  must  by  all  means  be  conueeted  with  the 
dvo/j] ;  but  it  is  not  operative  by  virtue  of  this 
rtlone.  The  dvo/i'i  denotes  the  old  time  as  the 
period  of  God's  prevailing  forbearanee,  to  the  end 
that  He  may  reveal  His  perfeet  righteousness  in  the 
future  decisive  time.  The  nd(tf(ji,i;,  on  the  con- 
trary, appeared  at  that  time  as  the  supplement  of 
the  propitiatory  and  retributive  judgments  whieh 
had  already  commenced  as  preliminaries.  For  this 
reason,  the  fit;  Vvrfftin'  (ver.  25)  is  not  tlie  same 
as  n()6(;  ri]V  f  rrfttit-r  (ver.  26).  The  first  %v- 
Sfi.ii.c,  as  the  judicial  righteousness  revealing  itself  in 
the  blood  of  Christ,  has  supplemented  the  ndi^KjiQ. 
The  second  J'reJftiK,-  is  the  purpose  of  the  ciro/^, 
the  fully  accomplished  'hr()n,ii,c,  which  branches  oft' in 
penal  righteousness,  and  in  justifying  righteousness 
to  him  who  "is  of  the  faith  of  Jesus,  and  draws  faith 
from  His  fountain  of  faith."  The  tU  should  there- 
fore not  be  confounded  with  the  7ri}Qi;  (Meyer). f 

Ver.  26.  [At  this  present  time,  Iv  nZ  vvv 
xaiQiT),  not  opposed  to  Iv  rf]  dvo/jj  (Bengel, 
Hodge),  but  ratlier  to  7T(j6  in  tt^oj'? j-ororoir,  and 
added  emphatically.  The  time  of  Christ  is  a  time 
of  critical  decision,  when  the  nd^nai^q  is  at  an  end, 
and  man  must  either  accept  the  fuU  reuiission 
(ai^'ffTtc)  of  sin,  or  expose  himself  to  the  judgment 
of  a  righteous  God. — P.  S.] — That  He  may  be 
just  and  the  justifier,  &c.  [ft<;  to  t  tvav 
avzQV  diy.cti,ov  y.ai  d  t,  x  a  t,  ov  vr  a,  rbv  £>t 
TtiffTfoii; 'J  ijffoT'.  The  iii;  expresses  not  merely 
the  result,  but  the  design  of  God  in  exhibiting 
Christ  to  the  world  as  the  mercy-seat. — P.  S.] 
We  emphasize  avrov,  07ie  and  the  some  {nn  and 
dersieVje).X  That  He  may  be — that  is,  that  He  may 
plainly  appear  [and  be  recognized  by  men  in  this 
twofold  character  as  the  Just  One  and  the  Justifier 
of  the  sinner].  The  righteousness  of  God  in  the  death 
of  Christ  has  fully  revealed  that  which  the  human 
view  of  the  early  and  later  times  found  so  difficult 
to  grasp  ;  namely,  righteousness  and  forbearance  or 
love  in  one  spirit,  condemnation  and  deliverance  in 
one  act,  kilHng  and  giving  new  life  in  one  operation. 

[Bengel:  '■'■  Suinmurii  hi.c'Jiobdur paradoxon  evav- 
gdicum;  nam  lu  leae  conspicitur  Dcuh  Justus  et  C07i- 
demnans,  in  evan'/elio  ju-itus  ipse  et  justijicans  pecca- 
torem.^^  This  apparent  contradiction  is  solved,  ob- 
jectively, in  the  love  of  God,  which  is  the  beginning 
and  the  end  of  his  ways ;  and,  subjectively,  in  faith 
(tov  fx  TTtffrfr.jc),  by  which  the  sinner  becomes  one 
with  Christ.     In  the  death  of  Christ,  God  punished 

*  [Hence  Dr.  Lange,  in  his  translation,  makes  a  period 
after  a.ijLapTt)fj.aTMv.  I  prefer  the  construction  of  Meyer  and 
Pnilippi  ;is  beins  more  natural.  The  avoxrj  must  not  be 
confou  (led  with  X"P^5  •  the  former  suspends  and  puts  off 
the  judgment  by  nipea-is,  the  latter  abolishes  the  guilt  of 
ein  by  dijbecris. — P.  3.] 

t  [McycT  :  "Trpbs  tjji'  evSei.(iv,  Wiederau/nahme 
4ek  €1?  evSe  ifiv,  ver.  25,  mid  zwar  ohne  Si,  ver.  22, 
tBoOei  eis  niil  ttcm  g/eiclibrdeu'eiid''»  irpo^  absichlslos  ver- 
ta*:ch:il  isf.  iliT  Artikel  abcr  de.r  Vorstcllung  tier  bislimm- 
len,  g'-scliichilich  gegihawn  evSfifi^  diciit,  vxis  drm  F'lrt- 
gchn'lle  der  Darnlellxiiig  eiihprirlil."  So  also  Tholuck  and 
Philippi.  The  latter  commentator  explains  tlie  exchange 
of  TTpos  for  eis  from  euphony,  to  avoid  the  threefold  repe- 
tition of  eis  (eis  evS..,  ver.  '35  ;  ei?  to  ilvai,  ver.  2G'). — P.  S.] 

X  [Meyer  takes  avrds  simply  as  the  pronoun  of  the  third 
person.  It  evidently  belongs  both  to  Sixaioi'  and  iixot- 
ovi^ra. — P.  S.] 


sin  and  saved  the  sinner,  and  Divine  justice  was  vin. 
dicated  in  the  fullest  display  and  triumph  of  redeem- 
ing love.  Not  that  the  Father  poured  the  vials  ol 
His  wrath  upon  His  innocent  and  beloved  Son  (as 
tiie  doctrine  is  sometimes  caricatured),  but  the  Son 
vohmtarily,  in  infinite  love,  asid  by  the  eternal  coun 
sel  and  with  the  consent  of  the  holy  and  merciful 
Father,  assumed  the  whole  curse  of  sin,  and,  as  the 
representative  head  of  the  human  family,  in  its  stead 
and  for  its  benefit.  He  iully  satisfied  the  demands  of 
Divine  justice  by  His  perfect,  active  and  passive  obe- 
dience. His  saciitice,  as  the  sacrifice  of  the  eternal 
Son  of  God  in  union  with  hiunan  nature,  without  «n 
is  of  infinite  value  botii  as  to  extent  and  duration 
while  the  Old  Testament  sacrifices  were  merely  an 
ticipatory,  preparatory,  and  temporary.  Justification 
is  here  represented  as  the  inmiediate  effect  of  Christ's 
atoning  death.  On  (ii/.aioiit,  comp.  the  Exer).  Notes  (m 
ver.  24,  and  also  Doctrinal,  below.  No.  5.  Wordsworth 
has  a  long  note  here  on  the  doctrine  of  justification. 
He  likewise  maintains  that  dv/.aioio  (and  p'^ijri )  in 
the  LXX.  and  in  the  New  Testament  means,  not  to 
nial-e  righteous,  but  to  account  and  declare  righteous, 
and  to  rer/ard  and  triat  as  such,  in  opposition  to 
condemning  and  ■pronowiciiig  ffuilti/.  But  he  insists 
also,  that  we  are  actually  made  righteous  by  our 
union,  with  Christ,  and  that  Goii's  righteousness  is 
not  only  imputed,  but  also  imjiarted  to  us  in  Hira 
who  is  "  the  Lord  our  Righteousness."  This  work 
of  infu.sion  of  grace,  however,  is  not  properly  called 
ju\tJicatioii,  but  sanctijicat  on.  Comp.  vi.  22 : 
"  Being  freed  from  sin,  and  made  servants  unto 
God — i.  e.,  being  justified — ye  have  your  fruit  unto 
holiness  " — this  is  sauctification. — P.  S.J 

SEtoND  Paeagkaph  (vers.  27-31). 

Ver.  27.  Where,  then,  is  the  boasting?  This 
announces  the  great  conclusion  from  the  foregoing. 
The  lively  expression  of  the  paragraph  arises  from 
the  triumphant  confidence  of  the  Apostle.  [Ben- 
gel:  Tcov,  particula  victoriosa.~\  The  y.  a  v /  tj  a  i, <; 
[gloriatio]  is  certainly  not  the  same  as  /.ai/ijfict 
[gloriandi  materia],  subject  of  boasting  (Reiche) ; 
but  yet  it  is  not  exactly  bragging  (Meyer),  since  in 
many  persons  boasting  of  the  law  arose  from  dog- 
matic  error.  Jewish  boasting  is  especially  meant 
here,*  but  not  exclusively,  for  the  general  conclu- 
sion  is  here  drawn  in  reference  to  the  righteousness 
of  the  Jews  and  Gentiles  (see  ver.  19).  With  the 
negation  of  the  y.a>'-/i.nic,  the  y.av/>ifia  is  also  de- 
nied at  the  same  time. — It  is  excluded.  Perhaps 
the  expression  is  here  chosen  with  reference  to  the 
limits  of  tlie  court  of  justice.  The  law  excludes 
unqualified  plaintiffs  and  defendants.  —  By  what 
law  ?  (By  the  law)  of  works  ?  Since  the 
Mosaic  law  was  a  law  of  works  in  form  only,  and 
not  in  spirit  (see  chap.  vii.  7),  the  question  presup. 
poses  that  there  is  no  such  law  of  works  ;  tlie  spirit 
of  the  law  is  the  law  of  faith.  But  the  meaning  of 
the  question  itself  is :  the  law,  as  such,  erroneously 
made  a  mere  law  of  works,  is  too  imperfectly  de- 
veloped in  its  operation  to  exclude  boasting  (see 

*  [Hence  the  article  17,  which  seems  to  refer  to  the' 
Kavx^Jt^i?  already  spoken  of  in  chap.  ii.  17;  iii.  19,  comp. 
below,  ver.  29.  So  Claysostom,  Theodoret  (to  in/zijAov  to)i» 
'lovSaCiav  4)p6vT)na),  Bengel,  Kuckert,  Tholuck,  Philippi, 
Jteyer,  Alford  ;  while  Fritzsche,  Hodge,  and  othei-s,  take 
it  in  a  general  sense  of  the  boasting  of  the  sinner  before 
God;  which,  of  course,  includes  the  boasting  of  the  Jewi 
over  the  Gentiles. — P.  S.l 


13G 


THE    EPISTLE    OF    PAUL   TO    THE   ROMANS. 


Matt.  xix.  20. — By  the  law  of  faith.  According 
to  Meyer,  tlie  Apostle  apeaks  of  tlie  law  of  faitli 
because  the  gospel  ]jre.scribes  fuitli  as  tiie  condition 
of  salvation.  According  to  Tiioluck  and  De  Wette, 
the  word  ro/ios'  I'^is  li^-'''e  the  idea  of  a  religions 
rule  (/(«)•;//«).*  But,  according  to  vcr.  31,  the 
Apostle  will  coni|)letely  establish  the  same  law,  for 
the  U'laicing  void  of  which  the  Jew  charged  him. 
The  same  revealed  law  which,  in  its  analytical  char- 
acter— that  is,  in  its  single  commandments — bears 
the  ajjpearauce  of  a  law  of  single  works,  is,  in  its 
synthetical  character,  recognized  as  one,  a  law  of 
faith  (Ucut.  vi.  4,  5  ;  Mark  xii.  29  ;  James  ii.  10) ; 
because,  as  our  schoolmaster  to  lead  us  to  Christ,  it 
leads  to  faith,  and  in  Him  first  comes  to  man  as  tlie 
objective  [irinciple  of  faith,  and  then,  as  the  subjec- 
tive principle  of  faith,  it  becomes  tiic  law  of  the 
new  life.  [With  vo/ioi;  nifTTmx:,  comp.  vnay.oi] 
nicfTK'U^  i.  5;  voiioi;  rov  nvtviiarw;  rtji;  t^oi'jt;,  viii. 
2;  tvi'uiioi;  X(ji.(TToT;  1  Cor.  ix.  21;  voiioi;  rilnoi; 
TJ^s"  l/.n'Ot(ilu^,  James  i.  25;  ii.  12 — all  going  to 
show  that  tlie  liberty  of  ttie  gospel  has  notliing  to 
do  witli  license  and  airtinomianisui. — P.  S.] 

Ver.  28.  Therefore  L^O"^]  '^^  judge.  Ao- 
yt^o/(f.9-a  [ceiisonus,  comp.  ii.  3;  viii.  18;  2  Cor. 
xi.  5j,  is  not,  we  infer,  nor  merely,  we  think,  reckon 
(Tholuck  [AUbrd,  Hodge]  ),  which,  with  the  read- 
ing ycci),  would  not  even  make  good  sense.  The  ex- 
pression, "  For  we  lltink^''  would  be  an  odd  method 
of  demonstration.  It  is  not  the  subjective  fact  of 
justification  which  establishes  the  olyective  economy 
of  salvation  already  described  ;  but  it  is  tliis  objec- 
tive economy  which,  on  the  one  hand,  excludes  false 
justification,  namely,  tliat  which  is  by  woi'ks ;  and, 
on  the  other  hand,  establishes  real  justification,  tiiat 
which  is  by  faitii.  We  must  consider  also  that  the 
Apostle  lays  down  the  statement  of  ver.  28  as  tiie 
principal  proposition  to  the  entire  following  ai-gu- 
ment,  but  will  not  apply  it  as  ])roof  for  the  negative 
statement,  that  man  is  not  justified  by  works. — By 
faith  [;rt'(7Tft  =  (Vtot  nifrrmti;,  instrumental  cause]. 
Lutiier's  addition  of  alone  [jliirch  den  Gluuben- 
allki.n]  is  defended  by  Tholuck  (the  Nuremberg 
edition  of  the  Bible  of  1483  also  reads,  onlij  by 
faith).  Meyer  properly  remarks :  It  does  not  be- 
long to  the  translation,  but  it  is  justified  by  the  con- 
text as  ail  explanation.]- — Without  works  of  the 

♦  iSo  :il8o  Afford  anil  Ilodpo:  ^' v6ixo<;  is  not  used  hero 
in  its  ordin;iry  souse,  'file  ■jeneral  idea,  however,  of  a  rule 
of  ml  inn  is  retained."— P.  S.| 

t  (Tliis  ic  very  true.  TJuther's  nllf.in  id  correct  in  sub- 
stance, aii<i  appnipruite  as  a  rIos-s  or  in  a  parajjliruse,  fiut 
has  no  t)usiness  in  tlie  text,  it  is  a  lo;jicai  inference  from 
the  oonlext,  and  is  equivalent  to  the  eav  uq  ia  the  parallel 
passajfo,  (jal.  ii.  IG.  The  Latin  Vulnite  had  taken  the 
Bame  lit'orfy,  it  is  true,  in  other  cases  ;  and,  in  this  very 
vorsc,  Luther's  insertion  can  he  juslifiod  by  Oatholic  ver- 
sions, v  7..,  the  oldest  (jcrman  Oatholic  Itihle  of  JSuremborB 
(published  1483,  the  yi-ar  of  Lutl.cr's  birth),  winch  n-ads  : 
j»UB  iliiich  lien  O'.,  nnd  two  Italian  versions  (of  (ieno  i, 
1478,  and  Venice,  1538,  pr  In  sola  /->//).  Kven  Erasmus 
defended  Luther  in  this  case,  and  aiid:  "  Vnx  sola  lul 
cUlinnribiix  liip.ilnlii  hue  iir.ulo  in  L'llliero,  revirenlfr  in 
P.itr  bus  [!)  .tn-Jihir."  Comp.  Wolf,  Koppe,  Tholucli,  nnd 
riiilippi  in  liico.  Novortheless,  the  insertion  of  the  "snln" 
in  the  tninslation  was  unnecessjiry  and  iinwi-i-,  :ind,  In  the 
even  of  Kotimni.sts,  it  pave  some  iilanslhility  to  the  unjusl 
onnrRo  of  filsifyinif  the  .Scriptures.  It  bron(;ht  I'aiil  into 
direct  verbil  (though  no  reil)  (■(inlllct  with  Jiime-,  when  he 
saf s  fhiit  by  "  work-"  man  is  jiistifled,  and  mi'  byfiii'h  only  " 
(ou«  Ik  itiartia^  iiovov,  ii.  24).  The  do^inatio  foi-milla,  snia 
fi'U  (hcnci'  the  term  nolifi'lininum),  has  l>ecome  a  watch- 
word of  evnnt'olii'al  rrotesluntism,  and,  rightly  iinder- 
Ktood — <■.  <!.,  in  the  sense  of  ijra'in  S'lln — it  expresses  a  most 
precious  truth,  which  can  never  Iw  sacriHced.  Hut  it  must 
not  he  coufotinded  with  /!•/'•  nolilnrin,  a,  faith  that  i>  anil 
'oiiai'ia  alone.    The  ^t^P't  ipyutv  iVov  mu.st  bo  connected 


law.  This  naturally  refers  to  AixatoTa&ai,  but  not 
to  faith.  In  the  process  of  justijicalion,  the  works 
of  the  law  do  not  come  into  coiiperiition.  [Hodge : 
"To  be  justitici  without  works,  is  to  be  justified 
without  any  thing  in  ourselves  to  merit  justification. 
The  works  of  the  law  must  be  the  works  of  the 
moral  law,  because  the  jn-oposition  is  general,  em- 
bracing Gentiles  as  woU  as  Jews.  .  .  .  The  Apostle 
excludes  every  thing  subjective.  He  places  the 
ground  of  justification  out  of  ourselves."  Yet  faith 
is  something  subjective,  by  which  the  olyective 
ground  of  justification  is  personally  appropriated, 
and  made  available  for  our  beneiit. — P.  S.] 

Ver.  21),  Or  is  he  the  God  of  the  Jews 
only?  [Or,  in  case  that  what  was  said  in  ver.  28 
should  be  called  in  doubt.  Vers.  29,  3U  furnish  an 
additional  striking  proof  for  ver.  28  ;  Meyer. — P.  S.] 
ftVat  Tiroc,  to  belling  to  some  one.  The  Rabbinical, 
and  subsequently  the  Talmudic  Jew.s,  certainly  as- 
sumed that  God  was  merely  the  God  of  the  Jews 
(see  Tholuck,  p.  102.  .Meyer  refers  to  Eisenmcng- 
cr's  Entdccktci  Jwlenihnm,  i.  p.  587). — Paul  can  de- 
clare, without  further  proof:  Yes,  of  the  Gentiles 
also.  The  Apostle  does  not  have  here  in  mind 
chiefly  the  utterances  of  the  prophets,  as  Tiioluck 
supposes,  but  the  same  fact  of  Christian  experience 
to  which  Peter  refers.  Acts  x.  46  flf.  ;  xv.  9  ;  and  to 
which  he  himself  refers  in  (Jal.  iii.  5.  The  Old  Tes- 
tament witnesses  were  explained  and  eonlirmed  by 
the  fact  of  the  salvation  of  the  (Jentiles  by  liiiili,  by 
which  fact  also  his  apostleship  to  the  tieiitiles  was 
first  completely  sealed  (see  1  Cor.  ix.  2).  [God  is 
not  a  national,  but  a  universal  God,  and  offers  salva^ 
tion  to  (Jentiles  and  Jews  on  precisely  the  same 
terms.  Hodge :  "  These  sublime  truths  are  so  famil- 
iar to  our  minds,  that  they  have,  in  a  measure,  lost 
their  power;  but  as  to  the  Jew,  enthralled  all  his  life 
in  his  narrow  national  and  religious  prejudices,  they 
must  have  expanded  his  whole  soul  with  unwonted 
emotions  of  wonder,  gratitude,  and  joy." — P.  S.] 

Vcr.  30.  Seeing  it  is  one  God.  The  tntintQ, 
since  [altdlewcil,  introducing  something  that  can- 
not be  doubted].     According  to  Meyer,  tlie  weight 

with  the  verb,  not  with  irt'crrei.  The  Bible  never  says  : 
"faith  justifies,"  hut,  "  we  are  justified  by  faith  (n-ioret)," 
because  faith  comes  into  view  here  simplv  ;is  a  mcan^,  or 
as  the  opyoLvov  k-qitTiKov  which  apprehemls  and  appropri- 
ates Christ ;  and  hence  it  is  by  faith,  without  the  eoiiprra- 
tion  of  works,  that  we  are  justified,  liut  faith  is  neverthe- 
less the  fruitful  source  of  all  pood  works.  "  Ful-s  mla 
juslifical,  al  nrc  est,  ner  manfl  snla  :  in/rinxeius  npfrnlur  tt 
extrinserim."  Tho  more  full  and  correct  formula  would 
be :  Ornlla  sola  jusl^ficnninr  perjlliin  qrnt  Chrisli  jnslilinm 
iipprelifiiilil  it  pi-r  cnrilnlnn  operntur  (ttiVtis  5i  ayairifi 
ivtpyovfi.(vi\)^  or  salvation  by  prace  alone  us  apprehendol 
by  a  living  faith.  Justifying  f.iith  purifies  tlio  heart,  over- 
comes the  world,  and  abounds  in  fruits  of  riphtcoiisness. 
Ills  inipos,s!ble  truly  to  nelii  ve  in  Christ,  without  partak- 
ing i>f  the  i)owor  of  ills  holy  life.  Wordsworth  in  lite,  hits 
the  point,  when  he  says  :  "Thoupli  it  is  by  faith  we  are 
justifiid,  ii'id  by  faitli  onl;/.  yet  not  by  such  a  faith  as  ba« 
no  works  snrinpinir  out  of  it.  Every  such  faith  is  a  dead 
faith.  And  yet  it  is  not  from  tho  works  that  spring  out  of 
faitli,  bul  from  the  f  litli  which  is  the  root  of  works,  that 
all  are  justified."  In  otlior  words,  it  is  not  by  faitli  as  na 
active  or  working,  1)ut  by  faith  as  a  receptive  or  approjiriating 
principle,  by  which  weare  justlfled  ;  yet  that  which  faith  re- 
ceives, is  a  power  of  life  which  must  at  once  manifest  itself  in 
ffood  works.  It  is  but  just  to  laithorto  add,  that  he  taught 
mo"t  dearly  and  forcibly  this  ln«epar.il)le  connection  between 
faith  and  works.  I  shall  iiiiote  but  ono  iiassage  from  his  ad- 
mirable preface  to  the  Epi.stle  to  the  Romans  :  "  O  <•.<  iV  tin 
hbewlig,  ffi'mhi'if'ig,  t/iillig,  mdelihg  Ding  urn  ilfn  Glmibi-n, 
ilitgs  IS  nnnii'H/lirIt  i.il,  iliiss  tr  nichi  nhnr  Vnlfrlixss  snille  Q\tlrt 
witkm.  Er  frngf  nwh  nii/il,  ub  gnlf.  Werkf  Mu  Ihun  sindf 
.wndrrn  elie  mnn  J'lagt,  hiil  rr  sir  grjhan,  iind  ist  immir  im 
Tliiin.  ,  ,  .  Ahi>  (Inn  iinini'iffliih  i.-t,  Wrrk  vnm  Gtiinbcn  MU 
tihriilen  ;  jn,  to  unm/iglirh,  a!s  hrrnnen  und  Imihlrn  vom 
Ftucr  mug  getchiedcn  wf.rUcn."    Comp.  p.  140,  No.  9. — P.  8,1 


CHAPTER  ni.   21-31. 


IS] 


of  the  proof  rests  on  the  unity  of  God,  Monothe- 
ism ;  but  the  context  puts  the  weight  upon  the  fact 
that  tlie  justification  of  the  Jews  and  Gentiles  as  one 
divine  fact — which  therefore  appears  to  be  divided 
into  two  parts — must  be  traced  to  one  and  the  same 
God. — The  future  dixattoafu  is  certainly  not  used 
for  the  present  i)i,/.ai,ob  (Grotius  [»io?'e  Htbrceorwnl^, 
and  others),  still  less  does  it  refer  to  the  universal 
judgment  (Beza,  Fritzsehe) ;  but  it  assumes  the  ex- 
perience thai  Jews  and  Gentiles  are  already  justified, 
ill  order  to  give  prominence  to  the  future  estabiisiied 
by  it ;  namely,  that  Jews  and  Gentiles  will  be  jus- 
tified. [The  future  (=  prcescns  futurabile)  ex- 
presses the  permanent  purpose  and  continued  power 
of  justification  in  every  case  that  may  occur;  comp. 
the  future  in  ver.  20  and  v.  19.  Erasmus :  '■'■  Respexit 
ad  eos  qui  udhuc  easent  in  Judaismo  seu  pac/anis- 
mo." — P.  S.]  —  Circumcision  by  faith.  It  is 
remarkable  that  there  is  not  only  a  change  of  the 
prepositions  eV.  and  ()i.d,  but  also  that  tlie  article 
stands  with  the  latter,  but  not  with  the  former. 
Meyer  regards  the  change  of  prepositions,  as  well  as 
the  disappearance  of  the  article  from  tx,  as  a  matter 
of  indifference.*  Calvin  observes  in  the  change  of 
the  prepositions  ty.  and  dod  a  certain  irony  :  "  Si  qnis 
vult  habere  differentiai)i  gentilis  a  Judceo,  liauc  ha- 
beat,  quod  ille  per  Jidem,  h  c  vero  ex  Jide  justUlam 
couseqnitur^^  (from  Tholuck,  p.  162).  Meyer  prop- 
erly regards  this  explanation  as  strange.  But  indif- 
ference as  to  the  form  of  expression  would  be  equal- 
ly strange.  There  seems  in  reality  to  be  a  double 
form  of  breviloquence  here :  He  will  justify  the  cir- 
cumcision (which  is  a.  circumcision  by  faith)  by 
faitli ;  for  the  real  Jew  has  alreadi/  a  germinat- 
ing faith ;  and  He  will  justify  the  uncircuracision 
(that  whicli  through  faith  has  become  circumcision) 
</*roM^/i  the  faith.  Or,  more  briefly:  To  the  gennine 
Jew,  saving  faith,  as  to  its  germ,  is  something 
already  at  hand,  and  justification  arises  from  the 
completion  of  the  same,  just  as  the  fruit  from  the 
tree.  But  to  the  Gentile,  faith  is  offered  as  a  foreign 
means  of  salvation. f 

Ver.  31.  Bo  we  then  make  void  the  lavr? 
The  question  here  arises,  whether  ver.  31  constitutes 
the  conclusion  of  the  preceding  train  of  thought,  or 
whether  it  opens  the  new  train  of  thought  which 
begins  with  chap.  iv.  1,  and  extends  throughout  the 
chapter.  The  former  acceptation  has  prevailed  since 
Augustine  as  the  preferable  one  (Beza,  Melanchtbon, 
Tholuck,  Philippi   [Hodge]  ) ;    the  latter  (conform- 

*  [So  also  Hodge,  since  Paul  uses  both  forms  indiscriin- 
inately ;  «,  in  i.  17  ;  iii.  20 ;  iv.  16  ;  and  iia,  in  iii.  22,  2.'j ; 
Gal.  ii.  16,  and  sometimes  first  the  one  and  then  the  other, 
in  the  same  connc-ction.  Comp.  the  English  prepositions 
hy  and  ihrongh.  According  to  De  Wette  and  Alford,  ck 
TTiVrtios,  by  fiiith,  expresses  the  objective  ground;  6id  t^? 
irt'o-Tews,  IlirtiKgh  hia  {llieir')  fnilh,  the  subjective  mudivni  of 

i'ustification.  Jowi'tt  connects  ck  7ri'crT6a>s  with  mpi.Toii.rtv, 
he  circumcision  which  is  hy  ftn'lh,  and  thereby  destroys  the 
correspondence'  to  the  other  member.  Green  (Gr.,  p.  300, 
ae  quoted  by  Alford)  refers  Sia  r^s  TT-t'o-xeajs  to  TriVTeco?  just 
mentioned,  hy  thu  iiiitlruiiirntitlHy  of  ihr,  identical  fnilh 
which  opirntes  in  the  case  of  the  cii-cumcised.  Bengel : 
'•  Jadsef  prukm  in  fide  fuerant ;  gentiles  fidem  ab  illis 
recens  niicli  cmn'V—V.  S.I 

t  [Very  similar  is  the  interpretation  of  "Wordsworth  : 
The  Jews,  or  children  of  Abraham,  are  justified  rmi  of  or 
jium  (Jk)  the  f lith  whioh  Abraham  their  father  had,  and 
which  they  are  supposed  to  have  in  him,  being  already  in 
;he  covenant  with  God  in  Christ.  The  Gentiles,  oi  efio, 
must  enter  that  do»r  of  the  faith  of  Abraham,  and  piiss 
Ihro.igh  it  {Sia),  in  order  to  be  justified.  There  is  but  one 
Church  from  tlie  icginning.  Abraham  and  his  seed  are  in 
the  household  of  faith  in  Chr  st,  but  they  must  live  and 
ect  from  its  spirit ;  the  heathen  must  m/er  the  house 
through  the  door  of  that  faith  in  Him.— P.  S.] 


ably  to  Theodoret,  Pelagius)  has  been  maintained  b,^ 
Semler,  and  otiiers,  and  by  De  Wette  and  Meyer 
According  to  Meyer,  the  Apostle,  from  chap.  iii.  31 
to  iv.  25,  proves  the  harmony  of  the  doctrine  of  ju* 
tifieation  by  faith  with  the  law,  by  what  has  been 
said  in  the  law  about  Abraham's  justification.  Meye* 
urges  against  the  former  view,  that  then  tl)Js  very 
important  sentence  appears  merely  as  an  at)rupt  cate- 
gorical assertion  ;  and  Philippi's  reply,  that  chap, 
viii.  1  continues  it  further,  certainly  does  not  relieve 
the  matter.  But  Tholuck  justly  remarks  against 
the  second  view,  that  theti  a  y<xQ,  instead  of  oiv, 
would  be  naturally  exjjected  in  chap.  iv.  1.  [Be- 
sides, the  main  object  of  Paul  here  is  to  show  the 
true  method  of  justification,  and  not  the  agreement 
of  the  law  and  the  gospel. — P.  S.]  This  much  is 
clear :  that  ver.  31  constitutes  the  transition  to 
chap.  iv.  But,  in  itself,  it  serves  as  the  conclusion 
of  the  paragraph  from  vers.  27-30,  in  that  it  brings 
out  the  relation  of  the  experimental  fact  that  there 
are  believing  Gentiles — to  the  law.  Paul  had  shown 
that  the  justification  of  the  Gentiles,  with  the  justifi- 
cation of  the  Jews,  is  to  be  traced  back  to  one  and 
the  same  God.  By  this  means,  he  says,  the  law  is 
not  made  void,  but  established.  How  far  estab- 
lished ?  The  answer  is  furnished  by  the  preceding 
verses :  As  far  as  the  unity  of  God,  which  underlies 
the  law,  is  glorified  by  the  harmony  of  His  saving 
operations  timong  Jews  and  Gentiles. .  Particularism 
weakens  the  law,  because  it  makes  the  law  the  stat- 
ute of  a  national  God.  The  universal  Monotheism 
of  Christianity,  proved  by  the  universal  justification 
of  believers,  first  properly  establishes  the  law  in  its 
true  character,  by  making  plain  tlie  universal  charac- 
ter of  the  lawgiver. — The  sentiment,  Do  we  then 
make  void  the  law?  is  sufficiently  repelled  by  the 
emotional  expression,  /» ?j  ye'roiTo,  Far  be  it! 
by  no  means  !  But  the  opposite  sentiment,  We 
establish  the  law,  has  been  already  proved  by  the 
fact  that  the  law  is  defined  as  the  law  of  faith,  and 
has  been  traced  back  to  the  God  of  the  Jews  and 
Gentiles.  This  is  indeed  extended  further  in  what 
follows,  yet  not  in  the  form  of  a  continued  proof, 
but  in  the  ibrm  of  a  new  scriptural  argument.  The 
question.  How  far  does  Paul,  or  Cliristianity  es- 
tablish the  law  ?  has  been  variously  answered ; 
see  Tholuck,  p.  163.  Chrysostom,  and  others,  say, 
that  the  salvation  in  Christ  is  the  end  of  the  law. 
Most  expositors  hold  that  the  law  is  fulfilled  by  the 
new  obedience,  chap.  vi.  and  viii.  4  [by  love,  which  is 
called  "the  fulfilment  of  the  law;"  xiii.  10.  Angus- 
tine,  Luther,  Calvin,  Beza,  Calov.,  Philippi. — P.  S.]. 
Tholuck  thinks  that  the  testimotiy  of  the  ro/ioc  and 
the  7i^o(itjTc<i,  is  meant.  But  this  is  not  a  new 
laTdvau ;  nor  would  the  continuation  in  chap.  iv.  be 
a  new  lurdvai,  from  this  point  of  view  ;  it  is  only  a 
new  proof  for  the  righteousness  by  faitii :  the  proof 
from  Scripture.  The  Apostle  glorifies  and  estab- 
lishes  the  law  on  a  new  and  broader  foundation,  by 
representing  it  as  a  unit,  by  tracing  it  to  its  principle 
of  life,  and  enlarging  its  contents  from  the  Jewish 
particularism  to  the  universality  of  the  revelation 
of  the  living  God  of  all  men.  Thus  the  Mosaic  law, 
as  the  type  of  the  Mosaic  religion,  is  glorified  so  far 
as  it  is  the  representative  of  all  the  legal  elements 
of  religion  in  general.* 

*  [Comp.  a  long  note  of  "Wordswoi-th  in  loc,  who  assigns 
no  le^s  than  twelve  reasons  tor  the  assertion  of  ver.  'Jl,  viz., 
because  the  doctrine  of  justification  is  grounded  on  the  testi- 
mony of  the  law  that  all  are  under  sin ;  because  the  sacrifice 
of  Christ  was  pre-announced  by  the  passovcr,  and  other  sacri 


138 


THE   EPISTLE   OF   PAUL   TO   THE   ROMANS. 


DOCTBJNAL  AXD  ETHICAL. 
FiBST  Pabaouaph  (vebs.  21-26). 

1.  As  the  Old  Testament,  according  to  ver.  21, 
has  testified  of  the  rij;hteousness  of  faith  contained 
in  the  New  Test;iment,  so  does  the  New  Testament 
—as  the  perfect  revehition  of  God's  righteousness — 
bear  witness  to  the  holiness  of  the  law  in  the  Old 
Testament. 

2.  It  is  a  defective  and  inorganic  view  to  believe 
that,  as  far  as  tlie  single  attributes  of  God  are  con- 
cerned, in  the  New  Testament  His  justice  is  less 
prominent  tiian  in  the  Old,  in  order  that  His  love 
may  appear  more  prominent.  On  the  contrary,  the 
revelation  of  His  jusiiee  is  first  completed  in  the 
New  Testament.  It  is  here  completed  so  grandly, 
that,  in  proportion  to  this  completion,  the  Old  Tes- 
tament revelation  of  justice  may  be  regarded  as  still 
veiled.  The  same  may  be  said  of  all  tiie  Divine 
attributes.  In  tiie  New  Testament  they  have  a  kill- 
ing and  a  vivifying — i.  e.,  creative  ett'ect.  The  jus- 
tice in  union  with  love  is  grace.  In  tiie  Old  Testa- 
ment, however,  justice  appears  mainly  in  its  punitive 
aspect. 

3.  On  the  double  form  and  kind  of  faith,  see  the 
£!xe(/.  NotM  on  ver.  22. 

4.  Also  on  the  i)6ia  ^foT^  see  Exeg.  Notes  on 
ver.  23.  As  the  <ii,/.ai,(y<ri<vti  is  the  internal  part  of 
the  Divine  <)6ia,  so  is  the  want  of  ditla  on  man's 
part  the  evidence  of  his  want  of  iiuxai-oaln'ti.  The 
same  connection  is  likewi.se  exhibited  in  the  life  of 
faith.  The  ()n^d'^iadav  arises  from  the  ()^xato^ffl^a^ 
(chap.  viii.  30). 

5.  Tiie  doctrine  of  yMS<«/?ca<io«.  Onthetftxat- 
ovv,  see  cliap.  ii.  13,  and  the  section  relating  there- 
to. On  the  fact  tiiat  it  is  under  the  dixat,m'(r flea 
that  man's  utter  want  of  personal  righteousness  first 
becomes  prominent,  see  the  Excfi.  Xotes  on  ver.  21. 
The  evangelical  definition  per  j/idem  is  opposed  to 
the  Roman  Catliolic  definition  propter  fidem.  Tlie 
form  /irofiter  jvlem  has  a  d()ul)le  sense.  If  faith  is 
understood  as  merit,  the  order  of  tlie  work  of  sal- 
vation is  reversed,  and  its  causality  is  transferred  to 
man.  It  is  very  clear  frum  tlie  present  tense  rytxai.- 
oT'irfyru  (ver.  28),  that  the  Apostle  distinguishes  here, 
and  throughout,  between  raleiiiptioii  and  junttfica- 
tion.  Christ  is,  indeed,  effei-tively  the  righteousness 
of  believers,  and  virtually  the  righteousness  of  hu- 
manity, and  so  far  could  the  redemption  be  once 
loosely  denominated  justification.  Yet  the  Apostle's 
usage  of  language  is  far  above  this  indefiniteness, 
and  cliai).  viii.  30  proves  conclusively  (comp.  chap. 
V.  18)  that  he  regards  justification  as  a  part  of  the 

flees  of  the  law  ;  bccanso  the  law  revc:»l8  Qod  as  a  juBt  Judso, 
who  npiMis  nil  ndoquate  propitiation  for  sin  ;  hi-cuiise  tno 
death  of  (.'hriat  is  suoh  a  propitiation  ;  bocaimo  Christ  ha.s,  by 
His  perfect  ohod  euco  to  the  law,  established  it«  diifnity ; 
boC'iiiso  justificitioii  by  f:>ith  obliges  men  t<  new  depieeti  of 
love  and  (rralitiide  to  God,  &c.,  &c.  But  tliose  are  all  siili- 
ordin'ito  points. — In  one  sense  the  law  is  abolished,  as  ii  type 
and  shadow  of  thini{s  to  come;  a.s  a  killing  letter,  with  its 
curse  ;  corap.  Kph.ii.25;  (ial.  iii.  K);  hut  as  to  icsmrnil  con- 
tents, as  the  expression  of  the  holy  will  of  Ood,  iis  a  rule  of 
oonduct,  it  was  iiurfcctly  fulfilled  by  Christ,  and  I" 'onstantly 
fulfilled  by  every  believer  in  love  toOod  anu  .n.fc  lOtiur  neiifh- 
bor.     Thi'  doailoifue  is  a  national  code  in  /oiin,  a  universal 

X)de  'n  ipirit  and  aim.    This  applies  to  ail  the  Ten  Coin- 

nnndments,  from  which  we  cannot  take  out  one  (say  the 
seO'iad,  or  the  fourtli)  without  m»'  ^k  the  beauty,  har- 
li),ony,  and  Cf)mpleteno»8  of  th<»  »  -  .  o.  Christ  has  settled 
that  question  in   His  interpretation  of  the  law,  by  the  fui.- 

damenial  pratciple  of  the  iiia)rna  oh  irta  of  the  kingdom  of 

heaven,  um  laid  down  Matt.  v.  17  If. — 1*.  8.] 


plan  of  salvation.  The  connection  between  the 
fitxau.jffK,- — which  grace  effects  in  every  believef 
after  the  x/./^ffi,- — and  the  i/air.KOi,-,  consi.sts  in  this : 
tiiat  Christ,  as  the  perfect  dkAaimiia,  is,  by  the 
gospel,  offered  to  men,  that  He  is  set  forth  aa 
i).aarin)i.Qv.  (Lipsius,  in  a  monograph  entitled  Th« 
Pauline  Doctrine  of  Justijicalion,  '853,  iiolda  that 
the  (hxKtoni'oy  is  the  condition  of  righteousness,  and 
that  every  one  is  t)iy.aio<;  who  is  just  what  Wis  de^ 
tination  recjuircs  he  should  be.  The  author's  con- 
clusion is,  that  Paul,  in  no  single  passage,  compels 
us  to  divide  the  divine  operation — the  result  of 
which  is  the  (preliminary)  human  ()i/t«u)(Ti''r// — into 
two  distinct  and  separate  acts,  the  actus  (fficlevs  and 
the  actus  declaratorlus,  in  such  a  manner  that  the  lat- 
ter only  may  be  called  t)ixat,o7v.) — The  way  for  the 
Protestant  doctrine  of  justification  was  i)rei)ared  by 
the  sound  productions  of  the  mysticism  of  the  Mid- 
dle Ages  ;  for  example,  in  "  German  Tlie(ilo<;y."  * 
This  book  contrasts  sdfdoni,  or  egoism,  with  entire 
self-surrender  to  God  and  His  will,  and  thereby 
indi(!ates  the  deepest  ground  for  the  sinner's  justifi- 
cation by  faith.  Justification,  as  the  a])pro])riation 
of  Christ's  (Uxft/i/jna,  makes  the  gospel,  through  the 
power  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  an  individual  and  special 
absolution  from  tiie  guilt  of  sin,  which  the  believer 
experiences  in  peace  of  conscience  and  freedom.  It 
makes  the  objective  fyi.xc<(«)/<a  in  Christ  his  subjec- 
tive dr/.aiofTi'ivtj.  Justification  is  essentially  a  pro- 
nouncing righteous,  but  by  the  creative  declaration 
of  God  ;  therefore  it  is  also  a  making  righteous,  in 
the  sense  that  it  is  the  conmninication  of  a  new 
princi[)le  of  life,  vet  in  such  a  way  that  this  nevr 
principle  of  life  must  ever  be  regarded  as  the  pure 
effect  of  Christ,  and  not  in  any  way  as  the  cniiite  of 
justification.  The  one  gracious  act  of  justification 
is  divided  into  two  acts :  1.  Tlie  offer  of  the  dixniioua 
for  faith  until  faith  is  awaked  by  free  grace  ;  2.  Ac- 
counting faith  as  righteousness.  The  effects  of  jus- 
tification are,  negatively,  liberation  from  the  guilt, 
the  curse,  and  ])unishment  of  sin  ;  and,  positively, 
adoption  or  sonsiiip,  by  which  the  believer's  filial 
relation — that  is,  tiie  decision  of  his  imlividiial  re- 
generation, and  his  translation  into  the  state  of  peace 
— is  pronounced.  In  the  old  Protestant  theology, 
justification  has  been  variously  confounded  too  much 
with  the  redemption  itself;  while  in  our  day,  as  was 
already  the  case  with  Osiander  [died  ir)."i2),  it  has 
often  been  far  too  niueh  identified  with  sanetitieaiion. 

[Additional  remarks  on  the  doctrine  of  justifira- 
tion  1)1/  /(lit/i,  or  rather  bi/  free  grace  through  faith 
in  Christ. 

(a.)  Its  iviportance  and  pnsl'ion  in  the  theological 
sy.stem.  It  iielongs  to  soteriology,  the  appropriation 
of  the  salvation  of  Christ  to  the  sinner.  It  ])resup- 
poses  the  fundamental  truths  of  the  Trinity,  the  in- 
carnation, total  depravity,  the  atonement,  all  of  which 
were  revealed  before,  as  the  (Jospels  and  Act.s  precede 
the  Epistles.  It  is  therefore  not,  strictly  si)caking, 
the  arliculus  stniitis  et  cadcntis  ccdciitv  (Luiher),  but 
subordinate  to  the  article  of  (.'hriat,  who  alone  can 
be  called  the  one  foundation  and  rock  of  the  whole 
Christian  system  (1  Cor.  iii.  11).     The  doctrine  that 

•  [The  D'lilschf  Throliiffir,  or  Thr.'ilogut  Grrmanica,  !• 
the  work  of  an  unknown  author  of  the  flfle<'nth  century, 
and  WHS  edited  by  Dr.  Luther  with  a  hiwbly  commendatory 
preface  in  l.)l(>,  one  year  before  the  commenc'Ricnt  of  the 
Ueforniaiioii.  P^'cent  clltions  by  I'fi'iffer,  ls,Vi,  nnd  Rol- 
fpnialli,  lSii:i.  Thi'ie  is  also  an  Kii);  ish  translation  bj 
Susanna  Winkworlh,  with  introductions  by  lliinsrn  anq 
Kiuk'sley,  I<ondon,  I86d,  reprinted  at  Anduver,  1856.-* 
r.  S.] 


CHAPTER  III.   21-81. 


139 


Christ  is  the  Son  of  God,  and  came  into  the  flesh — 
i.  e.,  was  born,  died,  and  rose  again,  to  save  sinners 
— is  emphatically  "the  mystery  of  godliness"  (1 
Tim.  iii.  16),  iind  forms  the  burden  of  the  first  Chris- 
tian confession  (Matt.  xvi.  16-19);  its  assertion  or 
denial  is  the  criterion  of  true  Christianity  and  of 
antichrist  (1  John  iv.  2,  3).  But  justification  by 
faith  is  undoubtedly  a  fundamental  article  of  subjec- 
tive  Christianity  and  of  evangelical  Protestantism,  as 
distinct  from  oicumenical  Catholicism,  and  as  op- 
posed to  Greek  and  Roman  sectional  Catholicism. 
It  constitutes  the  material  or  life-principle  of  Prot- 
estantism {principliitn  essendi),  as  the  doctrine  of 
the  supreme  autliority  of  the  Holy  Scriptures  in 
matters  of  faith  and  practice  constitutes  its  formal 
principle  (jn-incipiion  cagnoscendi).  It  was  never 
properly  understood  in  the  Christian  Church,  not 
even  by  Augustine,  until  Luther,  and  the  other 
Reformers  brought  it  out  into  clear  light  from  the 
Epistles  of  Paul,  especially  those  to  the  Romans  and 
Galatians.  The  unbiassed  philological  exegesis  of 
modern  times  has  fully  justified  the  scripturalness 
of  this  doctrine  of  the  Reformation.  Yet  the  best 
men  in  the  Church  of  all  ages,  and  the  profoundest 
divines  before  the  Reformation,  such  as  Augustine, 
Anselm,  Bernard,  have,  in  fact,  always  come  to  the 
same  practical  conclusion  in  the  end,  and,  disclaiming 
all  merit  of  their  own,  they  have  taken  refuge  in 
the  free  grace  of  God,  as  the  only  and  sufficient 
cause  of  salvaticm.  "  Our  righteousness,"  saj's  St. 
Bernard  (Senno  V.  de  verbis  Esaice  Proph.,  vi.  1,  2), 
"our  righteousness,  if  we  have  any,  is  of  little  value; 
it  is  sincere,  perhaps,  but  not  pure,  unless  we  believe 
ourselves  to  be  better  than  our  fathers,  who  no  less 
truly  than  humbly  said  :  All  our  righteousnesses  are 
as  filthy  rags." 

{b.)  Definition  of  justification.  It  is  a  judicial 
act  of  God  by  which  He  freely  acquits  the  penitent 
einner,  and  adopts  him  as  His  child  on  the  ground 
of  Christ's  perfect  righteousness,  and  on  condition 
of  a  living  faith.  Paul  has  in  his  mind  a  judicial 
process :  The  righteous  and  holy  God  is  the  Judge  ; 
man  is  the  guilty  culprit ;  the  law,  or  tlie  expressed 
will  of  God,  is  the  accuser ;  Christ,  with  His  perfect 
sacrifice,  steps  in  as  a  substitute  ;  the  sinner  accepts 
Him  in  hearty  faith,  or  enters  into  Christ's  position, 
as  Christ  did  into  his ;  God,  on  the  ground  of  this 
relation,  acquits  the  sinner,  and  treats  him  as  His 
own  child  ;  the  sinner,  being  one  with  Christ,  no 
■more  lives  unto  himself,  but,  the  grace  of  God  ena- 
bling him,  unto  Ciirist,  who  died  for  him,  and  rose 
again.     This  is  justification. 

(c.)  Relation  to  the  atonement,  regeneration,  and 
tandijicntion.     Justification  differs : 

{aa.)  From  the  atonemevt  ('i).a(T/i6i;,  D.aarrjQLOv, 
expiation,  propitiation,  Versuhnung)  and  the  conse- 
quent reconciliat  on  {y.aTaX/.ay/j,  at-one-ment  in  the 
old  sense  of  the  term,  as  used  in  the  E.  V.,  Rom.  v. 
11,  in  German  Versohnuvg),  i.  e.,  the  reconciliation 
of  God  and  the  sinner  by  the  self-sacrifice  of  Christ, 
which  fully  satisfies  the  claims  of  Divine  justice,  and 
draws  men  to  God  by  the  attniction  of  superhuman 
love.  The  atonement  is  the  objective  ground  of  jus- 
tification ;  it  was  accomplished  once  for  all  time,  but 
"ustification  is  repeated  in  the  case  of  every  sinner. 

(bb.)  From  reneneration,  or  the  new  birth.  This 
is  a  creative  act  of  the  Holy  Spirit  in  nuiii  preceding: 
or  accompanying  the  objective  act  of  justification  by 
God  the  Father,  and  resulting  in  a  subjective  change 
of  heart,  which  corresponds  to  the  new  relation  of 
the  believer  as  justified  in  Christ. 


{cc.)  From  sanctijication.  This  is  a  gradual  erowth, 
beginning  witli  regeneration  and  justification,  and  cul. 
minating  in  the  resurrection  of  the  body.  Justifica- 
tion is  God's  gracious  act  toward  us ;  sanctification 
is  God's  gracious  work  within  us :  the  former  is  a 
single  act  of  God,  the  latter  a  continuous  growth  in 
man. 

{d.)  The  evangelical  Protestant  (Pauline)  doctrine 
of  justificjition  must  be  maintained : 

{aa.)  Against  Pharisccism,  Pelagianism,  and  Ra- 
tiojialism,  or  the  doctrine  of  justification  by  works, 
which,  in  various  forms  and  degrees,  glorifies  human 
ability  and  represents  justification  as  a  reward  for 
man's  own  merit  (legalism,  self-righteousness,  work- 
righteousness). 

(bb.)  Against  the  semi-Pelagian  and  the  Romish 
or  Tridcntinr,  as  well  as  the  modern  Anglo-Roman- 
izing or  Tractarian  theory  of  justification  by  faith 
and  works,  which  confounds  justification  with  sancti- 
fication (juslitia  infusa  ;  ex  injus  o  Justus  redditur), 
makes  it  depend  on  the  degree  of  personal  holiness, 
teaches  the  meritoriousness  of  good  works  [opera 
meritoria  pro2yortionata  vitce  eeterna: ;  meritum  de 
cougruo  and  meritum  de  condigno  ;  opera  superero- 
gationis),  and  divides  the  glory  of  our  salvation  be- 
tween God  and  man. 

(cc.)  Against  ultra-  and  pseudo-Protestant  Soli- 
Jidianism,  and  Antinomianisin,  which  destroy  the 
law,  as  a  rule  of  conduct,  tear  justification  from  ita 
proper  antecedents  and  consequents,  and  deny  the 
necessity  of  good  works.  (Amsdorf,  a  Lutheran 
divine  of  the  sixteenth  century,  went  so  far  as  to 
assert  that  good  works  were  pernicious  or  dangerous 
to  salvation ;  while  Major  maintained  the  opposite 
thesis  :  bona  opera  necessaria  <id  salntem.  The  result 
of  this  controversy  was  the  distinction  that  good 
works  were  necessary,  not  as  a  condition  of  salva- 
tion,  but  as  the  evidence  of  saving  faith  ;  and  that 
not  good  works,  but  only  such  rel'iance  on  them  as 
interfered  with  trust  in  the  merits  of  Christ,  was 
dangerous  to  salvation.) 

{dd.)  Against  subjective  Spiritualism  and  un- 
ci lurchly  Fanaticistn,  which  resolve  justification  by 
faith  into  a  justification  by  feeling,  and  despise  or 
ignore  the  Church  and  the  sacraments,  as  the  regular, 
divinely  appointed  means  of  grace. 

On  the  doctrinal  aspect  ol'  justification  by  faith, 
comp.  Cliemnitz,  Concil.  Trident.,  torn,  i.,  lib.  viii. ; 
Gerhard,  Loci  JTieologici,  tom.  vii. ;  John  Davenant 
(Bishop  of  Salisbury),  Diaptdatio  de  justitia  habituali 
et  actuali,  1631,  English  translation  by  Josiah  All- 
port,  London,  1844-'46,  2  vols,  (a  standard  work  of 
the  Anglican  Church  against  the  Romish  doctrine) ; 
my  Principle  of  Protestantixm,  1845,  p.  54  If.; 
Bishop  Ch.  P.  M'llvaine,  Righleoicsness  by  Faith  ; 
or  the  Nature  and  Means  of  Justification  before 
God  (against  the  Romanizing  doctrine  of  the  Ox- 
ford Tracts),  Phila.,  2d  ed.,  1864;  Dr.  James 
Buchanan,  The  Doctrine  on  Justif  cation :  an  Out- 
line of  its  History  in  the  Cliurch,  arid  of  its  Expo- 
sition from  Scripture,  Edinburgh,  1867  ;  the  respec- 
tive sections  in  the  works  on  Symbolics ;  several 
recent  dogmatic  essays  on  the  subject,  by  Dorner, 

1867,  translated  by  C.  A.  Briggs  for  the  Am.  Pre.\b. 
Theol.  Rev..,  New  York,  April,  1868,  pp.  186-214  ; 
Riggenljach,  in  the  Studien  arid  Kritiken  for  April, 

1868,  pp.  201-243  ;  an  article  in  the  British  and 
Foreign  Evang.  Review  for  January,  1862,  which  ia 
fully  criticised  by  Forbes,  on  Rom.  p.  125  ff.  The 
exeuetical  essays  have  been  mentioned  in  commentil 
on  chap.  i.  17,  pp.  75,  76.— P.  S.t 


140 


THE   EPISTLE    OF   PAUL    TO    THE   ROMANS. 


1   tAaffTi/'piOJ',   D.ouT/io^,  and  anoli'TQuxTK;, 

Exej.  Xotes  on  ver.  '25.     For  more  detailed 


6.  On 

Bee  the  Exej.  Notes  on  ver.  "25.  For  more  detailed 
information,  see  my  Positive  Doi/maiici,  p.  813  If. 
As  recent  elt'orts  have  bi'en  ma<le  to  set  aside  the 
true  doctrine  of  atonement  itself  hy  refuting  the 
view  of  Ana  liTi,*  it  sliould  he  remembered  that  the 
defects  in  Anselm's  theory  were  acknowledged  even 
in  the  Middle  Ages,  but  that  they  cannot  destroy  its 
relative  truth  and  value.  The  real  idea  of  the  atone- 
ment cannot  be  clearly  apprehended  without  under- 
atamling  the  meaning  of  compassion,  of  sympatin', 
of  reconciliation  in  Christ,  of  the  divine  judgment- 
Beat  in  the  sinner's  conscience,  and  of  the  connection 
of  judgment  and  deliverance  in  the  sutt'erings  of 
Christ  as  well  as  in  tiie  sinner's  conversion. 

7.  God  is  the  righteous  Judge  and  the  justifying 
God  :  (1.)  In  the  same  grace  ;  (2.)  In  the  objective 
work  of  redemption,  or  in  justification  by  faith. 

8.  When  the  Apostle,  in  ver.  27,  contrasts  a  law 
of  works  and  a  law  of  faith  as  excluding  each  other, 
and  then  says  in  ver.  31:  "We  establish  the  law,"  it 
follows  that  he  oidy  recognizes  that  antithesis  in 
ver.  27  as  one  which  the  external  legalism  of  the 
Jews  had  made ;  or  as  the  appearance  of  the  an- 
tithesis between  the  economy  of  the  Old  and  New 
Testaments,  but  that  his  own  view  was  based  upon  a 
deeper  unity. 

9.  It  is  well  known  that  very  much  has  been 
written  about  Luther's  sola,  ver.  28.  This  word  is 
perfectly  true  so  far  as  it  is  contrasted  with  'f(>-/a 
vo.KOi;  for  the  reading  is  y(t>^i(;  't(jyit>v  v6f<or,  with- 
out works  of  the  law.  Therefore  the  so/a  is  even 
positively  exclusive.  But  does  it  also  exclude  works 
of  faith  ?  Answer  :  As  soon  as  a  work  of  faith  is 
added  to  faitli,  it  is  made  an  '/(jyoi'  v6i(or,  a  work  of 
the  law.  If  the  work  remains  a  mere  phenomenon 
or  manifestation  of  faith,  it  has  no  separate  signifi- 
cance in  itself. 

[Dr.  Donne,  a  standard  divine  of  the  Church  of 
England,  originally  a  convert  from  Romanism  (died 
lij:il),  in  Serm.  ii.  on  John  xvi.  8-11,  makes  the 
following  apt  remarks  on  this  sola  fide  :  "  Faith  is 
but  one  of  those  things  which  in  several  senses  are 
Baid  to  justify  us.  It  is  truly  said  of  God,  Deus 
aohis  justijii-at ;  God  only  justifies  us — efficienter  ; 
nothing  can  effect  it,  nothing  can  work  towards  it, 
but  only  the  mere  goodness  of  God.  And  it  is  truly 
said  of  Christ,  C/tristus  solus  jiistificat ;  Christ  only 
justifies  us — iiiaterialiter  ;  nothing  enters  into  the 
substance  and  body  of  the  ran.s()m  of  our  sins  but 
the  obedience  of  Christ.  It  is  also  truly  said,  sola 
fiiles  jiistitirat  ;  oidy  faith  justifies  us — inxtvumfiu 
ta'Uer ;  nothing  apprehends,  nothing  applies  tlie 
merit  of  Ciirist  to  thee,  but  thy  faith.  And  lastly, 
it  is  as  truly  said,  sola  opera  justificant ;  only  our 
works  justify  us — declaratorii  ;  only  thy  good  life 
can  assure  thy  conscience,  and  the  worlil,  that  thou 
art  justified.  As  the  efficient  justification,  the  gra- 
cious purpose  of  Coil,  had  done  us  no  good  without 
the  matiM'ial  satisfaction,  the  di'ath  of  Clirist,  that 
followed  ;  and  as  that  material  satisfaction,  the  death 
of  Christ,  woulil  do  me  no  good  without  the  instru- 
mental justification,  tlie  apprehension  by  faith  ;  so 
neither   would   this   profit  without   the   declaratory 

•  r  As  set  forth  in  his  colobrntptl  tnict,  Cnr  D'lit  Homo. 
An  alil.'  and  viKoroiis,  but  unHiiccomfiil  iittcmpt  to  set 
ftnldf?  the  orthoilox  vinw  of  the  atoticinrnt  lias  t)0('n  mmlo 
in  Aino.icii  bv  Ur.  UiiHlindl,  The  Vicarious  S'lrriflrt,  New 
York,  I  HOI).  Comp.  iiIho  tlio  Enuli.ili  work  of  Younu  on 
Chriitl  Ihr  Lffl,'  ami  Li/r  of  Ihr  Worlil,  1S67,  .in-l  .IoWi'tl'« 
CXClirsn.s  on  flii!  D'lririiir  of  Ihr  Aluii.ninil  (Horn.,  p.  4G8  tf. 
-P.  .S.J 


justification,  by  which  all  is  pleaded  and  established, 
(jod  enters  not  into  our  material  justification :  thai 
is  only  Christ's.  Christ  enters  not  into  our  instru- 
mental justification  :  that  is  only  faith's.  Faith  en- 
ters not  into  our  declaratory  justification  (for  faitli  \3 
secret),  and  declaration  belongs  to  works.  Neither 
of  these  can  be  said  to  justify  us  alone,  so  ;is  that  we 
may  take  the  chain  in  pieces,  ar.<l  think  to  be  justi- 
fied by  any  one  link  thereof — by  God  without  Christ, 
by  Christ  without  faith,  or  by  faith  without  works. 
And  yet  every  one  of  these  justifies  us  alone,  so  aa 
that  none  of  the  rest  enter  into  that  way  aird  that 
means  by  which  any  of  these  are  said  to  justify  us." 
Comp.  my  foot-note  on  ver.  28,  p.  13(j. — 1'.  S.] 

10.  Ver.  29.  Paul  did  not  need  any  longer  to 
prove  from  tiie  Scriptures  that  God  was  also  the 
God  of  the  Gentiles.  The  first  phenomenon  of  the 
New  Covenant:  Blessedness  of  faitli,  speaking  with 
tongues,  and  a  new  life,  was,  with  the  Ajjostlea, 
etjuivalent  everywhere  to  scriptural  jiroofs,  and 
served  for  the  exposition  of  the  Old  Testament.  It 
was,  indeed,  the  specific  New  Testament  evidence 
which  precedes  with  I'aul  the  argument  from  the  Old 
Testament  in  chap.  iv. 

1 1.  On  the  means  by  which  Christianity  chiefly 
estahlhhes  the  law,  see  the  JExcff.  jVole.i  on  ver.  31. 
The  Judaism  of  the  Old  Testament  first  attained  its 
universal  historical  glory  by  Chi-istianity,  and  ita 
thanks  are  due  especially  to  Paul,  who  was  so  hated 
by  the  Jews.  [Bi.shop  Sanderson  {Sermon  on  1 
Peter  ii.  16,  as  quoted  by  Ford) :  "  The  law  may  be 
considered  as  a  rale  ;  or,  as  a  covenant.  Christ  haa 
freed  all  believers  from  the  rigor  and  curse  of 
the  law,  considered  as  a  covenant ;  but  He  has  not 
freed  them  from  obedience  to  the  law,  considered  aa 
a  rule.  .  .  .  The  law,  as  a  rule,  can  no  more  be  abol- 
ished or  changed,  than  can  the  nature  of  good  or 
evil  be  abolished  or  changed." — P.  S.j 

HOMILETICAL  AND  PRACTICAL. 
Chap.  hi.  21-26. 

The  revelation  of  the  righteousness  of  faith 
through  Jesus  Christ  which  is  efiicacious  in  God's 
sight.  It  comes  to  pa.ss :  1.  Without  (he  nxsixtancei 
of  the  law,  although  testified  by  the  law  and  the 
prophets ;  2.  For  all  sinners,  without  distinction, 
who  believe  ;  3.  Bi/  the  redemption  etVeeted  by  Jesus 
Christ  the  .Mediator,  who  [jroffers  the  righteousness 
which  is  acceptjible  to  (Jod  (vers.  21-2t)). — The  testi- 
mony of  the  law  and  the  |)ro]ihets  concerning  the 
rigliteousness  which  is  acceptalde  to  (Jod  :  1.  Of  the 
law  by  its  typical  reference  to  the  atonement;  2.  Of 
the  prophet-s  by  the  Messiainc  projjliecies  (ver.  21). 
— The  Apostle  takes  from  the  law  what  does  not 
belong  to  it,  aiid  concedes  what  does  belong  to  it. 
He  denies  :  1.  Its  alh.-ged  coiiperatiou  in  the  right- 
eousness wliich  is  acceptable  to  (Jod.  Hut  he  con- 
cedes to  it :  2.  The  testimony  of  the  future  atone- 
ment (ver.  21). — The  universality  (d'  grace  corre- 
sponding to  the  universality  of  sin  (vers.  22-24). — ■ 
What  sort  of  confession  should  we  make  to  (Jod 
daily  as  evangelical  Christians  y  Two  kin<ls  :  I.  We 
are  altogether  sinners,  and  come  short  of  the  glory 
wo  should  have  before  (Jod  ;  2.  We  are  justified 
freely  by  His  grace,  &c.  (vers.  23-2  f). — Christ  set 
forth  by  (Jod  to  be  a  propitiation  (mercy-seat) 
througii "faitli  in  His  blood:  1.  To  what  eudV  To 
offer  His  rightt>ousness  at  this  (present)  time;  2. 
Why  ?     Because  in  time  past  He  could  pass  over  sin 


CHAPTER  ni.   21-31. 


141 


by  His  Divine  forbearance,  and  thereby  shake  faith 
in  His  justice  (vers.  25,  26). — Divine  forbearance 
(ver.  25). — God  the  only  just  One,  and  therefore  the 
only  Justifier  (ver.  21). 

Luther  :  "  All  have  sinned,"  &c.  This  is  the 
chief  portion  and  central  part  of  this  Epistle,  and  of 
the  whole  Scripture.  Therefore  understand  this  text 
well,  for  the  merit  and  glory  of  all  works, — as  he 
himself  says, — are  done  away  with,  and  God's  grace 
and  glory  alone  i-emain  (ver.  23). — Sin  could  be 
removed  neither  by  laws  nor  by  any  good  works ; 
that  must  be  done  by  Christ  and  His  forgiveness 
(ver.  25). — Faith  fulfils  all  laws,  but  works  cannot 
fulfil  a  single  tittle  of  the  law  (ver.  31). 

Starke  :  There  is  only  one  kind  of  justification 
in  the  Old  and  New  Testaments  ;  namely,  that  wliich 
is  by  faith  in  Christ  (ver.  21). — To  have  a  believing 
heart,  is  to  hunger  and  thirst  after  the  grace  of  God 
in  Christ,  and  to  appropriate  the  righteousness  of 
Christ  for  our  spiritual  satisfaction  and  refreshment 
(ver.  22). — Do  not  make  a  wrong  use  of  this  passage 
against  active  Christianity,  for  God's  image  nmst  be 
restored  in  us  in  the  order  of  the  new  birth  and 
daily  renewal  (ver.  23). — Grace  and  righteousness 
are  the  two  principal  attributes  of  God  which  are 
proved  in  the  work  of  our  salvation.  Therefore  one 
cannot  be  separated  from  the  other,  either  in  the 
cause  or  order  of  our  salvation  (ver.  24). — The  faith 
which  appropriates  the  blood  of  Jesus  Christ  and 
His  expiatory  death,  and  presents  them  to  God  the 
Lord,  is  the  only  means  by  which  Christ  becomes 
also  our  mercy-seat  (ver.  25). — If  you  are  ever  so 
distinguislied  and  wealthy,  and  are  deficient  in  true 
and  living  faith,  you  can  neither  be  justified  nor 
saved  (ver.  26). 

OsiANPER  :  No  doctrine  must  be  accepted  in  the 
Church  of  God  to  which  God's  word  does  not  bear 
witness  (ver.  21). — Lasge  :  The  merit  of  the  blood 
of  Christ  is  not  only  the  object  which  faith  grasps, 
but  also  the  foundation  on  which  it  firmly  rests  (ver. 
25).  —  Hedinoer  :  Christ  our  righteousness!  Oh, 
Jhe  glorious  consolation,  which  screens  us  from  the 
wrath  of  God,  the  curse  of  the  law,  and  eternal 
death  !  No  work,  no  perfection  out  of  Christ ;  but 
faith  alone  makes  us  dear  children  of  God — right- 
eous, holy,  and  blessed  (ver.  25). 

Besgel  :  Under  the  law,  God  appears  just  and 
condemning ;  under  the  gospel,  just,  and  yet  justi- 
fying the  guilty  sinner. 

Lisco :  The  nature  of  evangelical  righteousness 
is,  that  it  is  obtained  by  faith  in  Jesus  Christ ;  and 
it  comes  to  cdl  and  upon  all  who  believe  in  Him. 
Like  a  flood  of  grace  it  flows  to  all,  and  even  so 
overflows  as  to  reach  even  the  heathen.  It  is  there- 
fore a  righteousness  by  faith,  and  not  a  righteousness 
by  works. — In  the  work  of  redemption,  God's  holi- 
ness and  grace,  justice  and  forbearance,  are  revealed 
(vers.  25,  26). 

Helbn'er  :  The  difficult  question  is  now  solved  : 
"  How  can  the  sinner  find  redemption  from  his 
sins  ?  "  Christianity  replies  ;  Believe  in  Chriat  (ver. 
22). — How  is  the  righteousness  which  God  accepts 
testified  by  the  law  and  the  prophets  ?  1.  By  this 
means :  all  forgiveness,  all  redemption,  is  every- 
where described  in  the  Scriptures  as  the  free  work 
»f  God's  grace  ;  neither  the  oifering,  nor  man's  own 
merit,  was  sufficient  for  this  end ;  2.  In  the  em- 
phatic prophecies  of  a  future  Redeemer  (ver.  21). — 
Unworthiness  before  God  is  universal.  This  is  the 
first  prostrating  word  of  revelation  :  Know  that  thou 
art  a  sinner,  a  poor  sinner;  that  is,  who  hast  nothing. 


and  must  get  something  from  God  (ver.  23). — Christ's 
redemption  is  :  1.  A  ransom  (Matt.  xx.  28)  Irom  the 
guilt  of  sin  (Eph.  i.  7) ;  2.  A  ransom  from  the  puTu 
isJwieiit  of  sin  (Rom.  v.  9) ;  3.  A  ran-som  from  the 
dominion  of  sin  (1  Peter  i.  18  ;  ver.  23). — The  sub- 
jective condition  of  redemption  is  faitli  as  a  faitb 
of  the  heart,  which  reposes  its  confidence  on  Christ'a 
sacrificial  death — a  faith  that  Christ  died  for  vie. 
This  Jor  me  is  the  great  thing  !  (ver.  26.) — On  vers. 
23-25,  Reixhard  preached  his  celebrated  Reforma»  '] 
tion  Sermon  (ii.  270)  in  the  year  1800  :  "  The  great 
reason  why  our  Church  should  never  forget  that  it 
owes  its  existeiKie  to  the  renewal  of  the  doctrine  of 
God's  free  grace  in  Christ." 

Besser  :  The  law  impels  toward  righteousness, 
but  it  does  not  confer  it. — There  are  not  two  ordera 
of  salvation,  one  for  Jews  and  honorable  people, 
and  the  other  for  heathen  and  publicans  ;  but  there 
is  only  one  for  all. — We  are  justified :  1.  Without 
merit ;  2.  By  God's  grace ;  3.  Through  the  re- 
demption that  is  in  Christ  Jesus  (ver.  24). — The 
highest  declaration  of  God's  grace  is  at  the  same 
time  the  highest  declaration  of  His  justice. 

J.  P.  Lange  :  The  fact  of  salvation  is  also  a  mi- 
raculous work  of  God  (ver.  21). — Redemption  as  the 
second  and  higher  world  of  miracle  in  relation  to 
the  natural  world  of  miracle. — Golgotha  is  more  ex- 
alted than  Sinai  in  respect  also  to  God's  justice.— 
The  lightning-flash  of  New  Testament  justice :  1. 
Killing  ;  2.  Slaking  alive. 

[BuRKiTT :  Vers.  24-26.  We  see  here :  1.  A 
glorious  privilege  for  believers,  justification  ;  2.  Its 
efficient  cause,  God;  3.  The  moving  or  impulsive 
cause,  free  grace ;  4.  The  meritorious  cause,  the 
blood-shedding  and  death  of  Christ ;  5.  Tlie  final 
cause,  the  declaration  of  His  righteousness  ;  6.  The 
instrumental  cause, /az7A. — Oh,  glorious  and  all-wise 
contrivance,  whereby  God  made  sufficient  provision 
for  the  reparation  of  His  honor,  for  the  vindication 
of  His  holiness,  for  the  manifestation  of  His  truth 
and  faithfulness,  and  for  the  present  consolation  and 
eternal  salvation  of  all  repenting  and  believing  sin- 
ners to  the  end  of  the  world  ! — Matthew  Henry  : 
Ver.  25.  Christ  is  the  propitiation — there  is  the 
healing  plaster  provided.  Faith  is  the  applying  of 
this  plaster  to  the  wounded  soul. — ^Faith  is  the  bunch 
of  hj'ssop,  and  the  blood  of  Christ  is  the  blood  of 
sprinkling. — Dwight  devotes  six  sermons  to  the  sub-  ' 
jecf  of  Justification,  in  which  he  treats  of  its  nature, 
source,  and  means ;  duty  of  believing ;  nature  of 
faith  ;  influence  of  faith  on  justification  ;  reconcilia- 
tion  of  Paul  and  James  on  justification  ;  influence 
of  works  on  justification  ;  and  justification  by  faith 
no  diminution  of  motives  to  obedience  {Theology,  l 
vol.  ii.,  pp.  515-605).— -Clarke  :  vers.  23-24.  Aa 
God  is  no  respecter  of  persons,  all  human  creaiurea 
being  equally  His  offspring,  and  there  being  no  rea- 
son why  one  should  be  preferred  before  another, 
therefore  His  mercy  has  embraced  all. — The  redemp- 
tion of  Christ  comprehends  whatsoever  He  taught, 
did,  or  suff'ered,  in  order  to  free  men  from  evil. — 
Hodge  :  As  the  cardinal  doctrine  of  the  Bible  ia 
justification  by  faith,  so  the  turning-point  in  the 
soul's  history,  the  saving  act,  is  the  reception  of 
Jesus  Christ  as  the  propitiation  for  our  sins. — All 
modes  of  preaching  must  be  erroneous,  which  do 
not  lead  sinners  to  feel  that  the  great  thing  to  be 
done,  and  done  first,  is  to  receive  the  Lord  Jesua 
Christ,  and  to  turn  unto  God  through  Him.  And 
all  religious  experience  must  be  defective,  which 
does  not  embrace  distinctly  a  sense  of  the  justio< 


142 


THE    EPISTLE   OF   PAUL   TO   THE   ROMANS. 


of  our  condemnation,  and  a  conviction  of  the  suffi- 
ciency of  tlie  work  of  Christ,  and  an  exclusive  reli- 
ance upon  it  as  such. — J.  F.  H.] 


On  Chap.  m.  Q7-31. 

The  exclusion  of  man's  self-glorification.  Its  re- 
Bults :  1.  Not  by  the  law  of  works ;  but,  2.  By  the 
law  of  fiiith  (ver.  27). — Hdw  are  we  justified?  1. 
Not  by  the  works  of  the  law  ;  but,  2.  By  faith  alone 
(ver.  28). — "Only  by  faith" — Lutiiku's  watciiword, 
and  also  the  watchword  of  tiie  evangelical  church 
of  the  present  day  (ver.  28). — The  righteousne.-vs  of 
the  law  and  the  rigliteousness  of  faith  (ver.  28). — 
God,  a  God  of  all  people,  because  He  is  only  one 
God  (vers.  29,  30). — Faitii  in  the  one  God  consid- 
ered as  tiie  source  of  the  true  kind  of  universalisra 
(vers.  29,  30). — The  popuhir  saying  of  religious  in- 
differentisMi :  "  We  all  believe  in  one  God,"  is  only 
true  wlien  we  also  believe  tiiat  tl)is  God  also  justifies 
those  wiio  believe  (vers.  29,  30). — The  proof  that 
the  law  is  not  made  void  through  faith,  but  estab- 
lished, is  supplied  by  both  the  deeds  and  doctrine : 
1.  Of  the  Lord  ;  2.  Of  His  apostles,  and  especially 
of  Paul  (ver.  31). 

Ll-thek:  Faith  keeps  all  the  laws,  while  works 
keep  no  point  of  the  law  (James  ii.  10). — [A  passage 
in  the  preface  to  the  E[)istle  to  tlie  Romans  is  also 
in  place  here :  Faith  is  not  that  human  folly  and 
dream  which  some  take  for  fiiith.  But  faith  is  a 
divine  work  in  us,  which  changes  us  and  creates  us 
anew  in  God,  &c.] 

SiAUKE:  J'aith  alone  justifies  and  saves;  but 
you  must  not  take  away  works  from  faitli  in  order 
to  beautify  your  sinfid  life,  or  it  will  become  imbe- 
lief — There  are  many  forms  of  arbitrary  will  on 
earth,  and  yet  liut  one  way  to  salvation.  God  would 
save  all  men,  and  yet  by  only  one  way. 

Heiunokr;  Cliristi.iniiy,  with  its  doctrine  of 
fuith,  opens  no  dttor  for  sin,  but  shows  how  we  can 
be  obotiient  to  the  law  with  a  filial  spirit  for  God's 
Bake  (chap.  iii.  31). — Quksnei.  :  The  more  faith  in  a 
Boul  tiie  less  pride  there  is  in  it. 

Geiilacif,  from  CnuYS()sro>f :  What  is  the  law 
of  faith  y  Salvation  by  grace.  Herein  God's  power 
is  declared,  not  only  in  delivering  men,  but  also  in 
justifying  tlicm  and  raising  them  to  glor}' ;  for  God 
did  not  stand  in  need  of  works,  but  sought  faith 
alone. — True,  the  word  a!ont;  is  not  in  the  text  lit- 
erally, but  yet  it  is  there  in  sense,  as  it  is  expressly 
dcclaicd  in  Gal.  ii.  H>,  17  ;  without  faith,  nothing 
can  justify. 

Hechner:  Christianity  unites  humanity  by  one 
God,  by  one  Father,  who  is  the  Saviour  of  all. — 
The  unity  of  faith  in  grace  should  also  establish  the 
unity  of  hearts. 

Spem-  u  :  Looking  at  the  subject  in  its  true  light, 
faith  is  not  that  which  itself  justifies  man — for  its 
strength  would  be  far  too  small  for  this  work — Init 
faith  only  accepts  the  n)ost  powerful  grace  of  (Jod 
as  a  protfercd  gift,  and  thus  permits  man  to  be  saved 
by  it,  instead  of  its  really  justifying  and  saving  him. 
This  is  the  great  doctrine  of  this  Epistle,  on  which 
every  thing  rest,s,  and  from  which  every  thing  must 
6e  derived. 

Lanoe:  Therefore  we  judge,  &e.,  and  thus  it 
Rtantis  (ver.  2S).  True  salvation  of  the  inner  life  a 
witness:  1.  Of  the  true  faith;  2.  Of  the  true  gos- 
Del ;  3.  Of  the  true  God. 


[Bcrkitt:  Ver.  31.  The  moral,  not  the  cere- 
monial law.  The  moral  law  is  established  by  th« 
gospel ;  Christ  has  relaxed  ihe  law  in  point  of  dan- 
ger, but  not  in  point  of  duty. — IIexuv  :  Ver.  27. 
If  we  were  saved  by  our  own  works,  we  might  put 
the  crown  upon  our  own  heads.  But  the  law  of 
faith,  the  way  of  justification  by  faith,  duth  forever 
exclude  boasting ;  for  faith  is  a  depending,  self- 
empf^•ing,  self-denying  grace,  and  casts  every  crown 
before  the  throne  :  therefore  it  is  most  for  God's 
glory,  that  thus  we  should  be  justified. — Mack.night: 
Ver.  28.  Faith  in  God  and  Christ  necessarily  leads 
those  who  possess  it  to  believe  every  thing  made 
known  to  them  by  God  and  by  Christ,  and  to  do 
every  thing  which  they  have  enjoined ;  so  that  it 
terminates  in  the  sincere  belief  of  the  doctrines  of 
religion,  and  in  the  constant  practice  of  its  duties, 
as  far  as  they  are  made  known  to  the  believer.— 
Clarke:  Whi/ did  not  G<id  make  /.noim  this  grand 
method  of  salvation  soon<r?  1.  To  make  it  the 
more  valued ;  2.  To  bIiow  His  fidelity  in  the  per- 
formance of  His  promises;  3.  To  make  known  the 
virtue  and  efficacy  of  the  blood  of  Christ,  which 
sanctifies  the  presenly  extends  its  influence  to  the 
pa.'if,  and  continues  the  availing  sacrifice  and  way  of 
salvation  to  all  future  ages. — IIougk  ;  The  doctrine 
of  atonement  produces  in  us  its  proper  elfect,  when 
it  leads  us  to  see  and  feel  that  God  is  just ;  that  He 
is  infinitely  gracious  ;  that  we  are  deprived  of  all 
ground  of  boasting ;  that  the  way  of  salvation, 
which  is  open  for  us,  is  open  for  all  men  ;  and  that 
the  motives  to  all  duty,  instead  of  being  weakened, 
are  enforced  and  multiplied. — In  the  gospel,  all  ia 
harmonious  :  justice  and  uiercy,  as  it  regards  God  ; 
freedom  from  the  law,  and  the  strongest  obligations 
to  obedience,  as  it  regards  men. — Barnes  :  One  of 
the  chief  glories  of  the  plan  of  salvation  is,  that 
while  it  justifies  the  sinner,  it  brings  a  new  set  of 
influences  from  heaven,  more  teiuler  and  mighty 
than  can  be  drawn  from  any  other  source,  to  pro. 
duce  obedience  to  the  law  of  God. — J.  F.  H.] 

[IloMiLi'.TiCAr,  Literature  on  Jistikicatiox  (Id. 
the  order  of  the  text). — CoCCEifs,  J)e  Justifcatione, 
op.  7,  180,  T.  W.  Allies,  Scrm.  1 :  B.  Hill,  Serm. 
95;  E.  Cooper,  Lead.  J)oct.,  1.  20;  M.  1Iai;uison, 
several  sermons  on  Justification  (1091);  E.  Bather, 
Serm.  2,  248;  T.  Bosto.n,  Works,  1,  581 ;  S.  Kxigmt, 
Serm.  2,  15  ;  A.  Fullkr,  Three  Sermons  on  Justifi- 
cation, Serm.  17*1 ;  W.  B.  Collyer,  On  Script.  Doct., 
329;  Bishop  Hoiiart,  Serm.  2,  32;  W.  Bridge, 
Works,  5,  3(14;  C.  Si.MEo.v,  lI'.rA-.v,  15,  79;  A.  Bur- 
gess, On  .fustificatio)i  (Two  Parts);  J.  IIdolk,  ^Vn/i. 
2,  217;  W.  Stevens,  Serm.  1,  2C.8  ;  Bishop  Hali- 
fax, St.  PauPs  Doctrine  of  Justification  bi)  Faith 
Ex/i/ained,  2d.  ed.,  Camb.  1762;  T.  Randolph,  Doc- 
trine of  Ju.ttijication  In/  Faith  ;  H.  Worthington, 
Disc.  315  ;  S.  Disney,  Disc.  125  ;  P.  Hutcheson, 
Serm.  ;  T.  Young,  Ju.slifirati'iti,  &c.  ;  E.  Parsons, 
Jaxtification  hi/  Fr.ith,  Halifax,  1821  ;  J.  C.  Miller, 
.SV;-m.  359  ;  J.  Joiin.ston,  W,i;i  of  Life,  85  ;  T.  T. 
Smith,  Serm.  289;  W.  Suikley,  Serm.  151;  J. 
Whitty,  Serm.  i.  413  ;  J.  Wesli' Y,  Works  (Amer. 
ed.),  vol.  i,  47,  385  ;  vol.  ii.  40,  23fi  ;  vol,  iii.  153, 
172,  2r>9;  vol.  v.  37-442;  vol.  vi.  B-195  ;  vol.  vii, 
47. — The  I'eriodical  Nomi/ctical  Literature  on  the 
same  subject  is  very  abundant.  We  give  the  prin- 
cipal artif'es:  JiLitificution  bi/  Faith  (R.  W.  Lanius), 
Amcr.  liibl.  Rcjiositon/,  x\.  4Xi  ;  (I).  Curry)  ^flth. 
Quart,  h'ci'.,  iv.  5  ;  v.  5;  (C.  D.  Pidgeon)  Lit.  and 
The,,!.  Rev.,  vi.  621 ;  Princeton  /vVi-;,  xii.  208,  561  ; 
Justijication  by  Works. — J.  F.  H.j 


CHAPTER  IV.   1-25.  I43 


Eighth  Section. — Second  proof  of  the  riffhfeousness  of.  faith :  from  the  Scriptc  res,  and  particularly 
from  the  history  of  the  faith  of  Abraham,  the  ancestor  of  the  Jews.  Abraham  is  the  father  of  faith 
to  the  Gentiles  as  xcell  as  the  Jews,  because  he  was  justified  in  uncircumcision  as  a  Gentile,  and  because 
he  received  circumcision  as  the  seal  of  the  righteousness  of  faith.  David  is  also  a  witness  of  the  right- 
eousness of  faith.  {He  is  particularly  so,  since  his  justification  was  that  of  a  great  sinner.)  Abra- 
ham, by  his  faith  in  the  woi-d  of  the  personal  God  of  revelation,  and  particularly  in  the  promise  of 
Isaac,  is  a  type  of  believers  in  the  saving  miracle  of  the  resurrection. 

Chap.   IV.  1-25. 

1  What  [,  then,]  shall  we  say  then  that  Abraham  our  father,  as  pertaining  tc 

2  the  flesh,  hath  found  [found  according  to  the  flesh]  ? ' '  For  if  Abraham  wer« 
[wn?]  justified   by  works   [as  is  assumed  by  the  Jews],  he  hath  tohereof  to  glory  [he 

3  hath  ground  of  boasting]  ;  "^  but  not  before  God.  For  what  saith  the  Scripture  ? 
Abraham  believed  God,  and  it  was  counted  [reckoned]  unto  [to]  him  for  right- 

4  eousness  [oen.  xv.  e].  Now  to  him  that  worketh  [to  the  workman] '  is  the 
reward   not   reckoned   of   [according   to,  or,    as    a   matter   of]    grace,    but   of 

5  [according  to,  as  a]  debt.      But  to  him  that  worketh  not,"  but  believeth  on  him 

6  that  justitieth  the  ungodly,  liis  faith  is  counted  [reckoned]  for  righteousness.  Even 
as  David  also  describeth  the  blessedness  [happiness]  "  of  the  man,  imto  whom  God 

7  imputeth  righteousness  without  works,  Saying,  Blessed  [Happy]  are  they  whose 

8  iniquities  are  forgiven,  and  whose  sins  are  covered  [atoned  for].  Blessed 
[Happy]  is  the  man  to  whom  the  Lord  will  not  impute  [leckon]  sin  [rs.  xxxa  1, 2].' 

9  Cometh  this  blessedness  [happiness]  then  upon  the  circumcision  only,  or 
[also]  upon  the  uncircumcision  also  ?     For  Ave  say  that  faith  was  reckoned  to 

10  Abraham  for  righteousness.  How  was  it  then  reckoned  ?  when  he  was  in  cir- 
cumcision, or  in  uncircumcision  ?     Not  in  circumcision,  but  in  uncircumcision. 

11  And  he  received  [cen.  xvii.  2]  the  [a]  sign  of  circumcision,'  [as  ?]  a  seal  of  the 
righteousness  of  the  faith  which  he  had  yet  being  uncircumcised  [of  the  faith 
in  the  uncircumcision,  ri,^  Trcarecog  t^\,'  iv  rij  uy-QO^vaxla,  or,  of  the  faith  wliich  he 
had  while  in  uncircumcision]  :  that  he  might  be  the  father  of  all  them  that 
believe,  though   they  be  not  circumcised  [while  yet  in  uncircumcision]  ;    that 

12  righteousness  might  be  imputed  [reckoned  also]  unto  them  also  : "  And  the 
fiither  of  circumcision  to  them  who  are  not  of  the  cii'cumcision  only,  but  who 
also  walk  in  the  steps  of  that  faith  of  our  father  Abraham,  which  he  had  being 
yet  uncircumcised  [which  he  had  while  in  uncircumcision].* 

13  For  the  promise,  that  he  should  be  the  heii-  of  the  world,  was  not  to  Abra- 
ham, or  to  his  seed,  through  the  law  [For  not  through  (the)  law  is  the  promise 
to  Abraham,  or  to  his  seed,  that  he  should  be  heir  of  the  world],  but  through 

14  the  righteousness  of  faith.  For  if  they  which  [who]  are  of  the  law  [«/  r/.  roiiov] 
be  heii's,  faith  is  made  void,  and  the  promise  made  of  none  [no]  eifect  [ren- 

15  dered  pow^erless]  :  Because  the  law  worketh  wrath  :  for  whei-e  "  no  law  is,  there 

16  is  no  transgression  [but  where  there  is  no  law,  neither  is  there  transgression 
of  the  hiw].  Therefore  it  is  of  faith,  that  it  might  be  by  grace  ;  to  the  end  [in 
order  that]  the  promise  might  be  sure  to  all  the  seed  ;  not  to  that  only  which 
is  of  the  law,  but  to  that  also  which  is  of  the  faith  of  Abraham  ;  who  is  the 

17  father  of  us  all,  (As  it  is  written,  I  have  made  thee  a  father  of  many  nations 
[A  father  of  many  nations  have  I  set  thee  ;  Ocn.  xvii  5],)  before  him  Avhom  he 
believed,"  even  God,  who  quickeneth  the  dead,  and  calleth  those  tldngs  which  be 
[are]  not  as  though  they  were  : 

18  Who  against  hope  "believed  in  hope,  that  he  might  become  the  [mnit  the] 
father  of  many  nations,  according  to  that  which  was  spoken,  So  shall  thy  seed  be 

19  [Gen.  XV.  s].  And  being  not  weak  in  faith,  he  considered  not ''  his  own  body 
now  [already]  ''  dead,  when  he  was  [being]  about  a  hundred  years  old,  neither 

20  yet  the  deadness  of  Sarah's  womb :  He  staggered  not  at  the  promise  of  God 
through  unbelief  [But  with  regard  to  the  promise  of  God  he  wavered,  or 
doubted  not  ia  unbelief]  ;  but  was  [made]  strong  in  faith,  giving  glory  to  God 


144  THE   EPISTLE    OF   PAUL   TO   THE    ROMANS. 

?1  And  '*  being  fully  persuaded,  that  what  he  had  [hath]  promised,  he  was  [is] 
S.2  able  also  to  perform.  And  therefore  [Wherefore  also]  "  it  was  imputed  [reck- 
oned] to  him  for  righteousness. 
2?  Now  it  was  not  written  for  his  sake  alone,  that  it  was  imputed  [reckoned] 
24-  to  him  ;  But  for  us  also,  to  whom  it  shall  be  imj)Uted  [reckoned],  if  Ave  believe 
25  on  him  that  [who]  raised  up  Jesus  our  Lord  from  the  dead;  Who  was  delivered 
[up]  for  our  offences,  and  was  raised  again  [omit  again]  for  our  justitication.'* 


»  Ver.  1. — Tlie  readinc  in  Lachmiinn,  tiprfKivai  'APp.  rhv  ir  poiraropa  finCtv,  is  not  only  mostly  authenti- 
cated (A.  B.  C,  &c.)i  but,  ii  well  understood,  it  also  (rives  the  best  Ktnse  ;  and  we  ie;rard  the  opposite  readins,  which  is  now 
(enerally  favored,  as  an  cxplanitoiy  tr:in>;piisiti.)n.  See  the  Exir/.  SVn'rs.  [The  lex',  nc.  puts  *A^paa/i  t'ov  irarepa  (not 
»po7raTopa)  rifxCtv  bi-fori:  eiipijxeVai.  Cod.  Sin.  nuolains  the  readi  g  of  Lachinann,  which  in  also  aduplc'i  liy  Alfo!-.!,  who, 
however,  liracUets  ei>p^K«Vai  as  being  of  doubtful  authority,  since  it  i.s  omitted  l.y  the  Vatican  Cod.  (sre  TLselu-ndorf  s  edi- 
tion, p.  H48).  Hut  It  is  indii-pensable,  and  aliundantly  sustained  by  the  other  uncial  MSS.  Meyer  admits  the  weij^hl  of 
exienial  authority  in  favor  of  Lachmann's  reading,  but  is  dispose<l,  ueveitheless,  to  regard  it  as  a  later  transposiiion  to 
Buit  the  connection  of  Kaja.  aapxa.  with  t6>'  itarepa  ij/nttii-.  The  E.  V.,  following  the  lixl.  nc,  adopts  this  cnnnection, 
and  Dr.  Lange  defends  it  in  the  JCxeg.  Aolis.  Jlut  with  the  majoritj'  of  modciTi  commentators,  including  Meyer,  AUbrd, 
Hodge,  I  piefer  to  join  Kara  aapxa  with  eiipijicei'at.  This  is  indeed  necessary,  if  we  follow  the  lrc:io  ruipUt,  and  it  is 
perfectly  allowable,  thougli  not  so  natural,  if  we  adopt  the  reailiiig  of  Lachmann.  In  this  ease  we  must  translate: 
W7iii/,  till  II,  shall  wi'  .vay  that  Ahroham  inir  fa'lur  {/onftil/n  r)  finind  (or,  ynhvd,  aUainrd)  accarding  to  (i/ii)  fl'sh  lor,  m 
the  wny  of  the  jUxh) — I.  f .,  through  his  own  natural  etibrts  as  distinct  from  the  gT:ico  of  God.  Grotius  :  prop'riis  vnbus  ; 
De  Wette,  and  others  :  iiach  nin  mtnschliclnr  Wiisr.  Meyer  takes  cap^  here  as  the  weak,  unspiritual,  finfiil  himian 
nature.  Abraham  did  indeed  attain  righteousness,  but  by  faith,  not  by  works.  Ccdd.  SC.  A.  B.  C*.  sustain  -irpo-naTopa 
/or  the  iraTtpa  of  the  Ji'C.—l'.  S.] 

'  Ver.  :'.— [Lange  translates  :  er  hat  Euhm,  glonj.  Ka.vxy)t>-o.  (as  also  »caux>)<ri!)  in  the  N.  T.,  and  in  the  LXX., 
me.ans  generally  (not  tilwmjs,  as  Meyer  says,  p.  160) "the  object  or  giimud  of  boasting,  matrria  glnrhmdi ;  Horn.  iv.  2  ;  1 
Cor.  ix.  15,  16  ;  2  Cor.  i.  14 ;  Gal.  vi.  4  ;  Phil.  i.  26  ;  ii.  10  ;  and  sometimes,  as  in  the  classics,  the  act  of  boaitiug  or 
exulting,  glorialin  ;  I  Cor.  v.  6  ;  2  Cor.  v.  12  ;  Ix.  3.-1'.  S.] 

'  Ver.  1. — [T<u  ipya^oixevw  is  well  rendered  by  Luther  :  dem  der  mil  Wtrkfii  umgiht.  Lange:  dcm  wflcher  den 
Werhdienst  treibl.  Meyer  :  deiii  yVirkthiiligin.  The  word  is  frequent,  and  signifies  a  workman  who  works  for  pay. 
Conybeare  and  Howson,  too  freely  :   i/  a  man  earns  his  pay  by  his  work.    Young  :  too  litertdly  :  to  him  who  is  working, 

•  Ver.  5.— [tw  (htj  ipya^onivta,  to  him  who  wnrkelh  not  for  hire — d'T  nicht  Werhdienst  Ireibt. — P.  S.] 

•  Ver.  6. — [fiaxapiafidi/,  in  allusion  to  the  Hebrew  form  """I'i'X  ,  Oh,  the  blessedness,  or,  happiness  of.  The  N.  T. 
of  the  Amer.  Bible  Union,  and  Robert  Young,  render  /u.axapio$,  here  and  elsewhere,  even  in  the  Sermon  on  the  Mount, 
tiy  happy,  instead  of  blessed,  which  properly  corresponds  to  ciAoyYjTos.  There  is  the  same  ditference  between  the  Ger- 
man giirklich  and  S'llg.  In  a  popular  English  liible.  I  would  retain  blessed  and  fc/cssi  rfmss  where  religious  or  iternal 
happiness  is  spoken  of.  The  E.  V.  is  inconsistent,  and,  without  a  fixed  rule,  alternates  between  hapitu  and  blessed.— 
P.  S.] 

•  Vers.  7,  8.— [From  Ps.  xxxii.,  which  describes  the  happiness  and  the  conditioiTof  the  forgiveness  of  sins. .  Tin 
(allowing  is  a  literal  version  of  vers.  1  and  2  : 

Blessfd  {Havpy)  is  he  whose  Iransgressio/i  is  forgiven. 
Whose  sin  is  covered. 
BIcss'd  (Il'ippy)  is  the  man 
To  whom  Jehiicak  impulclh  not  iniquity, 
And  in  whose  spirit  ihcre  is  no  guile. 


And  ui  whose  spirit  Ihcre  is  7io  guile. 
Ewald  (Die  Psalmen,  3d  ed.,  1866,  p.  65)  renders  the  passage  thus : 

Srii/f  flfSRrn   Minsrlhnt  i^prnpttpn 


S'lig  dctsen  Misscthat  vergeben, 

Di'ssen  Sfcnde  ist  vcrziehii  I 

Si-liger  Mcnsch  dent  Jahre  nicht  anrechnet  Schuld, 

Und  in  detsen  Geiste  keirw  Tduschung  ! — P.  S.] 

T  Ver.  11.— The  accusative  irepiroft^i'  [A.  C*.  Syr.]  does  not  really  change  the  thought,  but  rather  strengthen. 
It.  It  Is  probablv  an  alteration  or  oversight  [caused  by  the  surrounding  accusatives.  The  genitive  irepirouiif  it 
BttcHted  by  N.  B.  CK  D.  F.  K.  L.,  .ke.-P.  S.l 

•  Ver.  12. —  Koi  auToit  must  bo  retained,  contra rj*  to  Lachmann.  [koi  is  wanting  in  N-  B.  Meyer  defends  it. 
—P.  S.l 

•  Ver.  13.— Tjjv  iv  (rrj)  aK pofivaria  niiTTeuii  [N.  A.  R.  C.  D'.,  &c.,  Lachmann,  Teschendorf,  Meyer,  Alford]. 
The  opp.isitc  reading  is  t^?  itiVt.  t^«  iv  tjj  aKpo/3.  [Uecommended  by  Oriesbach,  adopted  by  Scholz — contrary  to  the 
roajonty  of  the  uncial  MSS.     It  looks  lilie  a  mechanical  adjustment  to  ver.  11.    Tjj  is  also  to  be  omitted.— I'.  S.) 

">  Ver.  l.").  — o5  ii  is  probably  a;i  oxeg(;tieal  rorrection  ;  though  strongly  attested  by  A.  IJ.  C,  Oriesbach,  Lach- 
mann. [The  text.  rcc.  reads  oC  yap,  roa  where,  which  i*  supported  by  N*.  I).  F.  K.  L.,  while  SC'.  favors  o5  &i,  but 
vherc.-V.  S.] 

"  Ver.  17.  — « Trio- T<u (rat,  Codd.  F.  O.,  Luther  [crrdidlsti,  dem  dngrglaubt  hnsi,  as  if  it  was  part  of  the  Scriptora 
quotation,  instirad  of  ini<rTt  virtv,  creilidit,  which  is  sustained  by  Cod.  Sin. — P.  S.) 

"  Ver.  lit.— Tlio  ou  is  wanting  in  the  oelcbrated  Codd.  A.  B.C.  [and  Sin.].  Also  in  Lachmann.  According  to 
Meyer,  this  omission  arose  from  regard  to  Ocn.  xvii.  17.  It  could  also  have  lieen  occasioned  by  the  antithesis  in  ver.  20. 
[The  oil  is  insettid  in  IJ.  F.  K.  L.,  Lat.,  Syr.,  &c.     Alford  brackets  it.     See  Ercg.  \„lcs.~l'.  S  ] 

"  Vr-r.  1!).— Th«-  ij  4  7)  is  wanting  in  B.  F.  (>.,  &c.  [and  thrown  out  by  Fritzsohc  and  Tischendorfl  but  sustained  by 
^•.  A.  C.  I).  K.  L.    Lachmann  and  Alford  bracket  it.— P.  S.] 

'•  Ver.  21.— The  k  a  i  is  suslaiued  by  A.  B.  C,  Sec,  Lachmann.  [Cod.  Sin.  likewise  favors  kiu,  and  Alford  retains 
it.— P.  S.l 

'»  Ver.  22.— [The  Kal  after  6i6  ie  omitted  by  B.  D>.  F.,  but  inserted  by  JC.  A  0.  D».  K.  L..  Lachmann  and 
Alford  br-icket  it.— P.  S.] 

'•  Ver.  2.5. — [Luther,  to  whom  above  all  others  the  Christian  world  is  indebted  for  a  lucid  and  forcible  exposition  c/ 
Paul's  doctrine  of  iustification  by  faith,  has  miule  a  strange  mistake  hero  by  translating  SiKatoKriv:  Qrrethti'jkeit 
(righteousue.>«<),  instead  of:  Ji'ch^firl'gnnfj  (ju.stiflcation).  Ai<atWi(  Is  the  diviuo  act  oif  setting  u  man  right,  or  putting 
Dim  into  the  state  und  possession  of  Sucaxoavi^.  —P.  S.) 


CHAPTER  IV.   1-25. 


145 


EXEGETICAL  AND  CEITICAL. 

General  Remarks. — The  theocratical  Scripture 
proof  for  the  righteousness  of  faith  promised  to  the 
Gentiles  as  well  as  the  Jews.  Enlargement  of  the 
Mosaic  economy  of  particularism  by  the  develop- 
ment of  the  germ-like  universality  of  the  Abrahamic 
religion.  Survey:  1.  Abraham's  justification  was 
a  justification  by  fait} ,  and  excluded  justification  by 
works.  It  was  therefore  only  a  justification  of  the 
sinner,  as  is  shown  by  the  beatitude  prononuced  by 
David  (vers.  1-8).  The  opposite  is  the  Jewish  right- 
eousness of  works.  2.  It  was  independent  of  cir- 
cumcision and  the  law.  Abraham  did  not  obtain  the 
blessedness  of  justifying  faith  in  circumcision,  but  in 
uncircumcision  ;  circumcision  was  then  added  to  it 
as  a  seal  of  justification.  Abraham  was  thereby  set 
forth  to  be  the  father  of  the  faithful,  as  well  of  the 
uncircumcised  as  of  the  circumcised  (vers.  9-12). 
The  opposite  is  Jewish  particularism.  3.  Justifica- 
tion is  as  universal  as  the  promise,  which  constitutes 
even  an  antithesis  to  the  law.  Abraham's  justifica- 
tion is  to  him  and  to  his  seed  a  promise  of  the  in- 
heritance of  the  world.  This  promise  is  not  limited 
by  the  law.  Such  a  limitation  would  make  the 
promise  void  ;  for  the  law  produces  that  wrath 
\o(iyij\  which  looks  rather  to  the  destruction  than 
the  inheritance  of  the  world.  The  promise  is  both 
conditioned  and  established  by  fiiith  and  grace  (vers. 
13-1'7).  The  opposite  is  Jewish  legalism.  4.  Abra- 
ham and  Chris  ians  have  in  realiti/  the  same  right- 
eousness of  faith.  The  analogy  between  Abraham's 
faith  and  that  of  his  believing  children, — Christians : 
a.  In  relation  to  the  same  wonder-working  God  (ver. 
IT),  b.  In  relation  to  the  same  conduct  of  faith  : 
looking  away  from  the  contradiction  of  the  natural 
life  ;  strong  confidence  in  the  Divine  word  of  reve- 
lation and  promise  (vers.  18-21).  c.  In  reference  to 
the  same  operation  (vers.  22-25).  The  opposite  is 
the  external  and  superficial  contemplation  of  the 
worldly  sense. — Or  also :  a.  The  faith  of  Abraham 
(vers.  17-22) ;  b.  Application  to  the  faith  of  Chris- 
tians (vers.  23-25).  The  opposite,  in  general,  is  the 
hierarchical  formalism  and  ceremonialism. 


First  Paragraph,  vers.  1-8. 

[Paul  exhibits  Abraham  as  a  truly  evangelical 
character,  as  a  man  of  faith,  in  order  to  confirm  the 
doctrine  that  the  ground  of  our  salvation  lies  not  in 
us,  but  outside  of  us  in  the  free  grace  of  God,  and 
that  this  must  be  apprehended  first  by  faith,  before 
we  can  do  any  good  works.  James,  on  the  other 
hand  (ii.  21  ft'.),  in  opposition  to  a  barren  orthodoxy 
and  mere  notional  belief,  represents  Abraham  as  a 
man  of  holy  obedience,  who  proved  his  faith  by 
works.  In  the  one  case  he  appears  as  the  champion 
of  the  righteousness  of  faith,  in  the  other  as  the 
champion  of  the  righteousness  of  life.  Both  views 
are  right.  Paul  goes  to  the  root  of  the  matter,  the 
vital  principle,  which  animated  Abraham ;  James 
looks  at  the  fruit  produced  thereby.  Faith  and 
works,  righteousness  and  holiness,  are  as  inseperable 
as  light  and  heat,  as  the  tree  and  the  fruit,  as  cause 
and  effect.  Paul  himself,  after  laying  the  only  true 
foundation,  as  strongly  insists  upon  a  holy  life  as 
James.  There  is,  in  the  Old  Testament,  an  evan- 
gelical as  well  as  a  legal  element;  and  the  go-pel,  or 
promise,  precedes  the  law  which  came  in  between 
10 


the  promise  and  the  fulfilment  (ver.  20).  Abrahan 
represents  the  evangelical  element,  as  Moses  does 
the  legal.  Abraham's  faith  differs  from  the  Chris- 
tian faith,  as  the  promise  differs  from  the  fulfilment 
of  the  gospel  salvation,  and  as  hope  differs  from 
fruition  ;  but  the  essential  element,  the  ethical  key- 
note, in  both  is  unconditional  confidence  and  trust 
in  God's  truth  and  God's  mercy. — P.  S.] 

Ver.  1.  What,  then,  shall  we  say.  The 
ovv  announces  an  inference  from  the  previous  state- 
ment (iii.  29),  that  God  is  the  God  of  the  Jews  as 
well  as  of  the  Gentiles,  considered  in  relation  to 
Abraham's  history  and  its  significance.  But  our  in- 
ference is  not  a  corroboration  (Meyer),  or  confirma- 
tio  ab  exemplo  (Calvin).  We  have  liere  rather  a 
new  proof,  as  deduced  from  the  foregoing,  namely, 
the  explanation  of  Abraham's  history  and  of  David's 
words  of  faith.  Likewise  Tholuck  observes,  tho 
ovv  cannot  be  explained  if,  in  accordance  with  the 
view  of  recent  expositors,  this  verse  be  connected 
immediately  with  ver.  31  of  the  previous  chapter. — 
2'he  co>istructio7i, :  It  may  be  asked,  first,  whether 
the  question  should  be  read  as  one  question,  or  two? 
Grotius  and  others  have  placed  an  interrogation  mark 
after  E^>o'i/(fv,  and  thus  made  two  questions  out 
of  the  sentence.  Then  (hy.aioavvtjv  is  supplied  to 
f  ('(jtjxivat,. — If  the  e  vjjtj/.ivai,  be  taken  abso- 
lutely in  the  sense  of  the  Grecian  philosophy,  this 
division  could  be  made  more  easily.  Yet  the  chief 
question  here  is  not,  what  should  be  said,  but  what 
is  Abraham's  advantage? — It  may  further  be  asked, 
whether  xarci  ad^/.a  relates  to  tz q ondroiia 
{nar i^a)  or  to  fiqrjy.ivai,.  Lachmann's  read- 
ing :  Ti  oin'  t!J0Vfi(v  tvi)tjy.ivai,  '^^fjQ,  &c.,  [see 
Textual  Note  '],  is  the  one  most  favored  by  the 
Codd.  (A.  C.  D.,  &c.,  and  also  the  Sin.).  "  The  sus- 
picion  that  the  transposition  of  the  y.ara  adf^y.a  [of 
fvfjrjy.ivai,  rather. — P.  S.]  is  to  be  laid  to  the  charge 
of  the  copyist,  is  strengthened  when  we  see  that 
such  expositors  as  Chrysostom,  Theophylact,  Gen- 
nadius  in  Qilcumenius,  who  read  fi''(>>/ztr«t  y.ura, 
ad(j/.a,  nevertheless  connect  the  latter  with  nartjQ 
!if(,7iv"  (Tholuck,  p.  167).  De  Wette,  Meyer  [Tho- 
luck, Alfbrd,  Wordsworth,  Hodge],  and  most  com- 
mentators, with  the  Peshito,  connect  xarri  (rd^y.a, 
with  fVQfjy.tvao,  and  not  (according  to  Origen, 
Ambrose,  Calvin,*  &c.)  with  nariQa  rjuwv.  But 
in  ver.  9  ff.,  the  subject  is  circumcision  ;  while  in 
vers.  1-8,  it  is  only  the  contrast  between  righteous- 
ness  by  works  and  righteousness  by  faith.  There- 
fore, according  to  Meyer's  construction,  y.ar  a, 
adgxa  should  correspond  to  the  el  e^yfov,  yet 
not  so  that  the  two  ideas  should  be  identical,  but 
that  works  should  be  embraced  in  the  more  general 
idea  of  y.aTcc.  ads)y.a.  The  o-a^J,  in  antithesis  to 
the  divine  nvfr/ia,  should  then  denote  huma;iity 
given  up  to  itself.  Pelagius,  Ambrose,  and  othtvs, 
refer  y.axd  ad^/.a  to  circumcision.  Riickert  un- 
derstands the  word  as  embracing  both  circumcisioa 
and  t(iya.  While  Tholuck  consents  to  the  now  cus- 
tomary connection  of  the  /.ard  adi)/.a  with  iVQij- 
y.ivai,,  he  does  not  grant  that  the  works  of  faithful 
Abraham  were  'ifiya  y.md  adq/.a  ;  although  Flacius 
would  include  likewise  the  opera  renati,  as  performed 
by  men  and  not  imputed  by  God,  in  the  opera  carnis  ; 
and  Bullinger  and  others  would  make  rra^jj  equal  te 

*  [Hodge  quotes  Calvin  for  the  opposite  view,  explain- 
ing Kara  aapKa  in  tlie  sense  vnturoJiltr,  ex  scipso.  But 
Calvin  goen  on  to  say  :  "  frnbabile  lama)  rsl  rpUhrti  loci 
Patri  cotijungi,"  and  gives  the  preference  to  the  construo 
tion  with  narepa. — P.  S.] 


146 


THE   EPISTLE    OF   PAUL    TO    THE   ROMANS. 


Jigya.  Tholuck  therefore  arrives  at  the  conclusion, 
that  Paul  (lid  not  clesig;n  to  apply  Chri^^tian  justifica- 
tion in  all  its  conseciuunccs  to  the  patriarch.  But 
bow  couUl  lie  re[)resent  him  here  as  tiie  father  of 
the  faithful,  if  he  would  belittle  or  limit  liis  justi- 
fication ?  We  go  ujjon  the  supposition  that,  in  ac- 
cordance witli  the  best  Codd.,  "J-/,-;^«/(  6  TTfiondrutq 
fjiiiov  y.uTu  (Tciiixa  (ver.  1)  is  an  antithesis  to  arroi; 
nari,p  TtdvTinv  ri'iv  TTi^fTTft'ovTuiv,  &c.  (ver.  11),  and 
to  bs'  iarw  nar'r^(>  ndvToiv  tjinTii'  (ver.  16).  The 
principal  subject  is,  tliercfore,  Abraham,  tlie  natural 
ancestor  of  the  Jews;  and  if  it  be  itsked,  What  hath 
he  found?  tlie  cmpliasis  rests  on  ri,  and  this  refers  to 
the  i)t/.a.i.oriT{yai,  tt'ktth.  ytitijii;  sijyiov  vofiov  (chap, 
iii.  28),  and  especially  to  ver.  29  also.  As  God  is  a 
God  of  the  Jews  and  Gentiles,  Abraham,  the  n^w- 
ndri»()  of  the  Jews,  has  become  a  narrm  of  Jews 
and  (ientiles. 

Ver.  2.  For  if  Abraham  was  justified  [f'()t- 
TtaKoO-tj^  by  works  [in  the  opinion  of  tlie  Jews]. 
The  answer  assimies  that  the  view  that  Abraham 
was  justified  by  the  works  of  the  law,  was  already 
denied  in  the  ((uestion.  Yet  this  very  thing  was  be- 
lieved by  the  legalistic  Jew.  "  In  the  Talmud  it  was 
even  deduced  from  Gen.  xxvi.  5,  that  Abraham  ob- 
served the  whole  Mosaic  law"  (Meyer).*  The  an- 
swer does  not  therefore  assume  an  oidiv  [omitted 
before  tl  y«(>]  or  an  oi'()otio7'V  (Tholuck),  because 
xard  rrdfixa  [ver.  1]  does  not  stand  in  connection 
with  (t'(jtj/.irni.,  [?  comp.  Trxtual  Note  '. — P.  S.] 
To  the  question.  Which  of  the  two  kinds  of  right- 
eousness ?  it  assumes  the  conclusion,  that  it  was 
not  the  imaginary  righteousness  of  woiks,  but  the 
true  righteousness  of  faith.  The  supposition  is  so 
plain,  that  the  Apostle  proceeds  at  once  lo  the 
proof — Was  Justified  by  works.  The  sense  can 
be  :  if  he  sfiould  be  so  justified,  it  could  only  be  at 
a  human  tribunal,  and  not  at  the  tribunal  of  (iod — 
as  ha.s  been  already  described.  But  it  can  also  be 
understood  thus :  if  Abraham,  according  to  the 
national  prejudice  of  tlie  Jews,  has  been  really  jus- 
tified /)//  iror/iS.  This  is  the  more  ol)vious  view. 
■Conceding  this  kind  of  justification,  Al)raliam  has  a 
.xai'/ri/ict  {malcnam  r/'oruiidi),  but  not  before  (iod. 
■Not  before  God,  first,  because  no  flesh  is  justified  by 
works  in  His  sight  (chap.  iii.  2(»);  second,  because 
we  know  definitely  from  the  Scriptures  that  Abra- 
ham was  justified  in  God's  sight,  or  at  His  trit)unal, 
by  faith.  The  t():.xca<iiO  tj  is  made  by  Beza,  Grotius, 
and  others,  to  refer  to  a  (inural  opinion  pronounced 
on  Abraham  ;  but  by  Calvin,  Calov.,  and  others,  to 
an  iiniirfinari/  opinion,  under  the  sup|)osition  of  an 
incomplete  conclusion  (the  mnjor :  he  who  is  jus- 
tified by  works  hath  wiiereof  to  glory.  The  minor  : 
but  not  before  God.  The  necessary  concluding  state- 
ment: therefore  Abraham  is  not  justified  by  works).f 


♦  [Meyer  quotoa  Kid<lu»h,  t.  82, 1  ;  TomT,  t.  28, 2 ;  lifrefh. 
rabh'i,  t.  i7,  4.  Tholuck  says  :  "  The  justification  of  \brn- 
hnni  b'  fore  Ond  was  a  hiciis  cummuuit  of  Jcwixh  theology." 
P.  K]  ■ 

t  [Calvin's  intorprct'ition  is  ffivcn  hy  him  {nd  Rom.  iv. 
2)  in  these  words  :  "  Epicherrmn  \iiti.\tipr\ti.a,  nn  iittim)>tf<i 
proof,  :in  inoimidctc  syllotfiKm)  <x',  i.  c,  nnprr/'C''!  ralin- 
tiiinlio,  qua-  in  lunic  /■oiiiiim  cu'lifji  ihbet:  Si  Abrahum 
op'-ribuf  jnalific'ilu.i  enl,  potisl  run  rn'ritn  glurinri  ;  fil  nnn 
iahf.1  uiid'-  gloiielur  utmd  Peum  ;  fn/n  imii  ex  i>p>rihit8  jiit- 
lijlcnliu  eti.  la  mrmhinm  illud,  '  Sd  nun  <ipud  D  urn,'  iH 
minor  pr'ipnailin  siiltngifmi.  tinic  iitl'Zi  drbil  rnnrlusio 
nuim  ptisui,  tamrlsi  n  Paiiln  turn  iTprimilur."  Similiirly 
Fritzsche  :  "Si  fnix  b'-nr.  /ncns  D' i  /nrnrrm  nncliu  isl, 
h'lhff,  qunil  npinl  Pmm  {/hiriflnr  .  .  .  ;  unl  no.«i  hnbil,  qii'ul 
(ipnd  Drum  ijluiirtin;  qnum  hbri  «.  prnplfr  PIDRH,  nun  pinp- 
ter  pul  bn-  /ficti  mm  D^a  proliotiim  rtsr  docmit  .  .  .  ;  n<'n 
nt  igiiw  Abr.  nl  bnit  /aeUi  Vfo probnlut."    8o  al«o  Kra«u- 


Tholuck  thinks,  with  Meyer,  that  reference  to  God 
cannot  disappear  from  iiUxa^o'iO^ >i ,  and  lie  follows 
him,  with  Theudoret,  in  explaining  thus  :  "  For  if 
Abraham  has  been  justified  by  God  through  wiuks, 
he  has  certainly  received — the  perfect  fulfilment  of 
the  law  being  granted, — glory,  but  not  a  divine 
glory,  so  far  as  such  glory  could  not  be  traced  back 
to  God's  grace."  This  explanation  contradicts  the 
previous  sujipositions :  1.  Tliat  no  fiesh  can  b* 
justified  by  the  deeds  of  the  law  (chaj).  iii.  20) ; 
2.  Tliat  no  extenial  fulfilment  of  the  law  in  the 
sense  of  I'o/ioi,"  i'(>yi<iy  is  conceivable,  but  only  in  the 
sense  of  ro/ioc  niarnoi;.  A  plain  remark  nuiy  aid  in 
the  understanding  of  this  difficult  jjassage :  that 
dixai-oTnOat,  always  refers  to  a  definite  tribunal,  but 
that  this  tribunal  may  be  very  ditfercnt  according  to 
the  diRerent  relations  of  i)i,xato7fTi9ai.  Thus  the 
tribunal  of  Jewisli  national  prejudice  already  men- 
tioned was  very  ditfercnt  from  that  of  the  theocrati- 
cal  conimunion  of  faith  itself,  which  the  passage  in 
James  ii.  23  lias  in  view  (see  the  Commentari/  on 
James,  chap.  ii.  Also,  Ps.  cvi.  31,  on  the  justifica- 
tion of  Phineha.s).  It  has  been  counted  to  him  for 
righteousness — -from  generation  to  f/eneratioti^  see 
Tlioluck,  p.  172,  thereon.  What  Theodoret  says  is 
certainly  true  :  that  true  justification  before  God 
must  glorify  the  love  of  God  ;  but  for  this  very 
reason  no  other  mode  of  justification  before  God  ia 
conceivable.  (Singular  explanation  of  Semler  and 
others  :  Has  he  glory  ?  No ;  before  God,  not !  Prot- 
estation.) 

Ver.  3.  For  what  saith  the  Scripture  ? 
Paul  makes  a  true  representation  of  Atiraliam  in 
accordance  with  the  Scri[)tures,  in  opposition  to  the 
false  representation  of  the  Jews.* — [But  Abraham 
believed  God,  and  it  (viz.,  t/ie  b  /ii'vi,iff,  to  /riff- 
Tfrffftt,  which  must  hi' supjilied  from  i  n  i  (T  t  f  ra  fv) 
■was  reckoned  to  him  for  righteousness,  ^  EnltT' 
rn'crfv  ()e' ^-ffiijaci/i.  tiZ  (^nji,  xcii  ti.ayiaDii  airio  ti(; 
dixctiOfTi'vtjv.  Gen.  xv.  6,  Sept.  The  emphasis  lies 
on  t  TtldTf  i'(rn' ,  placed  first,  or  the  faith  of  Abra- 
ham as  distinet  from  works  and  as  excluding  merit 
on  the  i^art  of  man.  yioyi^KTf)ai  ji'i,-  jkz«io<Ti'rj;v, 
to  reckon,  or  count,  or  impute  to  any  one  an  rir/fite- 
OK^ncss,  and  consequently  to  treat  him  as  righteous, 
is  identical  with  dixaium  (sec  p.  130).     On  the  con- 


sold,  Baur,  Kostlin,  Hodge.  This  interpretation,  would 
hnve  liccu  more  clearly  expressed  thus  :  txei  xavxriua  (rrpov 
Tov  OtbvY  oAA"  oi>K  (x"  «<"'X')'"'  "P^*  ^'"'  Seo>'-  I'ilt  it 
certiiinly  u'ivec  pnod  sense  and  f.alls  in  host  with  the  yap  in 
ver.  3.  "We  (•x|>laiii  thns:  It'  Aluaham,  as  the  Jews  sup- 
pose, was  juslifieil  hy  works,  ho  has  reason  to  (ilory  liefore 
Ood  (for  then  he  can  claim  juslificjition  as  a  just  reward  for 
his  merits,  leaviui;  nn  room  forthe  display  cf  tioil's  men'v)  ; 
but,  acroidilic  to  the  Scripture,  he  has  no  pround  to  irloi-y 
before  (iod,  ./'or  (ver.  3)  the  Scripture  derives  his  justifica- 
tion from  faith  in  God  or  ft-om  somethin);  outside  of  him, 
and  not  from  works  of  his  own.  Meyer,  in  his  former  edi- 
tions, defended  the  untenable  view  that  ei  .  .  .  iSiKaiui9rf 
was  a  question,  and  f^"  •  •  •  ^"^''  *''C  newitive  an'^wer  ; 
but,  in  his  last  eilitiniis,  he  returns,  with  Tholuck  and 
Wordsworth,  to  the  Inteqiretation  of  the  Greek  f.ithcrs 
(Theorioret,  Chryso»tom,  Theopbvlact),  which  would  re- 
quire in  ver.  3,  aAAa,  Instead  of  yap. — 1'.  S.] 

•  [If  ver.  3  oonlaiiied  the  refutat'on  of  the  inference, 
ver.  2,  we  wotdd  i-ntherexpect  aAAa  ti,  instead  of  ti  yap. 
Hut  If  the  refutation  is  contained  in  aAA'  ov  npix;  Odn'  («vft 
Kau;(T)/[ia),  the  yap  is  in  its  jilace  and  (jives  the  proof  for  llio 
answer  from  (ten.  xv.  (i,  showing:  that  justini-ation  pro- 
eeeiled  not  from  any  worlt  which  Ahrahnin  performed,  but 
from  God  In  whom  he  nnt  his  trust.  See  note  nn  p. 
Meyer,  holding;  the  old  Greek  inter]'retation  of  ver._2,  thm 
tries  to  explain  the  yap:  ".Mil  Unht  soi/e  ich  :  ou  7rp6| 
Tbr  SkSc,  d-iin  r./m  Gi.AfUK^,  nirbl  von  d'H  Wkrkicm 
Ahmhim'tlrilrtdif  Schii/l  iiUfilrHHIich  srin'-  Ii'Clilfrrti{f 
itnff  h'-r,  nnil  twiir  als  ilwns  durch  ZtTnECHNCNO  Enifffan^ 
enci."—i'.  S.J 


CHAPTER   rV.    1-25. 


147 


n-oversy  whether  Abraham  was  justified  per  fidem 
(through  the  instrumentality  of  faith),  as  the  Protes- 
tants rightly  teach,  or  propter  j^(/e//(  (on  account  of 
tlie  merit  of  his  faith),  as  tlie  Romanists  assert ; 
compare  the  remariis  of  Tholuck,  p.  173  ^'.  ;  also 
the  note  of  Alford  in  he.  Hodge  enters  here  into 
a  lengtin'  discussion  of  tlie  doctrine  of  imputation, 
pp.  164-175,  partly  polemical  against  Olshausen. — 
P.  S.]  The  quotation  of  Gen.  xv.  6,  is  from  the 
Seputagint  wliich  has  changed  the  active  verb 
nniZ-'n^"  into  the  passive  iloyiafyri.  Paul  uses 
the  more  prominent  expression  ()&  instead  of  the 
xal  of  tlie  Septuagint.  DiH'ereiit  explanations:  1. 
Riickert :  Paul  incorrectly  used  the  passage  for  his 
purpose.  2.  Roman  Catholic  expositors  (and  Bucer): 
Abraham  submitted  to  the  authority  of  God's  word, 
and  that  gave  value  to  his  faith.  3.  Faith  in  the 
promise  of  a  large  posterity  was,  in  view  of  its 
object,  fiiith  in  the  promise  of  the  Messiah  who  was 
to  come  Ibrth  from  his  posterity  (A  Lapide,  Calvin, 
Gerhard,  Calov.,  and  others).  4.  Implicit  faith  in 
tlie  Divine  promise  (Bullinger,  and  others).  Tho- 
luck adopts  this  view,  though  with  hesitation.  "  De- 
litzsch,  on  Gen.  xv.  5,  having  more  regard  for  the 
historical  interpretation,  says :  '  Every  thing  was 
contained  in  the  person  of  Jehovah  and  in  the  prom- 
ise of  a  numerous  posterity  to  Abraham,  which  was 
separately  disclosed  and  fulfilled  in  the  New  Testa- 
ment time  of  redemption.'  But  faith  in  a  numer- 
ous  posterity  cannot  effect  the  same  noxa  ohedientia 
as  faith  in  a  Chrhtua  satispatiens  and  satisfaciens 
can  effect."  [Tholuck,  p.  173.]  Further  particulars 
on  the  nova  ohedientia  of  Abraham  may  be  read  in 
Gen.  xxii.  According  to  Tholuck,  we  should  not 
introduce  into  the  faith  of  Abraham  the  faith  in  the 
Messiah.  But  yet  we  must  not  reject  it.  According 
to  the  promise  in  Gen.  xii.  3,  the  question  in  Gen. 
XV.  5 — the  passage  here  in  mind — could  not  be  the 
promise  of  a  merely  natural  posterity.  It  is  cer- 
tainly consistent  with  the  principles  of  historical 
interpretation,  when  we  are  considering  later  decis- 
ions, to  look  back  at  the  earlier  ones  which  lie  at  their 
root.  Meyer  [p.  161]  more  appropriately  remarks  : 
"  In  the  TTifTTfifn'  r('>  Ofo)  on  the  part  of  Abraham, 
Paul  has  perceived  nothing  really  different  from 
Christian  niffTi-q  ;  since  Abraham's  faith  referred  to 
the  Divine  promise,  and  indeed  to  the  promise  which 
he — one  who  was  the  friend  of  God,  and  illuminated 
by  Him — has  perceived  to  be  the  promise  which  em- 
braced the  future  Messiah  (John  viii.  56)." 

Yet,  under  the  supposition  of  the  substantial 
identity  between  the  faith  of  Abraham  and  that  of 
Christians,  we  shall  need  to  lay  stress  on  the  differ- 
ence in  form  :  The  faith  of  Abraham  is  the  essential 
beginning  of  the  specific  fiiith  of  salvation  in  the 
Old  Testament ;  the  faith  of  Paul  and  his  compan- 
ions is  the  completion  of  the  same  in  the  New. 
Faith  in  general,  as  well  as  in  each  of  its  particular 
parts,  undergoes  a  great  metamorphosis  in  its  pas- 
sage from  that  initial  point  to  this  terminal  point. 

But  it  remains  the  same  faith  in  substance.  And 
the  peculiarity  of  this  substance  is,  that  the  Divine 
object,  and  its  human  organic  reception,  constitute 
an  indissoluble  christological  synthesis.  The  objec- 
tive parts  are :  a.  The  personal  God  of  revelation 
in  His  revelation  ;  and  especially  as  the  creative, 
wonder-working  God,  who  can  call  forth  new  salva- 
tion and  life ;  b.  His  word  of  promise ;  c.  The 
import  of  His  word  of  promise — the  future  salvation 
of  the  nations  with  the  seed  of  Abraham.     Corre- 


sponding with  these,  are  the  subjective  parts  :  a.  Th« 
living  knowledge,  perception,  and  reception  of  tht 
revealed  God  ;  b.  Confident  submis.sion  to  the  word? 
of  promise,  against  all  the  contradiction  of  sense 
and  worldly  appearance;  c.  The  ajipropriation  of  th« 
object  of  the  promise  as  the  principle  and  energy  oi 
the  renewed  life. 

The  operations  correspond  to  this  harmony  of 
object  and  subject :  1.  Justification.  Freedom  of 
conscience  before  God,  according  to  the  measure  of 
the  conilemnation  of  con.science.  The  peace  of  God, 
Gen.  XV.  2.  The  sacramental,  symbolical  seal.  Gen. 
xvii.,  see  ver.  11.  3.  Confidence,  and  acquirement 
of  new  life  from  condemnation  to  death,  or  even 
from  death  itself— internal  death. 

All  these  separate  parts  exist  as  germs  in  Abra- 
ham's  faith.  De  Wette,  after  an  ill-founded  remark 
on  the  Apostle's  arbitrary  dialectics  and  scriptural 
application,  admirably  says  :  "  When  the  Apostle  in 
this  way  unites  the  climax  of  religious  development 
with  the  historical  point  of  connection — for  the  de- 
veloping series  commenced  with  Abraham — he  givc-a 
evidence  of  great  historical  penetration."  Comp. 
the  Commentary  on  Genesis,  xv.  1-12. 

Ver.  4.  Now  to  the  workman  [tw  Sk 
EQ  yato  ft  ev  m ,  Lange  :  Detn  ab<r,  loelcher  den 
Werkdienxt  treibf^.  The  statements  of  vers.  6  and 
7  are  two  sentences,  which  establish  the  doctrine  of 
justification  by  faith,  as  well  in  its  divine  as  in  its 
human  character.  The  work  does  not  reach  up  to 
God,  His  grace,  or  His  heaven ;  but  it  belongs  to  the 
sphere  of  gain,  and  makes  the  remunerator  the  debtor 
— which  cannot  be  said  of  God  without  impiety. 
But  as  God's  grace  is  exalted  above  the  claims  of 
merit,  so  is  man's  faith  exalted.  The  believer  does 
not  rely  on  merit,  but  on  the  gracious  strength  of 
Him  who  justifies  the  ungodly,  and  he  receives  the 
righteou.sness  in  proportion  to  his  faith.  The  first 
sentence  establishes  negatively,  that  Abraham,  ae 
cording  to  his  relation  to  God,  could  not  be  justified 
Vjy  works  ;  the  second  sentence  establishes  positive- 
ly, tliat  justification  presupposes  a  relation  of  God's 
grace  to  the  sinner.  It  is  therefore  clearly  intimated 
that  Abraham  was  a  sinner ;  besides,  the  introduc- 
tion of  David  and  his  testimony  proves  conclusively 
that  the  justification  is  that  of  the  sinner.  But  the 
root  of  the  antithesis  is  in  the  ((tyatoftfvoi;  and 
the  ftf)  f.(iytt,i.6nfvo(;;  it  is  the  continuation  of 
the  contrast  in  chap.  ii.  7,  8.  Those  who  strive  un- 
tiringly, seek  God  as  their  only  end  ;  but  partisans 
oppose  God  by  their  claims.  The  iQyatoufvoq 
is  not  "  the  active  man,  whose  characteristic  is 
works "  (Meyer),  but  he  whose  righteousness  con- 
sists  only  of  works,  who  relies  on  the  merit  of  hia 
works,  and  whose  basis  of  confidence  and  pride  are 
works.  Therefore,  his  counterpart  is  not  an  ov% 
i{)yaL.6iitvo'i,  but  a  /(  A  iQy, 

Is  the  rew^ard  (6  fna Q  oc)  not  reckoned 
according  to  (as  a  matter  of)  grace  (zarce 
ya.(ii,v).  That  is,  the  earned  reward,  in  accord- 
ance with  the  law  of  wages  and  labor.  The  loyltta- 
Oav  is  a  very  flexible  idea ;  in  the  case  of  works, 
denoting  a  literal  settling  up,  a  payment,  according 
to  the  external  quantitative  relations ;  and  in  the 
case  of  faith,  a  respectful  valuation  or  reward,  ac- 
cording to  the  internal  qnalitative  relations.  But 
even  in  the  latter  case,  there  is  no  fiction,  no  un- 
truth, but  a  decision  in  strict  conformity  with  the 
actual  condition.  He  who  makes  God  his  debtor  for 
service  rendered,  reverses  the  poles  of  spiritual  life  ; 
he  conceits  that  God  exists  for  his  sake,  and  for  tha 


148 


THE   EPISTLE   OF   PAUL   TO   THE   ROMANS. 


Bake  of  his  external  work.  Therefore,  the  mere 
worker  becomes  a  culpable  debtor  in  the  judgnient 
of  God.  Faitii  is  the  return  to  the  normal  relation 
with  God.  Here  God  is  tlie  absolute  majesty,  the 
justifier,  the  source,  the  giver  of  all  things,  the 
intiuitcly  merciful ;  and  before  Him  the  believer 
Stands  in  the  sense  of  ai)Solute  need,  dependence, 
poverty,  impurity,  and  guilt.  But  when  the  believ- 
fv  commits  himself  to  the  burning  aiid  delivering 
arms  of  God's  love,  his  guilt  vanishes  as  the  cloud 
before  the  sun. — Not  according  to  grace,  but 
according  to  (as  a)  debt.  Tlie  fo;'«^i/'f  roc  really 
declines  grace  ;  he  claims  a  reward  for  liis  merit. 
And  in  the  same  way  will  his  reward  be  reckoned 
according  to  his  dtbt.  '  0(i'f  i).  tj  u  a,  the  ilebitHin, 
according  to  the  relations  of  reward. — It  is  plain 
that  such  a  relation  did  not  apply  to  Abraham,  from 
tlie  fact  tiiat,  according  to  ver.  3,  he  obtained  God's 
grace ;  and  this  in  a  definite  case,  where  the  ques- 
tion could  not  be  one  of  merit  (fien.  xv.). 

Ver.  5.  But  to  liim  that  -worketh  not  (for 
hire),  &c.  Meyer  piopcrly  remarks,  in  opposition  to 
Reiche,  who  refers  the  statement  directly  to  Abra- 
ham,* that  the  sentence  is  a  locus  comnntnu,  and 
that  it  is  left  to  the  reader  whether  he  will  include 
Abraham  in  it  or  not.  But,  according  to  Paul, 
Abraham  has  certainly  included  himself.  Li  the 
same  way,  Meyer  properly  observes  that  a  ff  ?/?»;'?, 
ungodly,  must  not  be  diluted  into  aiVixot;,  unright- 
eous. Faith  perceives  that  the  foundation  of  the 
afVizict  is  the  ai7i{hi,a  (chap.  i.  21),  alienation  from 
God  ;  and,  because  of  its  deeper  knowledge  of  sin, 
applies  to  the  grace  of  God.  The  TnaTtvnr  enl  nva 
cannot  merely  denote  a  faith  in  tlie  direction  toward 
some  one,  but  a  believing  self-surrender  on  the 
ground  of  God's  grace  (Acts  xvi.  31,  kc). 

Ver.  6.  Even  as  David.  The  introduction  of 
David  completely  establishes  the  fact  that  the  justifi- 
cation of  man  is  a  justification  of  the  sinner,  and 
that  the  believer  perceives  his  sins  ;  for,  in  relation 
to  David,  both  his  guilt  and  pardon  were  conceded 
by  the  Jews.  And  now  David  must  also  testify  to 
this  truth.  Uvcn  rtv  {xciOnrrfi))  indicates  that 
David  is  quoted  for  the  elucidation  and  ])roof  of 
what  has  been  said  already  in  vers.  4  and  5.  He  is 
quoted,  not  as  a  universal  example  of  justification  in 
general,  but  in  special  proof  that  it  is  such  a  justifica- 
tion of  the  sinner  as  excludes  the  merit  of  works. 
[Vers.  7  and  8  prove  clearly  that  the  forgiveness 
of  sins  belongs  to  justification  ;  but  this  is  only  the 
negative  part,  with  which  is  inseparal)ly  connected 
the  positive  part,  namely,  the  imputation  and  apjili- 
cation  of  the  righteousness  of  Christ,  and  this  con- 
tains the  germ  and  power  of  sanctification. — P.  S.] 
Tholuck  :  "  By  the  negative  statement,  Calvin  was 
le<i  to  insist  that  the  idea  of  the  justific(xtio  is  cx- 
luiusted  with  the  comlonatio  peccaionim  (fn.sl.  iii. 
11).  The  same  thing  is  done  by  the  Protestant  doc- 
trinal theology  before  the  Formula  Concordke — 
which  first  expressly  added  the  vloOKrirt,  which  is 
really  included  therein."  Compare,  however,  the 
Heidelberg  Catechism,  Question  OO.f     The  beatitude 


•  Awordinff  to  llcicho,  Abraham  id  the  fiij  ipya^ontvot, 
the  afftfirii  ;  im'l  Ihi.t  word  iiUudoH  to  the  oarly  idolatry  of 
Abraham,  whirh  is  drsrnbrd  by  I'liilo,  Joseplius,  and  Mui- 
monidi'8.  OrotiuH,  nnd  othcrn,  have  adopted  the  same 
opinion. 

t  [This  question  of  the  HoidelberR  Catechism,  which  was 
first  published  in  l.'iG:!,  contains  ono  of  tho  best  staloiiicnts 
of  the  cvanRolioiil  doctnne  of  jusHfication,  nnd  clearly 
brinRS  out  the  positive  clement,  which  Tholuck  wronply 
date*  from  the  Fcrm  of  Concord  of  tho  year  1577.    ll  ruadia 


from  Ps.  xxxii.  1  and  2  is  quoted  from  the  Septus, 
gint.  [See  Tixluat  Note  "]  The  choice  of  verbs  in 
ver.  7  corresponds  to  the  substantives.  Tlie  nro^ica 
is  a  debt  doomed  to  prison  ;  it  is  relea.sed,  and  thua 
abolished  ;  the  «/<n((T('(«  is  the  ground  of  it,  and  is 
covei'cd  from  God's  eye  (  "SS.  nos  ) — that  is,  abot 
ished  by  Him. 


Second  Fabaobaph  (vers.  $>-12). 

Justification  applies  also  to  the  Gentiles.  It  is  a 
justification  for  all. 

Ver.  9.  (Is)  this  blessedness  [5  /4axap»<r« 
/loi,',  the  prononnchic)  liippi/^  coi't/rafiilation,  iSelig' 
prei«ung'\,  then,  upon  the  circumcision.  The 
question  now  is,  whether  the  beatitude  described  by 
David  applies  only  to  the  Jews.  The  expositors 
have  supplied  dillcrent  words :  Tholuck  [Stuart, 
Philippi,  Meyer,  ed.  4.],  and  others,  f (tti  ;  Meyer '^ 
[Fritzsche,  De  Wette,  Alford,  Hodge],  /.iytrai  [conip. 
Heb.  vii.  13  ;  Mark  ix.  12],  with  reference  to  ver.  6 
(others,  nin-ni  [Tlieophylact],  ij'/.Otv  [Q-^cumenius], 
'i^/fTcu  [Olshausen],  yiyort).  The  '/.iytrai,  has  less 
foundation  than  iari.  [It  is  always  safer  to  supply 
the  simplest  word. — P.  S.] — Or  also  upon  the  un- 
circumcision  ?  The  also  shows  that  the  previous 
clause  is  to  be  understood  in  the  exclusive  sense : 
upon  the  circumcision  onhi.  [Some  MSS.  add  /lo- 
I'or. — P.  S.] — For  we  say.  The  j'«(<  presup- 
poses  that  the  Apostle  has  already  mentally  expect- 
ed an  affirmative  reply  to  the  question.  Or  upon  the 
uncircumcision  also  ?  [The  form  of  the  question, 
too,  with  //  xai,  presupposes  an  atfirmative  answer 
to  the  second  clause,  and  this  implied  affirmation  is 
made  the  ground  of  the  argumentation,  vers.  10-12. 
De  Wette  and  Alford.— P.  S.]  The  t,Ti  \4fi(^.  is 
certainly  emphatic,  as  Fritzsche,  De  Wette  [Alford], 
and  others,  maintain,  though  Meyer  denies  it ;  for 
the  whole  of  the  following  argument  proceeds  from 
the  jierson  of  Abraham.  [For  we  say  that  to  Abra- 
ham faith  was  reckoned  for  righteousness. — P.  S.] 

Ver.  10.  Not  in  circumcision,  but.  Accord- 
ing to  Gen.  XV.,  Abraham  was  justified  about  four- 
teen years  before  his  circumcision.  Gen.  xvii.  [Con- 
sequently his  circumcision  was  not  the  elfective  cause 
and  condition,  but  the  Divine  ratification  of  grace 
already  received. — P.  S.] 

Ver.  11.  And  he  received  a  sign  of  circum- 
cision [  X  rt  t  aii/tftov  t/.n,ifr  tt f  (>  t t o /(  ^ ;; f  ]. 
Genitive  of  apposition  [i.  c,  a  sign  wliieh  consisted 
in  circumcision.  Van  Hengel  and  Ilofmann,  prefer- 
ring the  reading  TTfoiToiiijv  to  ;rfolTo/(^^•,  explain: 
As  a  sign  he  received  circumcision,  as  a  seal  (agpo- 
yWa  in  apposition  to  atj/inov).     Meyer  objects  that 


thus  :  "  ITow  art  thou  riRhteons  before  God  ?  Answer  : 
Only  by  tiuo  faith  in  .lesus  Christ.  That  is  :  although  my 
conscience  awuse  me,  that  I  liave  prievously  sinned  ai;ainst 
all  the  commamlments  of  (lod,  nnd  have  never  kept  any 
of  thorn,  and  that  1  am  slill  prone  always  to  nil  evil,  yet 
God,  without  nny  merit  of  mine,  of  mere"  pmcc,  ffr'iiiln  and 
iniputis  In  me  Ih'. ptr/ert  snth/aciiun,  ri!jlitiniisii(,<!s,  nnd  holi- 
nrst  of  Cltrisl,  as  if  I  hnd  never  committed  nor  had  any  sin, 
nnd  had  myself  accomplished  all  the  obedience  wliich  (llhrist 
has  fulfilled  for  me,  if  only  I  accept  such  benefit  with  a  be- 
lieviup  heart." — 1'.  8.) 

•  [This  must  refer  to  a  former  edition  ;  for,  in  the  4th 
cd.  of  Ififi.'i,  Meyer  (j^ves  tho  preference  to  l<rri :  "  Ah  da» 
sirh  von  srlb^i  virstihrndr  Vtrbnm  wird  am  rin^fachstrn  ivri 
prdiichi  {vriffl.  ii.  9;  Acts  iv.  33,  al.);  wniger  nnhdiegtnd i 
A^vf  Tai  aus  v.  6."— P.  8.] 

t  [The  '    ■ 


[Tlie  order  of  the  words    is    simply  rhetorical   nnd 
onic,  and 
and  rbilippi.- 


cuphonic,  and  gives  no  (imphasls  to  rntktiov.    Sec  Tholuok 
.-P.  8.] 


CHAPTER   IV.    1-25. 


149 


in  the  first  case,  atj/inov,  in  the  second,  7rfQi,rofi>'jv, 
jught  to  have  the  article,  and  explains:  jEin  Zeichen 
mit  luekliem  er  durch  die  Bexehneidang  versehen 
ivard,  cmpfinff  er  als  Slegel — i.  c,  a  sign,  with  which 
he  was  provided  in  circumcision,  lie  received  as  seal. 
But  the  article  is  sometimes  omitted  where  the  refer- 
ence is  specific,  and  where  there  is  no  danger  of  mis- 
take ;  comp.  Winer,  p.  118  f.  aijjiflov,  sign, 
token,  symbol,  nix .  Circumcision  was  the  sign 
of  the  covenant  God  made  with  Abraham,  Gen.  xvii. 
11 ;  God,  on  His  part,  promising  the  Messianic  y.'/.tj- 
Qoroiiia  (Gen.  xv.  6,  18),  and  Abraham,  on  his  part, 
exercising  the  obedience  of  faith  which  was  reck- 
oned to  him  for  righteousness  (Gen.  xv.  6).  Hence 
Paul  represents  it  as  a  seal  of  the  righteousness  of 
faith.  Tliis  was  not  only  a  "  legitimate  dogmatic 
inference  "  (Meyer),  but,  as  Tlioluck  remarks,  a  his- 
torie^il  necessity,  since  the  sic/n  of  the  covenant  was 
granted  in  consequence  of  the  faith  previously  shown. 
— P.  S.] — The  seal.  The  seal  denotes  here  the 
symbolical  and  sacramental  sealing ;  from  this,  the 
real  sealing  of  Abraham,  which  was  given  him  after 
the  offering  of  Isaac,  Gen.  xxii.  1,  is  still  to  be  dis- 
tinguished (see  the  Biblework  on  Genesis  xxii.). 
"  It  is  also  represented  in  the  Talmud  as  the  sign 
and  seal  of  the  covenant.  See  Schottgen  and  Wet- 
stein  in.  he.  These  words  belonged  to  the  formula 
of  circumcision  :  '  Benedictus  sit,  qui  sanciijicavit 
dileduia  ab  ufero,  et  signum  (  rix  )  posuit  in  came, 
et  filios  suos  sigiUavit  (  crin  )  signo  fvederis  sanctl ; ' 
Beracoth,  f.  xiii.  1."  Meyer  [foot-note].  Christian 
writers  \^Acta  ThomcB,  §  26  ;  Grabe,  Spicikg.  Pair. 
i.,  p.  333]  speak  in  tlie  same  way  of  the  water  of 
baptism  as  a  seal  [c/  aritjayii;  toTi  ).ovriioTi.  A  seal 
here  means  a  mark  of  Divine  ratification  of  a  justi- 
fication ah'eady  received,  a  "  signaculum  rei  acice," 
not  a  "  pignus  rei  agendce ; "  comp.  1  Cor.  ix.  2  ; 
2  Tim.  ii.  19.  We  have  here  an  intimation  of  the 
true  idea  of  sacraments:  they  are  signs,  seals,  and 
means  of  grace,  but  not  the  grace  itself.  Circum- 
cision is  not  the  covenant,  neither  is  baptism  regen- 
eration. A  sign  and  seal  can  never  be  the  substi- 
tute fur  the  thing  signed  and  sealed,  nor  should  it 
be  made  a  ground  of  confidence  and  hope  ;  but  it  is 
all-important  as  a  Divine  ratification,  and  gives,  so 
to  say,  legal  validity  to  our  claims,  as  the  govern- 
mental seal  to  a  written  instrument.  Without  the 
seal  of  circumcision,  Abraham  would  have  had  no 
certain  guarantee  of  the  Divine  favor  ;  and  if  justi- 
fication by  fiiith  is  abstractly  separated  from  the 
church  and  the  means  of  grace,  it  becomes  a  subjec- 
tive fiction  of  man. — P.  S.] — That  he  might  be 
the  father.  The  spiritual  father  is  meant  here. 
Abraham  is  the  father  of  faith.  "  The  conception 
of  author,  founder,  is  also  contained  in  that  of 
father;  comp.  Job.  xxxviii.  28  ;  Gen.  iv.  21 ;  1  Mace, 
ii.  54 ;  "  Tholuck.  —  On  the  idea  of  Abraham's 
spiritual  children,  see  Matt.  iii.  9  ;  John  viii.  37, 
38.  Gal.  iii.  8,  29,  is  a  parallel.— That  righteous- 
ness might  be  reckoned  also  to  them.  This 
means  tlie  sense  in  which  Abraham,  as  a  believing 
Gentile,  has  become  the  father  of  believing  Gen- 
tiles. 

Ver.  12.  And  the  father  of  circumcision. 
Prominence  is  here  given  to  the  life  of  faith,  the 
proof  of  faith,  in  connection  with  circumcisionfor 
faith.  We  remark  on  the  language :  1.  ?»'<,■  to  tlvai, 
ai'Tov  must  be  mentally  repeated  after  y.ai.  2.  roTc, 
the  datiue  commo  Ii  [for  those'],  comes  in  the  place 
of  faith.      3.  Instead  of   aV.a  xai  TOti,'  aroi/orai', 


we  should  expect  a)J.a  y.ai  arovyoTei,  without  tha 
article.  Tholuck  :  "The  y.ai  rol<;  is  an  unexampled 
solecism  in  the  Apostle's  language."  Tlieodoret, 
Hervreus,  Luther,  and  others,  have  assumed  a  trans- 
position :  Torc  ov/.,  instead  of  ov  toTl,-.  Meyer  and 
Tlioluck  reject  this.  Ruckert  defends  the  supposi 
tion  of  a  transposition  ;  Fritzsche  excuses  the  ar 
tide;  Reiche  defends  it  [so  does  Stuart;  both  regard 
it  as  a  resumption  of  the  sentence  begun  with  the 
preceding  ToTt;,  and  interrupted  by  the  ovy.  iy.  nffj.- 
ro/iTji:  fiovov,  cO.^.a  y.ai. — P.  S.]  It  may  be  asked, 
whether  ol  ovy.  ix  nf^iro/iTi^  fiovov,  a)J.cc  y.ai  o« 
(rrov/ovvTii;  could  be  said.  And  this  would  cer- 
tainly be  practicable,  if  we  could  place  oviti;  after 
fiovov.  They  are  not  only  the  people  of  the  cn-cum- 
cision,  but  also  those  who  walk,  &c.  The  fiiith  of 
the  real  Jews  is  not  only  here  made  prominent,  but 
also  their  life  of  faith  ;  no  doubt  with  rei'erence  to 
the  fact  that  these  believing  Jews,  like  Abraham, 
should  be  the  humane  publishers  of  salvation  to  the 
Gentiles,  [rotq  i/vkti,,  the  dative  after  <TTOi/fri» 
is  not  local,  but  normative ;  comp.  Gal.  v.  16,  25  ; 
vi.  16  ;  Phil.  iii.  16  ;   Meyer.— P.  S.] 


Third  Paragraph  (vehs.  13-17). 

Ver.  13.  For  not  through  (the)  lavr  is  the 
promise  to  Al'raham,  or  to  his  seed,  that  he 
should  be  the  heir  of  the  v/^orld.  (See  Gal.  iii.) 
Ver.  13  does  not  simply  establish  the  preceding 
(Meyer),  since  that  is  established  of  itself.  The 
foregoing  statement  is  indeed  strengthened  by  the 
discussion  which  now  follows  (tlieretbre  :  for) ;  but 
the  latter  also  sets  forth  a  new  privilege  of  the 
righteousness  of  faith,  namely,  its  release  from  the 
law.  See  De  Wette. — Not  through  the  law. 
The  law  declared  only  the  possession  of  Canaan  by 
the  Jews ;  but  the  promise  which  Abraham  re- 
ceived pledged  to  him  and  his  believing  children 
the  whole  earth  as  an  inheritance. —  7'hrovgh  the 
lim  ;  that  is,  not  per  jnstitiam  legis  (Parens,  and 
others),  but  with  the  Mosaic  legislation.  [De  Wette 
and  Alford  :  "  (VtrV  ro/ion,  not,  '  Uhder  the  law,''  nor, 
'  hg  norks  of  the  law,''  nor,  '  by  the  righteousness  of 
the  law  ; '  but,  through  the  law,  so  that  the  law 
should  be  the  ground,  or  efficient  cause,  or  mrdnim, 
of  the  promise." — P.  S.] — The  promise  (sc.  iari) 
to  Abraham,  or  to  his  seed.  This  is  the  great 
Messianic  Inayytlia.  v.ar  i'toyi'iv.  The  I/,  or,  ex- 
presses the  indivisibility  of  the  promise  to  Abraham 
and  his  seed — that  is,  his  believing  seed  (Gal.  iii.  9) 
— and  cannot  be  replaced  by  y.ai,  or  be  divided  thus: 
neither  to  Abraham  nor  his  seed  (Meyer).  Abraham 
inherits  with  his  seed,  and  his  seed  inherits  with 
Abraham  (see  Matt.  viii.  11 ;  Heb.  xi.).  According  to 
Estius,  Olshausen,  and  others,  the  seed  is  Christ, 
conformably  to  Gal.  iii.  16.  Meyer  says:  "Not 
Christ ;  "  which  is  ju.st  as  incorrect  as  the  limitation 
of  the  seed  to  Christ.— That  he  should  be^  the 
heir  of  the  world  [to  y.^.r/^orofiov  « r t o v 
fivau  yodfiov].  The  to  introduces  an  explana- 
tory  declaration  of  the  import  of  the  promise.  The 
ai'iTot;  refers  to  Abraham,  because  he,  in  his  person, 
represents  also  his  seed.  "  In  the  promises.  Gen. 
xiii.  15  ;  xvii.  8;  xxii.  IV,  18,  the  blessing  bestowed 
on  Abraham  in  chap.  xii.  is  expressly  transferred  to 
his  seed  ;  "  Tholuck.  It  may  be  asked  now,  Where 
has  this  promise  of  the  possession  of  the  world  been 
given  to  Abraham  ?  The  promises  which  the  Old 
Testament  furnishes  in  reference  to  the  hereditary 


150 


THE   EPISTLE   OF   PAUL   TO   THE   ROMANS. 


possession  of  Aljialiam  seem  to  include  only  the 
land  of  Canaan  ;  (Jen.  xiL  7  :  "  Unto  tliy  seed  will 
I  gi\'e  tills  land  "  (Can;ian^ ;  chap.  xiii.  14,  15  :  "  Lift 
up  now  thine  eves,  and  look  from  the  place  where 
thou  art,  northward,  and  southward,  and  eastward, 
and  westward  :  for  all  the  land  whicli  thou  seest,  to 
thee  will  I  give  it,  and  to  tliy  seed  forever ;  "  chap. 
XV.  18  :  "  From  the  river  of  Egypt  unto  the  great 
river,  the  river  Euphrates  ;  "  chap.  xvii.  8  :  "  All 
the  land  of  Canaan  ;  "  chap.  xxii.  17  :  "Thy  seed 
shall  possess  the  gate  of  his  eneiuies  "  (conip.  chap. 
ixvi.  3,  the  repetition  of  the  promise  to  Isaac;  and 
Exod.  vi.  4,  the  legal  establishment).  In  all  tliese 
there  is  no  promise  of  the  inheritance  of  the  world. 
It  is  not  correct  to  consider  /.oitho^  and  y7;  as  identi- 
cal. Thus  Meyer  says  :  "  The  hereditary  possession 
of  the  land  of  Canaan,  which  was  ))roniised  to  Abra- 
ham and  his  posterity  (Gen.  xii.  7,  &c.),  was  regard- 
ed in  the  Jewish  ehristology  as  the  gorerninent  of 
the  world  by  Ike  Mcss'anic  (heocraci/,  wiiich  was  sup- 
posed to  be  typically  indicated  in  Gen.  xxii.  '■Abra- 
ham'/ pitfri  iiico  Dens  posnidcudum  ded'U  coclcm  kt 
TEKRAM  ; '  Tanchnina,  p.  ltJ3,  1  ;  see  also  Wctstein. 
The  idea  of  the  M'ssiuuic  sorerelffnti/  of  (he  world, 
which  underlies  tliis  Jewish  particularistic  view,  is 
not  set  iLside  in  the  New  Testament,  but  it  is  brouglit 
out  by  Clirist  Himself  (Matt.  v.  5)  in  allegorical  form 
(Matt.  xix.  28  flf. ;  Luke  xxii.  30;  Matt.  xxv.  21), 
divested  of  its  Judaistic  notion,  and  elevated  to 
christological  truth.  It  is  necessary,  because  of  the 
univei'sal  sovereignty  to  wliich  Christ  Himself  is  ex- 
alted (Matt,  xxviii.  18;  John  xvii.  5  ;  Phil.  ii.  9  ; 
Eph.  iv.  10,  &c.);  and  liecause  of  the  necessary  com- 
munion Ijctween  His  disciples  and  Himself."  But 
we  can  liardly  suppose  tliat  tlie  Apostle  would  iiere 
apply  agdiiiat  the  Jews  the  promise  of  tlie  land  of 
Canaan  to  the  Jews,  in  its  liigher  signification.  We 
must  keep  in  view  tiie  signitieaut  pas.s;ige.  Gen.  xxii. 
17,  18:  "Blessing  I  will  Ijless  thee,  and  multiply- 
ing I  will  multiply  thy  seed  as  the  stars  of  the  heav- 
en, and  as  the  sand  which  is  upon  the  sea-sliore  ;  and 
thy  seed  shall  po.ssess  the  gate  of  liis  enemy.  And 
t«  thfi  seed  shall  all  the  nations  of  the  earth  be 
blessed^  Hero  we  have  the  germ  of  the  s;ime  prom- 
ise (Origen,  Chrysostom,  Bengel,  and  otliers).  Su- 
periority is  declared  by  the  very  position  of  the  one 
who  blesses,  and  the  eartli  itself  is  meant  l)y  the 
nations  of  the  earth.  Tholiiek  remarks,  on  the  con- 
trary, that  by  xonun^  we  must  then  understand  the 
ajzi^iia  itself,  so  far  as  it  is  led  to  faith,  and  that 
this  cannot  be  regarded  at  once  sis  jt/.z/^joro/ioi,-  and 
x/.//o(ji'oi(/'fi.  But  the  nniiiua,  as  the  organ  of  the 
world's  conversion,  must  Ix;  ilistinguished  from  the 
aniijiin,  as  the  converted  world.  (Jod  is  the  inherit- 
ance of  believers,  as  believers  are  the  inheritance 
of  God.  De  Wette,  in  summing  up  the  different 
explanations,  says  :  "  tj  x/.//(U)i'oii/a  Tor  xotriior  is 
not  an  indefinite  allegorical  blessedness  (Flatt);  not 
the  reception  of  all  nations  into  the  theocracy  (Me- 
lanchthon,  Be/.i,  Bengel,  Chrysostom,  Theodoret, 
&c.) ;  not  the  possession  of  Canaan  and  some  adja- 
cent countries,  '  <iu(e  felirl/fis  arcanam  r/rnbat  iiiia- 
pineiit  tefeniie  fftlcitatis''  ((irotius) ;  nor  of  the  earth 
(Ilosenmiiller,  Koppe,  K'lllncr,  Riickert),  in  the  .sense 
of  the  political  sovereignty  of  the  world  ;  nor  is  it  u 
powsession  of  the  future  world  (Calov.*) ;  still  less  of 

*  [By  a  typoirraphioal  mistake,  the  original,  in  the  bco- 
•nd  an  WoU  a*  tho  flmt  edition,  rea'ls  Cilvin,  Instead  of 
Citloviin,  who  was  n  ficrco  Liiihernn  polemic  of  tho  noven- 
tooiith  nnitiiry,  anil  author  of  thu  B'l>li<i  illualraUt,  \a  rofu- 
tatioc  -f  tho  commcntarios  of  Urotiiii<.— 1'.  S.]  , 


the  benejicia  spiritxwlia  (Bald.),  or  «m6  ti/po  terra 
Canaan  non  tnodo  spes  ccelestis  vitie,  sed  plena  ei 
solida  Dei  benedictio  (Calvin);  but  it  is  the  dominion 
over  the  world,  which,  with  all  its  oi)posing  Ibrces, 
shall  be  siilyected  to  Christ  and  the  Christians  (Uciche, 
Meyer,  Fritzsche)."  Obviously  too  many  negations  I 
— We  must  l)ear  in  mind,  that  in  the  Messianic  prom- 
ise  given  to  Abraham,  the  struggle  and  the  dominion 
are  hidicated  only  linally ;  the  chief  idea  is  the  bless- 
ing. If  all  the  nations  of  the  earth  were  to  be  really 
blessed  by  Abraham's  seed,  then  his  seed  must  be 
able  to  dis|)ose  of  a  world  of  ijlessing.  [The  prom- 
ise  will  be  literally  fulfilled  when  the  kingdoms  of 
the  world  are  given  to  the  people  of  the  Most  High, 
and  Christ  will  lule  with  His  saints  forever  and  ever; 
Dan.  vii.  27;  Apoc.  xi.  l.">;  xii.  !•»;  Matt.  v.  5;  2 
Tim.  ii.  12. — P.  S.] — By  the  righteousness  of 
faith.  Tills  was  the  fumlamental  gift  by  which  the 
promise  of  the  world  was  conditioned.  Meyer  thinks 
that,  because  of  the  date  of  the  justification.  Gen.  xv 
[i.  e.y  after  the  promise  had  been  given;  Gen.  xii.  3, 
7;  xiii.  15,  1(5. — P.  S.],  Paul  must  have  here  in  mind 
only  later  passages  [xv.  18  ;  xvii.  8,  whci'C  the  prom- 
ise is  repeated. — P.  S.].  But,  according  to  (Sen.  xii., 
Abraham's  life  of  faith  had  begun  at  tlie  time  of  his 
emigration.  [The  faith  of  Abraham  covered  the 
whole  period  of  the  promise,  which  was  made  and 
repeatedly  confirmed  to  his  faith. — P.  S.] 

Ver.  14.  For  if  they  who  are  of  the  law. 
Proof  tluit  Abraham's  believing  children,  but  not 
they  who,  in  contnist  with  them,  rely  on  the  law  and 
its  deeds,  shall  inlierit  the  world.  The  roiio-;,  ac- 
cording to  Flatt,  the  moral  law ;  according  to  Meyer, 
the  Mosaic  law ;  both,  according  to  Tholuck.  The 
Apostle  is  certainly  not  concerned  here  exclusively 
with  the  idea  of  the  Mosaic  ro/ioi;,  as  such,  but 
rather  with  the  idea  of  the  legal  standpoint,  or  of 
the  law,  considered  abstractly  in  itself,  and  in  con- 
trast with  the  promise.  And  it  may  be  said  of  the 
natural  moral  law,  too,  that  it  worketii  wrath.  ()l 
If.  v6/iov  are  not  people  wlu>  are  still  under  the 
law  as  such,  but  whose  life-principle  is  the  law, 
and  who  wisli  to  be  justified  by  the  law.  [oi  tx 
vofior,  those  of  law  =  adherents  of  the  law,  legal- 
ists. This  periphrase  is  of  frequent  occurrence ; 
comp.  01  ti  1(11.0 tiaii,  those  of  self-seeking  =  self- 
seeking  partisans;  ii.  8;  oi  ix  /Tfiunid/'.:,  the  cir- 
cumcised ;  iv.  12  ;  Tit.  i.  10  ;  Acts  x.  43  ;  xi.  2 ; 
oi  ix  niarniK,  the  believers ;  Gal.  iii.  7,  9 ;  Rom. 
iv.  16;  ot  t'i  ' J(T(>at'j/.,  the  Israelites;  Rom.  ix.  6, 
&c. ;  comp.  Xenoph.,  Anab.  i.  2,  18,  oi  ix  tTii; 
ayoiiii';,  the  market  people.  The  pro|K>sition  tx 
(out  of)  indi<'ates  here  the  origin  and  eliaracter. — 
1'.  S] — Be  heirs,  faith  is  made  void.  At  the 
lime  when  this  decisive  word  was  uttered,  it  had  not 
only  a  great  spiritual,  but  also  a  great  prophetical 
meaning.  Judging  from  external  signs,  it  wils  more 
])robalile  that  tlie  Jews,  rather  than  the  Christians, 
would  inherit  the  earth.  They  had  a  powerful  promi- 
nence, wide  dis.seminalion,  and  synagogues  all  over 
the  worlil.  But  the  .\ito>tle  wius  sure  of  his  cause, 
and  wished  clearly  to  distinguish  the  future  of  faith 
from  the  future  of  that  ilarkeneil  legalism.  Yet  his 
thought  is  not :  if  the  legalists  are  heii-8,  believcra 
cannot  be;  but,  if  the  legalists  are  heirs,  there  will 
be  no  inheritance  of  the  promise  at  all.  Faith  is 
made  void — that  is,  it  loses  il.s  import,  the  right- 
eousness of  fail  Ii — l>y  wrath  in  the  conscience  ;  tho 
promise  is  mad<'  p<>werli'ss  liy  the  wrath  of  histori- 
cal judgments,  because  it  \v:is  only  iiileiiiied  I'nr  fMilh. 

Ver.  15.  Because  the  law  worketh  wrathi 


CHAPTER   IV.    1-25. 


151 


The  operation  of  the  law  is  to  reveal  sin  and  to 
represent  it  as  transgression,  as  well  in  the  con- 
science as  in  the  life  itself.  Therefore  it  produces 
wrath,  which,  according  to  the  Divine  sentence  and 
government,  bursts  forth  from  the  internal  and  ex- 
ternal life  as  tiie  severe  judgment  of  dissolution  and 
of  death.  For  -where  there  is  no  law,  neither 
is  there  transgression  (of  the  law) ;  and  wlicre 
there  is  no  transgression,  there  is  no  wrath.  But 
inversely,  the  law  fully  reveals  transgression,  and, 
■with  transgression,  wrath  and  condemnation  to  death. 
The  proof  that  the  law  worketh  wrath,  is  therefore 
negative.  This  operation  is  meant  to  apply  first  of 
all  to  the  Mosaic  law,  as  is  proved  by  Rom.  v.  13, 
14,  particularly  by  the  distinction  between  a/ia^Tia 
and  na^di'iaffi.i;  (see  1  Tim.  ii.  14 ;  Gal.  iii.  19). 
Tholuck  quotes  Augustine :  "  Sine  lege  potest  esse 
quiH  iidquus,  sed  non  prcevaricator,^^  and  says  that 
"this  difference  has  generally  been  observed  ever 
since.  But  where  it  has  not  been  observed,  such 
7ia^f(j,u>jVtlai,  have  arisen,  as  with  Luther  (on  Gal. 
iii.  19),  who  introduces,  from  chap.  vii.  5;  v.  20, 
the  thought  that  the  lust  of  sin  is  dormant  without 
the  law."  Tholuck  also  properly  remarks,  that  the 
axiom  of  chap.  v.  13,  a,iia(jria  dt  ovy.  i/.'/Myi-liai, 
(.ifi  tii'Toc  ro/itor,  can  be  understood  only  relatively 
of  a  less  quantity  of  guilt,  as  is  proved  by  the  judg- 
ment of  the  Deluge,  and  other  judgments.  He  quotes 
Thomas  Aquinas  :  "  Et  tamen  omne  peccalian  potest 
did  prcevaricatio,  in  quantum  legem  naturalerntrans- 
greditury  [But  Thomas  adds :  '■'■  Gravius  tcunm  est 
transgredi  simul  legem  naluralem  et  legem  scriptam, 
quam  solmn  legem  naturae.  Et  idea  lege  data  crevit 
prcevaricatio  et  tnajorern  iram  promei'uit.'"]  Yet  the 
iXloyntai,  of  chap.  v.  13  is  to  be  emphasized  so  as 
to  denote  God's  real  reckoning  with  the  sinner  by 
His  law,  which  first  causes  the  natural  punishment 
of  the  sinner  to  assume  the  clear  blaze  of  wrath. 
Man  can  obtain  salvation  only  by  this  pa.ssage  through 
the  judgment  of  death.  For  this  reason  the  Apos- 
tle does  not  deny  the  necessity  of  the  law  ;  but  with 
him  it  is  a  means  for  an  end,  and  constitutes  the 
pedagogic  point  of  transition  for  the  pious  under  the 
law  (vno  v6/iiov,  chap.  vi.  14,  15).  But  people  of 
the  law  (oi  ix  vofiov),  who  seek  justification  ii  t(jyo)v 
(chap.  iv.  'Z)  because  they  are  in  feeling  ti  i(ji,Ovtai; 
(chap.  ii.  8),  make  the  means  an  end.  They  seek 
their  life  in  the  single  precepts  and  observance  of 
the  law,  in  pride  in  the  possession  of  the  law,  and  in 
the  settlement  of  their  account  with  God ;  and  by 
this  course  they  find  their  existence  in  the  fire  of 
wratli,  but,  unlike  the  salamander,  they  find  no  com- 
fort in  the  fire.  They  do  not  make  the  law  their 
preparation  for  faith,  but  the  antithesis  of  faith ;  and 
they  endeavor,  by  the  fire  of  their  fanaticism,  to  en- 
tice from  a  joyous  and  bright  life  those  who  are 
happy  in  faith,  and  to  draw  them  into  their  own 
gloomy  heat.  For  other  explanations  of  o^^yc/,  see 
Tholuck.  Cocceius :  The  ceremonial  law  is  the  ema- 
nation of  wrath  ;  J.  Miiller :  6(>yt'i  must  be  under- 
stood subjectively — the  consciousness  of  wrath ;  Me- 
lanchthon :  The  o^ytj  is  the  sinner's  wrath  toward 
the  avenging  God. 

Ver.  1(3.  Therefore  it  is  of  faith.  The  infer- 
ence from  vers.  14,  15.  That  cannot  be ;  therefore 
this  must  stand  true.  'Ex  nlarfioq.  Supply: 
ly  K/.riQovonia  yivfTau  (Beza,  Bengel)  ;  tj  inayyikia. 
tui  yifiQ-  latk  y.ai  tiji  rs7ii(Ji.i.arif  oti'Tor  (Grotius, 
Fritzsclie,  Tholuck  in  earlier  editions,  and  others) ; 
Sixaioai'vij  (Luther) ;  or,  better,  ot  zz/y^oro/foi  tial 
(Meyer,  De  Wette,  and  Tholuck,  referring  to  ver. 


14,  where  ix  niatfox;  and  ix  v6f(ov  appear  as  an? 
titheses).  This  last  seems  the  most  appropriate  ;  ye; 
in  ver.  14  we  read  not  ol  x^>;^ord/(ot,  but  ol  ix 
vo/wv  —  y.}.ri(jov6fiot.;  and  further  on  it  is  oi  In 
TTtaTtioi;.  Therefore,  we  must  merely  supply  either 
y./.>i^ovaf<ot  or  'iari'i. — That  it  might  be  by  grace. 
Faitli  is  here  plainly  denoted  the  homogeneous  organ 
of  grace.  It  is  grace,  and  not  man's  faitli,  that  ia 
the  source  of  that  general  surety  of  God's  promise  ; 
but  grace  makes  faith  the  organ,  just  as  wrath  mani- 
fests itself  in  the  work  of  the  law.  'iva  denotes 
here  tlie  consistency  of  the  principle  of  faith,  which 
certainly  restsupon  a  Divine  determination,  Tho- 
luck supplies  (i)(Ti,r. 

In  order  that  the  promise  might  be  sure  to 
all  the  seed  [f 4-  to  fira^  fitfiaiav  rijv  inayytj.iav 
Tiavti  no  ffTTf^/iaTt].  The  di;  denotes  the  result 
designed  by  God — that  the  promise  of  His  grace  b« 
communicated  to  faith.  By  this  determination  the 
fact  is  secured,  that  the  promise  holds  good  for  hia 
collective  seed — that  is,  for  his  entire  spiritual  pos- 
terity.— Not  to  that  only  w^hich  is  of  the  law, 
&c.  The  r(J')  l/.  tov  rofiov  denotes  here  the 
historical  origin  of  the  whole  body  of  faithful  Jews. 
The  Tw  iy.  n I cfr fox;,  as  antithesis,  denotes  the 
faithful  Gentiles.  They  form  a  totality  by  which 
Abraham  is  the  father  of  all  (see  vers.  11,  12). 

Ver.  IV.  As  it  is  written.  Gen.  xvii.  5 ; 
where  a  natural  posterity  of  many  nations  is  prom- 
ised to  Abraham  in  rtdation  to  his  name.*  Yet  this 
promise  has  its  ground  in  his  faith  (vers.  18,  19),  and 
hence  Paul  very  properly  regarded  it  as  the  type  of 
his  apiritual  posterity.  The  spiritual  relation  is  also 
implied  in  the  Divine  appointment,  TtDnxd  af. — 
[It  was]  in  the  sight  of  him  whom  he  believed 
[xaTtj'ttrTi.  0  1'  I  n  i  a  r  i  v  a  t  V  v^forf].  On 
account  of  the  connection  with  what  has  preceded, 
the  difficult  word  /.ariravri.  must  be  here  exitlained 
[as  far  as  the  construction  is  concerned].  1.  Luther 
follows  the  reading  ijiiaTtiaaii  [before  God,  whom 
thou  had  believed^  of  the  Codd.  F.  G.,  It.,  and  others, 
and  finds  here  a  continuation  of  God's  words.  An 
attempt  to  explain  the  connection.  2.  Bretschnei- 
der ;  "in  view  of  which  word,"  ov  sc.  tl^njfnvov. 
3.  Meyer,  Tholuck  [Alford,  Hodge],  and  others : 
The  quotation,  xaOwq — nf,  is  parenthetical  [so  also 
in  the  E.  V.],  and  /.ciTtvavTi.  must  be  connected  with 
o£,-  iffti  7iarii(i  ndvToiv  ?j/i(7)v  [i.  e.,  Abraham  is  the 
father  of  us  all,  not  physically,  but  spiritually,  in 
the  sight  and  estmation  of  God,  with  whom  there 
are  no  obstacles  of  nature  or  time. — P.  S.]  Meyer 
[and  also  Winer,  Gramm.,  p.  156,  7th  ed.]  thus 
resolves  the  attraction  :  y.arivcwrt.  rov  Ofor,  /.are- 
vavTi,  oil  inlaTfvaf  [i.  e.,  before  God,  before  whom., 
or,  in  whose  sight  he  believed^,  according  to  the  anal- 
ogous attraction  of  Luke  i.  4 ;  and  rejects  the  more 
common  resolution  [adopted  also  by  Fritzsche]  of 
the  attraction  ya-tivavTi,  Oiov,  m  inia-tn'Ot  [before 
God,  whom  he  believed — a  form  of  attraction  with 
the  dative,  which  is  very  unusual ;  see  Winer,  p. 
156,  and  Meyer  in  loc. — P.  S.].  See  Meyer,  for 
other  attempts  at  construction.     But  what  are  we  to 

*  [Abraham,  Cil'^^X  =;  C"''l«  '(irn  ~N,  father  qf 
a  muUiiude,  the  new  significant  name  given  to  Ahram, 
Q"i2S  ,  J.  e.,  father  of  elevation,  high  father,  Gen.  xvii.  5  • 
xv^ii'.  Is.-P.  S.] 

t  [Lange  makes  a  period  after  the  quotation  from  Gen. 
xvii  5,  and  then  tr.'inslates  :  Anyesichts  [jwac's]  dis  Go-ies,. 
ditn  er  Glauhin  hiflt.  He  supplies  eyeVero,  and  commcncei 
here  a  new  paragraph.  See  his  intei-pretation  below.— 
P.S.I 


152 


THE    EPISTLE    OF   PAUL    TO    THE   ROMANS. 


unik'r>t:iiHl  l)y  the  expression  :  lie  is  tiie  fatlier  of  us 
all  bflore  (ioj  'i  The  ideii  of  a  substitution  by  Aiira- 
hiini,  wliieh  nii<,'ht  easily  be  inferred  from  the  lan- 
guuf^f,  would  be  foreign  to  the  Apostle.  4.  We 
supi)ly  iyivt-ro  [before  y.arivavit],  and  explain 
thus :  As  it  is  written,  "  I  have  made  thee  a  father 
of  many  nations  ;  "  it  took  place  in  the  presence  of 
(iod,  or,  it  eaine  to  pass  there,  in  the  place  where  he 
stood  bilievinj^  before  God,  that  he  was  made  the 
father  of  many  nations  ;  before  Him,  namely,  God, 
&c.  He  who  is  justified,  who  receives  God's  prom- 
ise, stands  before  God.  [Philippi,  without  paren- 
thesizing >;«.'>(7»,- — fff,  supplies  after  this  quotation : 
And  a-s  such — viz.,  as  father  of  uatious — he  stands 
in  the  sight  of  God,  &;e.— P.  S.] 


FouETH   Paeaobaph    (vers.    17-25). 
X.—Alraham's  Faillt  (vers.  17-22). 

Ver.  17.  Bafore  him  wrhom  he  believed, 
even  God.  Kx|)lanatious  of  c<»-<uti  [xativar- 
Ti,  literally,  domi  over  agaiwit,  opposite  to,  like 
the  clas.sical  xaTtvavrlov ;  then  =  xaTtvit'iTiioi',  co- 
ram, so  here,  and  often  in  the  LXX.,  for  "".^E^  — 
P.  S.]  :  1.  According  to  the  will  (Reiclie).  2.  Ac- 
conling  to  the  decision  (Riickert,  and  others).  3.  Vi 
a'qtie  potentate  diriua  (Koppe).  4.  Before  God's 
omniscience  (Olshauseu).  5.  Meyer  [p.  173,  foot- 
note] :  "  We  must  leave  it  without  exi)lanation. 
Abraham  is  r( presented  as  standirig  before  God  who 
has  appeared  to  him."  But  it  denotes  the  first 
element  of  the  Abrahaniie  faith.  Abraham,  as  tiie 
friend  of  <irod,  stands  in  the  view  of  the  living  God 
of  revelation,  t\w.  speaking  God,  who  is  at  tlie  same 
time  the  God  of  miracles  and  new  creations;  and  it 
is  while  Aljraham  is  there,  that  he  is  af)i)oiiited  the 
father  of  many  nations.  (Theoiloret,  Theophylact, 
and  others,  have  explained  xarti-ni-Ti  as  equal  to 
oiioiio^  no  OnJ) ;  Grotius  has  divided  the  sentence 
into  question  and  answer;  see  .Meyer).  —  Kari- 
vavTi  on  tni(TTh  vafv,  standing  before  Him,  he 
believed  the  promise  on  tlie  spot. 

Who  quickeneth  the  dead.  [The  present 
tense  Cid  o  n  ot  i>  r  i'  r  o  s'  and  ■/. «  /.  o  r  v r  o  t;  is  used  to 
indicate  the  continued  nianifestatioti  of  God's  crea- 
tive power  in  every  physical  and  in  every  spiritual 
liirtli. — P.  S.]  "The  Li'^mronlv  toi'i;  vty.{>o\<i; 
is  the  solemn  characteristic  of  the  omnipotent  (Jod," 
says  Meyer.  The  doctrine  of  the  oninii)otence  of 
God,  as  the  wonder-working  power  of  the  God  of 
revelation,  has  Ijeen  directed  from  the  beginning  to 
tlio  coiismiiinutiun  of  the  revelation  in  the  resurrec- 
tion of  Ciirist,  and  subse(|uently  to  the  special  and 
general  resurrection  (Kph.  i.  19  (T.j.  This  is  evident 
from  those  passages  of  the  Old  Testament  which  rep- 
resent the  wonder-working  power  of  (Jod  as  a  power 
to  bring  the  dead  to  life,  [iroduced  by  it  (I)eut. 
xxxii.  ;J1» ;  1  Sam.  ii.  6;  Isa.  xxvi.  19;  liii.  1(> ; 
Ezek.  xxxvii.  1  If;  Hosea  xiii.  14;  Dan.  xii.  1,2; 
C'imp.  Book  of  Wisdom,  xvi.  13 ;  Tobit  xiii.  2 ; 
John  V.  21  ;  2  Cor.  i.  9  ;  1  Tim.  vi.  13).  The  .Vpos- 
tle,  with  i)rofound  penetration,  sees  this  miraculous 
jiower  which  raises  the  dead  to  life,  foreshadowed 
ulready  in  the  promise  of  Lsaac.  For  he  does  not 
have  in  view  the  offering  of  Isaac  (according  to 
Erasmus,  (Jrotius,  Baumgarten-Crusius),  although 
th<'  stronger  expression  seems  tf)  have  been  selected 
also  with  ret'erenee  to  that  last  lidieving  act  of  Abra- 
ham.    Neither  ia  the  awakening  of   the  spiritually 


dead  chiefly  meant  (according  to  Origen,  Anseim 
and  others).  Nevertlielcss,  we  would  not,  with  Mey- 
er, altogether  reject  these  explanations  as  falu  ;  for 
the  external  awakenings  stand  in  the  most  intimate 
reciprocal  relation  with  the  internal.  In  fact,  the 
former  are  generally  conditioned  by  the  latter ;  as 
we  see  that  Abraham  had  to  believe  first  in  the 
promise  given  to  him. 

And  calleth  those  things,  which  are  not, 
as  though  they  were  [literally,  calling  things 
not  being,  as  being,  ■/. a / o  vvtu^  t «  /( //  ovxa. 
(!)(,•  orra.  7  a  /< »/  6  rra  differs  from  ra  o  r  it  oi'ra 
in  that  it  presents  the  non-existence  as  conditional : 
if  they  are  not ;  or  )is  relative  only,  inasmuch  afl 
all  things  preexist  ideally  and  subjectively  in  the 
Divine  mind  before  they  are  created  and  set  forth 
objectively. — P.  S.].  Two  explanations:*  1.  Ref- 
erence to  the  creative  agency  of  God  (Tholuek, 
and  most  expositors).  Kcuilv  often  denotes  God's 
creative  call,  to  .summon  into  being,  into  exist- 
ence (Isa.  xli.  4  ;  xlviii.  13  ;  2  Kings  viii.  1  ;  Book 
of  Wisdom,  xi.  25  ;  comp.  Ps.  xxxiii.  9).  Philo 
[I)e  crcat.  ]>rliic.,  p.  728  B.]  :  ra  /lij  ijvTci  r/.ui.nrtv 
Hi;  TO  flvai,.  This  explanation  admits  of  several 
modifications  :  a.  Tiie  first  creative  act  is  thought 
of  (Estius).  b.  God's  continued  creation  is  in  mind 
(Kidlner ;  reference  to  the  particip.  prces.).  j.  A 
constant  attribute  of  God  is  denoted  (Tholuek). 
Meyer  holds  that  this  whole  interpretation  is  de- 
stroyed by  the  lo^  oira  ;  for,  in  the  New  Testament, 
(.'),,•  is  nowhere  tiie  same  as  tu.  Yet  Tholuek  adduces 
proof  in  favor  of  the  .signification  fU  to  tlvai.  ox; 
ovTa.  [Ho  refers  to  1  Cor.  i.  8 ;  2  Cor.  iii.  6 ; 
1  Thess.  V.  23  ;  Jude  24.  Conip.  Phil.  iii.  21,  where 
the  accusative  (Ti'</ii(o()<fQv,  like  unto  Ms  glorioiit 
bod;/,  is  the  accusative  of  effect  =  .so  as  to  be  like.— 
P.  S.]  Dc  Wette :  m.;  ovra  can  indeed  not  be  a 
substitute  for  fl^  ovrct.  =  iiq  ro  urai,,  but  it  can 
be  a  substitute  for  (oq  irroufva,  or  for  iiq  to  urai 
I'oi;  ovra  (Reiehe,  and  others).  2.  Meyer,  and  oth- 
ers (Riickert,  Philippi) :  117/0  jironouiicts  his  enact- 
iny  command  over  what  docs  not  txi.st,  as  over  what 
does  ej-ist.j^  It  is  not  necessary  to  prove  that,  even 
in  reference  to  the  creation,  this  is  the  full  sense 
(sec  Heb.  xi.  3)  ;  the  ideal  preiixistenee  of  things  in 
the  mind  of  God  is  therewith  intimated.  Neverthe- 
less, the  idea  of  the  xn/.tir — to  call  into  existence, 
or  into  appearance — nmst  be  retained.  Meyer  holds 
that  the  things  which  are  not,  that  God  called  into 
existence,  are,  according  to  Gen.  xv.,  the  posterity 

*  [Or  throe,  rat hor ;  but  the  third,  which  refers  xaXtlv 
to  f he  offcctnal  cjvllinp;  of  unborn  men  l>j- the  11. ily  Spirit, 
mill  explains:  "God  calls  to  be  llitt  children  those  who 
were  not  children,"  is  entirely  foreiim  to  the  context.  It 
is  strange  lliiit  oven  the  ration.ili.-itie  Fritzschc  explains  : 
"  liDiniiiis  it'iHditm  ill  Incrm  iihtus  liniiqunm  etlilns  iia  vilnm 
irliriinm  iiivilnl."  The  eicAoyij  and  npoyvoKriv  of  God  pre» 
oeiles  the  birth,  but  the  icAncnt  only  refers  to  living  men. — 

r.  s.] 

t  [Tholuek  doubts  that  KoXeiv,  X">p ,  ever  menns,  to 
commund,  to  dispose  of;  but  comp.  I's.  1.  1;  Isa.  xl.  26; 
xlv.  3;  xlviii.  3,  Meyer  and  I'hi'ippi  ()iiotc  two  ntriking 
panillol  pnKs:i(je9  from  I'hilo,  /)c  Jns.,  p.  .'>44,  C,  whei-o  Lo 
^pcaks  of  the  ini:igi"iitii>n  as  fonning  ra  fit)  oiTa  «us  oiTa, 
and  Artemidor,  i.  .^3,  where  it  is  sriid  of  the  pninler  that  he 
represents  ra  fii)  ovra  cut  otnra.  To  these  ((uotuiiuns  I  may 
add  the  fmious  lines  of  Sli:ikespeare  on  the  creative  power 
of  the  poet's  genius  (Miitsuiiimer-Aij/IU's  Draim,  Act  ▼. 
Scene  1): 

"  The  poet's  eye,  in  ii  fine  frenzy  rolling, 
Doth  Klnnre  fmni  lieiivi'n  to  earth,  from  cwiih.  to  hoaveni 
y\iid,  as  iMiii);iii.'iti(in  bodies  forth 
The  forms  of  thinpt  unknown,  the  poet's  pen 
Turns  thi-m  to  shapes,  iind  ifives  to  airy  nothing 
A  local  hubitution  and  a  name." — 1*.  ^.\ 


CHAPTER  IV.    1-25. 


153 


of  Abraham.  But  Abraham's  Aiith  undoubtedly  pre- 
supposed earlier  deeds  of  omnipotence.  The  ele- 
ments of  God's  creative  power,  and  of  His  renewing 
power,  are  comprehended  together  in  the  conception 
of  His  miraculous  power.  The  creative  word  is  a 
symbol  and  pledge  of  every  new  creative  word  which 
is  spoken  subsequently. 

Ver.  IS.  Who  against  hope  believed  in 
hope  [  0 1;  7T  «  ^ '  i).n  ida  t  n  i).ni()i,  in  I  a- 
r*  I'fff  v].  Faith  in  miracles,  which  is  itself  a  mira- 
cle, corresponds  to  the  gracious  God  who  worketh" 
miracles.  Established  on  the  ground  of  hope,  he 
believed  against  the  appearance  of  hope.  Meyer 
solves  the  oxymoron  incorrectly :  Abraham's  faith 
was  against  hrpe  in  an  objedire  relation,  and  yet  it 
was  established  on  hope  in  a  suhjedive  relation. 
Tholuck's  view  is  better :  His  faith  is  a  "  Yea " 
established  on  the  word  of  God,  in  opposition  to 
the  "No"  in  the  sphere  of  finite  causes.  "En' 
ilni(%,  1  Cor.  ix.  10.  [en"  iXnldi,  is  not  adverbial  = 
conjidenthi,  but  ini  signifies  the  subjective  ground 
of  his  faith.  Faith  is  the  organ  of  the  supernatural, 
and  holds  fast  to  the  Invisible  as  if  it  saw  Him.  Hope 
is  faith  itself,  as  directed  to  the  future. — P.  S.]. 

That  he  might  become.  Three  explanations 
of  f  4- :  1.  Of  the  result — so  that  he  might  be- 
come (Flatt,  Fritzsche,  and  others).  2.  He  believed 
that  he  should  be.  That  is,  hq  to  yfv.  is  the  object 
of  lni.(TT.  (Beza,  Reiche,  and  others).  8.  It  con- 
tains the  purpose  of  the  iniar.  ordained  by  God 
(Meyer,  and  others).  This  is  favored  by  the  follow- 
ing y.aTa  TO  f((j;//(£j'oj'.  [So  also  Alford,  Hodge: 
He  believed,  iu  order  that,  agreeal)ly  to  the  purpose 
of  God,  he  might  become  the  father  of  many  na- 
tions.]— According  to  that  •which  vras  spoken. 
See,  in  Gen.  xv.  5,  the  reference  to  the  stars  of  heav- 
en. Codd.  F.  and  G.  insert  the  comparison :  as  the 
stars  of  heaven,  and  as  the  sand  upon  the  sea-shore 
(the  latter  from  Gen.  xxii.  17). 

Ver.  19.  And  being  not  weak  in  faith.  A 
meiosis  [iicuoaic,  diminution],  according  to  Theo- 
phylact  and  Beza  [i.  e.,  the  negative  form  for  the 
positive :  beinff  strong.  So  also  Tholuck  and  Mey- 
er.] The  sense  is  rather  that,  in  the  long  trial,  his 
faith  did  not  grow  weary,  but  stronger,  in  spite  of 
the  difficulties  in  his  path. — He  considered  [not, 
o('],  y.anvorjan-.  Tholuck  says:  "The  omis- 
sion of  the  oh  in  important  MSS.,  such  as  A.  C.  [to 
which  must  be  added  Cod.  Sin.  and  B. — P.  S.],  the 
Syriac  Version,  and  others,  was  occasioned  by  hav- 
ing regard  to  Gen.  xvii.  17,  where  Abraham  does 
certainly  reflect  upon  finite  causes.  For  this  reason 
tlie  sense  was  thought  to  be,  that  he  reflected  with- 
out being  weak  in  faith.  But  Paul  had  in  view  only 
Gen.  XV.  5,  6,  according  to  which  Abraham  accepted 
the  promise  at  once  without  hesitation."  [So  also 
Meyer.]  But  Paul  means  plainly  a  steadfast  faith, 
which  became  more  vigorous  by  the  trial  of  many 
years  of  w-aiting,  and  whose  strength  was  augmented 
by  the  temptations  occurring  in  the  meantime.* — 

*  [Stunrt,  HodRC,  and  "Wordsworth  take  no  notice  of 
this  important  difference  of  reading.  Alford  brackets  ou, 
but  prefers  it  as  being  better  suited  to  the  context  ;  the 
object  being  to  extol  Abraham's  faith.  Omitting  ov,  the 
Bcnse  will  be:  "And  not  lieing  weak  in  the  fath,  he  was 
iiid  ed  well  aware  of,"  &c.,  "  but  (S4)  did  not  stagger  at  the 
promise,"  &c. ;  or,  "although  he  was  aware  of,"  &c., 
"yet  did  he  not."  This  agrees  better  with  Se  in  ver.  20; 
but  we  miss  in  this  case  fieV  :ifter  Karevoriae.  The  dog- 
iratic  idea  of  ihe  passage  is  well  brought  nut  by  Cnlvin, 
who  is  followed  by  Philippi  and  Tlodge.  A  similar  obstruc- 
tion of  faith,  as  the  one  recorded  of  Abraham,  Gen.  xvii.  17, 
occurred  ia  the  life  of  John  the  Baptist ;  Matt.  xi.  2  il— P.  S.] 


His  own  body  now  dead.  Abraham  was  nior« 
than  ninety-nine  years  old  when  the  promise  was 
fulfilled  (after  the  circumcision,  Gen.  xvii.  24),  and 
Sarah  was  more  than  ninety  years  old.  The  terms 
vfvix^iofiivov  and  vix^oxriq,  in  reference  to 
gcnPrative  death  (Heb.  xi.  12),  must  not  be  taken 
absolutely,  but  be  considered  according  to  the  meas- 
ure of  experience  and  the  usual  course  of  nature. 
Bengel :  "  Post  iSeunnn  (Shem)  nemo  centum  annormn 
geri<r<tsse  Gen.  xi.  legit ur."  [The  difficulty  concern, 
ing  the  later  children  of  Abraham  and  Keturah,  Gen. 
XXV.  1,  2,  Augustin  {Be  civit.  Dei,  xvi.  28)  and  Ben- 
gel  removed,  by  assuming  that  the  generative  power 
miraculously  conferred  upon  Abraham  continued  to 
his  death.  Bengel :  Novus  corporis  vigor  etiam 
mansit  in  matrirnonio  cum  Ketura.  So  also  Philippi 
and  Meyer. — P.  S.] 

Ver.  20.  He  staggered  not  at  the  promise 
of  God.  The  f)f,  which  is  an  expression  of  antithe- 
sis, appears  at  first  sight  to  favor  xari-roijaf,  the 
reading  of  the  Codd.  A.  C,  instead  of  o  v  y.arfvo- 
fj(Tf.  But  it  constitutes  another  antithesis.  Ver. 
19  says,  that  he  continued  steadfast  in  faith,  In  spite 
of  the  contradiction  of  sensuous  experience  ;  that 
he  did  not  regard  natural  appearance.  Ver.  20,  on 
the  contrary,  expresses  the  idea :  Neither  was  he 
doubtful  by  unbelief  concerning  the  piomise  itself. 
For  unbelief  is  not  produced  merely  by  reflecting 
doubtfully  on  the  contradiction  of  sensuous  experi- 
ence, but  also  by  an  immediate  want  of  confidence 
in  the  miraculous  promise  itself  which  belongs  to 
the  sphere  of  invisible  life.  He  was  not  only  not 
weak  in  faith  in  his  disregard  of  sensuous  improba- 
bility,  but,  while  looking  at  the  f)romise,  he  grew 
even  stronger  in  faith  ;  for  he  overcame  the  tempta- 
tion of  a  subtle  misinterpretation  of  the  promise. 
According  to  Meyer,  the  de  is  only  explanatory  ;  but 
Tholuck,  and  most  expositors,  regard  it  as  express- 
ing an  antithesis.  According  to  Riickert,  the  article 
in  T'Tj  anvcTTla  denotes  the  unbelief  common  to 
man  ;  but  it  denotes  unbelief  as  such,  whose  nature 
is  to  doubt  the  promise  of  God.  Therefore  other 
explanations  are  superfluous  (Meyer :  in  consequence 
of  the  unbelief  which  he  would  have  had  in  this 
case).*  The  passive  form,  ivfdvva/noOfj,  arises 
from  his  undoubting  aim  toward  the  promise.  The 
promise  has  the  ettect  of  always  strengthening  the 
faith  of  him  who  looks  at  it.  Therefore  Grotius  dis- 
turbs the  real  meaning  of  the  word,  when  he  takes  it 
in  the  middle  voice,  he  strengthened  himself.  Even  the 
intransitive  meaning  which  Tholuck  accepts,  "  to  grow 
strong,"  fails  in  tlie  same  way  to  satisfy  the  relation 
between  the  promise  and  the  steadfast  gaze  of  faith. 

Ver.  20.  Giving  glory  to  God.  To  give  God 
the  glory  ( n|in""b  ni=3,  THJ  or,  c^ib  ) ;  a  mark 
of  faith  which  God,  as  the  revealed  God,  can  de- 
mand. John  ix.  24  was  spoken  hypocritically;  John 
xii.  43  is  indirectly  expressed.  Comp.  also  Luke 
xvii.  18,  19  ;  Rom.  i.  21  ;  1  John  v.  10  ;  Rev.  xix. 
7  ;  comp.  Philippi  and  Meyer  on  this  passage,  both 
of  whom  amplify  the  meaning.  Thohuk  says  bet- 
ter :  "  Then  unbelief  is  a  robbery  of  God's  glory. 
It  does  not  easily  occur  except  in  a  state  of  trial  (?), 
but  it  does  so  occur  in  such  a  state.  Therefore  Cal- 
vin says :  '  Extra  certamen  quidem  nemo  Deum 
omnia  posse  negat ;  verum  simulac  ohji.citur  aliquid^ 

»  [Meyer  and  Philippi  take  rrj  airurria  as  an  instrumental 
dative  ;  rij  nia-rei  as  a  dative  oi  reference  :  "  Er  schwanlde 
Dtrhl  VF.RMOOE  DES  TJkglaubkns  (den  er  in  diesem  Falle  gre- 
hnhl  h«hi  II  wurile),  sondern  ivurde  stark  AM  Glatjben  {dett 
er  hatle).—V.  S.] 


154 


THE    EPISTLE   OF   PAUL   TO   THE   ROMANS. 


quod  curtum  promisulotium  Dei  impediat,  Dei  virtu- 
tem  e  suo  gradu  J'jicimitJi.^  " 

Ver.  21.  And  being  fully  persuaded.  Ac- 
cording to  Lacliiiiiina  (contrary  to  Tisulieiidoif),  tlie 
xat  before  Tt/.i^oo'ioiji^Oti^  is  strongly  attested  by 
the  Codd.  A.  B.  C,  iic.  If  the  xai  is  omitted,  we 
have  hero  the  reason  for  the  fact  that  lie  gave  God 
the  glory.  With  the  xai,  tlie  words  suitaljly  explain 
the  manner  in  which  he  gave  God  the  glory  ;  for  he 
was  fully  convinced  that  ile  was  the  El  Shaddai,  and 
that,  by  virtue  of  Uis  omnipotence,  He  was  able  to 
fulfil  what  lie  in  His  truthfulness  had  promised.  It 
was  by  this  confident  looking  at  the  El  Shaddai's 
word  of  promise  that  he  was  made  strong  ("  he- 
roic ; "  Meyer)  in  faith.  The  7i).tj(Joif.  denotes  intel- 
lectual activity,  knowledge  in  living  faith.* 

Vcr.  2 '2.  Wherefore  also  it  was  reckoned 
to  him  as  righteousness.  We  must  retain  y.al, 
as  authorized  by  tlie  Codd.  A.  0.  [i{.],  and  others. 
But  we  must  not  overlook  the  fact  that  we  have 
here  a  justification  of  jusLilication  in  its  essential 
adaptation.  The  didovcu  do'iav  n'}  On7i  in  faith  is 
a  return  to  the  paradiL-aical  or  angelic  (Isa.  vi.  3) 
attitude  to  God  (Rom.  i.  21).  Since  man  gives  God 
the  glory,  lie  again  participates  in  the  doia  &to7i 
which  he  had  lost  as  a  sinner  (Rom.  iii.  23).  In 
justification,  believers  embrace  in  their  hearts  the 
righteousness  of  Christ  as  the  principle  of  the  dola 
(Rom.  viii.  30 ;  comp.  ver.  18).  Therefore  the 
spirit  of  ()dja  rests  upon  them  (1  Peter  iv.  14)  until 
the  revelation  of  the  do|a  of  the  Lord  (1  Peter  iv. 
13). 

B.—lTke  Faith  of  Clirialians  {vers.  23-25). 

[Application  of  the  Scripture  testimony  of  Abra- 
ham, the  father  of  the  faithful,  to  the  believers  in 
Christ.  His  method  of  justification  is  our  method 
of  justification.  Calvin:  '■'■  Ahrahce  persona  speci- 
men communis  juxdiice,  guce  ad  omnex  x/iectat." 
This  completes  the  argument  for  the  vindication  of 
the  law  through  faith  ;  iii.  31. — P.  S.] 

Ver.  23.  Now  it  was  not  written  for  his 
sake  alone.  Explanations:  1.  Not  to  his  praise, 
noil  ill  ipxii/s  (//oriiun  (Heza,  Tlioluck).  2.  To  ex- 
plain the  manner  of  his  justification  (.Meyer).  The 
sense  is  this :  not  only  for  the  purpose  of  a  histori- 
cal appreciation  of  Abraham  (Rom.  xv.  4 ;  1  Cor.  x. 
11  ;  Gal,  iii.  8),  but  also  to  represent  him  as  the 
type  of  believers.  In  the  same  way  the  entire  Bible 
has  a  universal  destination  for  the  believers  of  all 
times.  Meyer  quotes  Berexh  R.  40.  8  :  QuiJguid 
tcriplum  est  de  Abrahaino,  scripluin  est  de  Jiliis 
ejus.  [The  aorist  iyiidiftj,  il  was  written,  de- 
notes the  past  historical  act  of  writing,  and  is  used 
here  in  order  to  emphasize  the  design  of  God's  Spirit 


♦  [Dr.  Ifodfre,  after  nuotini?  from  Ca'vin,  mnkes  the  fol- 
lowinc  oxrcllcnt  n-marks  on  irAijpoi^opijAe  t  c  :  "It  is  n 
very  RTPiit  error  for  men  to  suppose  that  to  doubt  is  un 
evidence  of  humility.  On  the  contrary,  to  iloulit  (Joil's 
promise,  or  Jlis  Inye,  is  to  dir^honor  Him,  hecnune  it  is  to 
question  Hi*  word.  Multitudes  refuse  ti  accept  His  t?race, 
because  they  do  not  rei;nrd  th^'mselves  as  worthy,  as  thouirh 
their  worthitiesH  were  the  f^'ound  on  which  tfiiit  uraco  Is 
ottered.  The  tliinif  to  be  believed,  is,  th:it  Clod  accepts  the 
unworthy  ;  that,  for  Christ's  Hake,  He  justifieH  the  unjust. 
Many  find  It  far  harder  to  believe  that  God  ran  love  them, 
notwithstandiiier  their  sinful riewi,  than  the  hundred-yenrs- 
old  jmrrlai-eh  did  to  believe  that  he  should  be  tin'  father  of 
many  nationH.  ('on6denc<f  in  Ood's  word,  n  full  persUiu<ion 
that  lie  ran  do  what  seems  to  us  im|><issil)le,  is  na  necessiiry 
in  the  one  ease  as  in  the  other.  The  sinner  honors  (lod,  in 
tmstini;  His  ifraee,  as  much  as  Abraham  did,  in  trusting 
Uis  power."—!',  S.] 


at  the  time  of  composition ;  while  tlie  more  usual 
perf,  yiyfiamai,,  ?<  m  wr/^/fw,  is  used  in  quota, 
tions  of  Scripture  passages  as  we  now  find  them,  and 
as  valid  for  present  purposes.    Comp.  Philipi)i. — P.  S.] 

Ver.  24.  But  for  us  also,  to  whom  it  [viz., 
the  faith  in  (!od,  or  Christ,  to  7ii.tjTn'n.v  tiZ  OkZ] 
shall  be  reckoned  [supply  ;  for  righteousness,  jti; 
()i.xaio(Ti'r/;i',  as  ver.  22].  The  fii/./.n,  refers  to 
the  divine  determination  of  Christianity  as  right- 
eousness by  faith  in  all  time  to  come  ;  but,  contrary 
to  Fritzsche,  it  does  not  refer  to  justification  at  tlie 
general  judgment. 

If  v^e  believe  on  him  who  raised  up  Jesus 
our  Lord  from  the  dead,  [rati;  TZKirt  i' ova  i,p 
"specifies  the  ij/'ci^;:  and  the  belief  is  not  a  mere 
historical,  but  a  Jidueial  belief;"  Alford. — P.  S.] 
Christian  faith  is  specifically  a  faith  in  the  risen 
Christ,  or  also  in  the  living  God  of  resurrection  who 
raised  Him  from  the  dead.  It  is  in  this  its  central 
point  that  tlie  finished  faith  of  the  New  Testament 
is  perfectly  in  harmony  with  the  central  point  of 
Abraham's  faith.  The  germ  and  fruit  of  this  faith 
are  identical  in  substance,  though  they  difler  very 
much  in  form  and  development.  The  nearest  formal 
analogy  to  Abraham's  faith  is  the  birth  of  Christ 
from  the  Virgin.  The  highest  exhibition  of  omnipo- 
tence was  at  the  same  time  the  highest  exhibition 
of  grace,  [Christ's  resurrection  was  a  triumph  of 
God's  almighty  power,  similar,  though  much  higlier, 
than  the  generation  of  Isaac  from  the  dead  body  of 
Abraham ;  by  faith  in  the  miracle  of  the  resurrec- 
tion, the  resurrection  is  spiritually  repeated  in  us,  as 
we  become  new  creatures  in  Christ,  and  walk  with 
Him  in  newness  of  life ;  comp.  vi.  3  ;  Eph.  i,  19, 
20;  Col.  iii.  1.— P.  S.] 

Ver.  25.  Who  w^as  delivered  up,  &c.  ["  In 
these  words  the  Ai)()stle  introduces  the  great  subject 
of  chaps.  v,-viii..  Death,  as  connected  with  Sin,  and 
Life  as  connected  with  liighleousnetis  ;  "  Alford  and 
Forbes.  "  Ver.  25  is  a  comprehensive  statement  of 
the  gospel ; "  Hodge,  The  (Vtct  means  in  both 
clauses,  on  account  of,  for  the  reason  of,  but  with 
this  dirterence,  that  it  is  retrospective  hi  the  fii-st, 
prospective  in  the  second:  lUa  ra  na^tanrM- 
ficna,  because  we  had  sinned,  or,  in  order  to  se- 
cure the  remission  of  our  transgressions;  cUa  t»/v 
i\i.xaii»fTi.v,  not  because  we  had  been,  but  that  we 
might  be  justified.*  To  the  first  (Virt  we  must  sup. 
ply  :  for  the  atonement,  or,  for  the  destruction  of  j 
to  the  second  :  for  the  procurement  of.  De  Wette 
zur  BiissuHfi — ziir  Bextaii'iunci.  naiit  rV  d  f)  tj ,  a  fre- 
quent designation  of  the  self-surrender  of  Christ  to 
death;  I.sa.  liii.  12;  Rom.  viii.  32;  Gal.  ii.  20; 
Eph.  V.  25  :  nnijiitinxtv  inrTin'  vntii  tj/uTiv.  rfi.- 
xaimiTti;,  from  (Uxaioet,  (only  here  and  v.  18,  in 
opposition  to  xrtrax^u/ia,)  Justification,  i.  e.,  the 
eHeetive  declaratory  act  of  putting  a  man  right  with 
the  law,  or  into  the  status  of  (itxatofferi/,  righteous- 
ness. — P,  S.l  The  antithesis  in  ver.  25  [nuQf- 
d  6  f)  t]  did  T  n  71  ct  (>  n  71  T  oi  /i  m  n  fj  ii  iTi  r  ^ 
>iY^l!^1  '^'"  T »;  r  di  x  ft  i  oiffi  i'  iifii'tv,  tlie  neg- 
ative (iifKjiii  and  the  positive  (U/rtioifXi,]  is  difticult. 
Tholuek  (p.  194]  :  "This  separation,  as  also  that  in 
chap.  X.  10,  is  generally  tiiken  as  a  rhetorical  /(»^mt« 


♦  [Rishop  Horsley,  as  quot<-d  by  Alford  and  Vi'ords- 
worth,  tjike.i  iia,  in  the  second  clause,  in  the  sense  that 
(  hrlst  was  raised  because  our  justification  had  ulnttily  bren 
r^fcifil  by  the  sacrifice  of  His  death.  Itut  thi-i  Is  incon* 
Bistcnt  with  1  Cor.  xv.  17.  Newman  explains  :  because  on? 
justification  is  bv  the  Second  Comforter,  whom  the  resui* 
rection  brouglit  down  from  heaven."— P.  8.1 


CHAPTER   IV.    1-25. 


155 


ftocif  separating  that  which  is  in  substance  indivisi- 
ble. Yet,  in  the  contemplation  of  the  Apostle,  the 
«)tj{atwo"K  certainly  is  more  nearly  related  to  the 
resurrection  of  Christ  than  to  His  death,  as  is  shown 
by  the  climax  of  Rom.  viii.  34,  and  by  the  ttoA/w 
/nct/./.ov  of  chap.  V.  10 ;  comp.  2  Cor.  xiii.  4."  But 
tlie  passages  cited  do  not  contain  the  same  antithe- 
sis. According  to  Roman  Catholic  interpretation, 
c)<.y.aiw<Ti.(,-  refers  to  sanctification  (Thomas  Aqui- 
nas, and  others).  The  old  Protestant  explanation, 
on  the  contrary,  referred  the  first  clause  to  the  de- 
Btructiou  of  sin,  and  the  second  to  tlie  ratification 
of  the  atonement  secured  thereby  (Calvin).  Meyer 
refers  the  first  part  to  the  expiation  of  our  sins,  and 
the  second  to  our  justification ;  with  reference  to 
1  Cor.  XV.  lY.  Tholuck  distinguishes  between  the 
negative  and  positive  abolition  of  guilt.  In  the  lat- 
ter— the  di/.uidxjui; — Christ's  intercession  is  also  in- 
cluded ;  for  the  Lutheran  theology  (Quenstedt)  de- 
notes the  applicatio  acquisitm  xalutis  as  the  purpose 
of  the  intercessio  [the  Reformed  theology :  patro- 
ciniwn  perpetuum  coram  Fatre  adversux  Satance 
cfiminationt'S~\.  Melanchthon  also  remarks  in  this 
sense :  "  Qnamquam  enini  pr.«:cessit  mentum,  ta- 
men  ita  ordhialum  fuit  ab  iiiitio,  ut  tunc  ngnalis 
APPLicARETUE,  cum  fide  acciperent."  We  must  bear 
in  mind,  however,  that  the  antithesis  is  not :  Christ's 
death  and  resurrection,  but  the  deliverance  of  Christ 
for  our  offences^  and  his  resurrection  on  God''s 
part.  The  principal  weight  of  the  antithesis  there- 
fore rests  upon  the  Divine  deed  of  Christ's  resurrec- 
tion ;  with  which  justifying  faith  was  first  called  into 
living  existence.  This  justifying  faith  is  analogous 
to  Abraham's  faith  in  the  God  of  miracles,  who  calls 
new  life  into  being.  To  this,  the  deliverance  of 
Christ  to  death  for  otir  sins  (transgressions,  falls, 
na.()amd}i.i,ara)  forms  a  complete  antithesis; 
and  to  this  corresponds,  in  the  single  work  of  re- 
demption, the  antithesis :  the  abolishment  of  our 
guilt,  and  tlie  imputation  of  His  righteousness.  Yet, 
in  reality,  these  two  cannot  be  separated  from  each 
other,  and  tlie  (ii/.aio)ai-<;  here  means  the  general 
and  potential  justification  wliich  is  embraced  in  the 
atonement  itself,  and  which,  in  individual  justifica- 
tion by  faith,  is  appropriated  by  individuals  only  by 
virtue  of  its  eternal  operation  through  the  intercessio, 
the  gospel,  and  the  spirit  of  Christ.  [See  Doctrinal 
and  Ethical,  No.  10.— P.  S.] 


DOCTELN-AL   AND   ETHICAL. 

1.  As  Paul  has  proved  from  the  Old  Testament 
the  truth  of  the  New  Testament,  and  especially  the 
doctrine  of  righteousness  by  faith,  so  can  the  evan- 
gelical Church  confirm  the  truth  of  its  confession  by 
the  best  testimonies  of  the  best  fathers  of  the  Catho- 
lic Church.  The  evanrfelical  confession  of  sin  and 
grace  is  defended  against  the  Romanists  by  Augus- 
tine, and  others,  in  the  same  way  that  Abraham 
defended  the  believing  Gentiles  against  the  Jews. 
[On  Augustine's  doctrine  of  sin  and  grace,  comp. 
my  Church  Hidory,  vol.  iii.  pp.  783-865.  Augus- 
tine dift'ers  in  form  from  the  Protestant  doctrine  of 
justification,  since  he  confounded  the  term  with 
sanctification  ;  but  he  agrees  with  it  in  S|iirit,  inas- 
much as  he  derived  the  new  life  of  the  believer  ex- 
clusively from  the  free  grace  of  God  in  Clirist,  and 
left  no  room  for  human  boasting.  The  same  may 
be  said  of  Anselm,  St.  Bernard,  and  the  forerunners 
of  the  Reformation. — P.  S.] 


2.  Here,  as  in  the  Epistle  to  the  Galatians,  and 
especially  in  chap,  iii.,  the  Apostle  characterizes  the 
Old  Testamtnt  according  to  its  real  fundamental 
thought — the  promise  of  Ood,  which  was  revealed 
in  Abraham^s  faith,  and  perfectly  fulfilled  in  the 
New  Testament  covenant  of  faith.  Accordingly, 
the  Mosaic  legislation  is  only  a  more  definite  Old 
Testament  signature ;  but,  as  a  stage  of  develop- 
ment, it  is  subordinate  to  Abraham's  faith  (see  chap. 
V.  20  ;  Gal.  iii.  17). 

Some  errors  of  the  present  day  concerning  the 
Old  Testament  have  in  many  ways  obscured  its  true 
relation  by  the  following  declarations :  (1.)  "  The 
Old  Testament  is  essentially  Mosaism."  In  this  way 
the  patriarchal  system  in  the  past,  and  the  prophetic 
system  in  the  future,  are  abolished.  (2.)  "  Mosa- 
ism is  legal  and  statutory  stationariness."  But,  on 
the  contrary,  the  Old  Testament  is  a  continuous  and 
living  development.  (3.)  "  This  stationariness  ia 
theocratical  despotism ;  the  Jew  is  absolutely  en- 
slaved imder  the  law."  This  is  contradicted  by 
Moses'  account  of  the  repeated  federal  dealings  be- 
tween Jehovah  and  His  people,  by  the  introduction 
to  the  Decalogue,  as  well  as  by  the  whole  spirit  ot 
the  Old  Testament.  It  is  particularly  contradicted 
by  the  fact  that  Jehovah  abandons  the  people  to 
their  apostasy,  in  order  to  visit  them  in  justice. 

3.  The  signification  of  Abraham  for  the  doctrine 
of  justification  by  faith  is  supplemented  by  Bavid^s 
example  and  testimony.  Abraham  was  justified  by 
faith,  notwithstanding  his  many  good  works  ;  David 
was  likewise  justified  by  faith,  notwithstanding  his 
great  offence.  The  righteousness  of  faith  is  there- 
fore thus  defined  :  (1.)  It  does  not  presuppose  any 
good  works ;  but,  (2.)  It  presupposes  a  know^ledge 
of  sin.  On  the  signification  of  the  passage,  vers. 
3-5,  for  justification  by  faith,  see  Tholuck,  p.  175. 

4.  As  Abraham  became  the  natural  father  of 
many  nations,  so  did  he  become  the  spiritual  father 
of  the  believing  people  of  all  nations,  both  Jews 
and  Gentiles. 

5.  The  designation  of  circumcision  as  a  seal  of 
the  righteousness  of  faith,  is  important  for  the  doc- 
trine of  the  sacraments.     See  the  JSxeg.  Azotes. 

6.  The  great  promise  of  faith  (ver.  13).  Its  de- 
velopment (chap.  viii.  ;  Isa.  Ixv.,  Ixvi. ;  Rev.  xx.- 
xxii.).  There  is  a  grand  view  in  the  reasoning  of 
ver.  14.  The  men  who  are  iy.  r6/ior,  of  the  law, 
cannot  be  the  heirs  of  the  world  :  (1.)  Because  they 
are  particularists.  But  also,  (2.)  Because  the  legal, 
human  o^y//,  provokes  the  historical,  divine  wrath 
— the  destruction  of  the  world.  Thus  did  legalistic 
fanaticism  bring  on  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem, 
the  fall  of  Byzantium,  the  exhaustion  of  Germany 
by  the  Thirty  Years'  War,  the  disorders  in  Spain, 
Italy,   Poland,   and   other    countries  (see   Matt.   v. 

7.  The  identity  of  the  faith  of  Abraham  vAth 
that  of  Paul.  We  must  define:  (1.)  Its  object; 
(2.)  Its  subject ;  (3.)  Its  operations.  The  differ- 
ence, on  the  contrary,  must  be  determined  accord- 
ing to  the  developing  forms  of  the  revelation  of  sal- 
vation, and  in  such  a  way  that  the  initial  point  will 
appear  in  the  faith  of  Abraham,  and  the  concluding 
or  completing  point  shall  appear  in  the  saving  faith 
of  the  New  Testament.  But  it  is  a  mistake  to  sup- 
pose that  faith  can  be  the  same  thing  in  a  subjective 
view,  and  another  in  an  objective.  Tlie  objective 
and  subjective  relations  will  always  thoroughly  cor- 
respond  to  each  other  here  ;  and  the  openitions  of 
faith  will  be  shaped  in  accordance  with  them.     Foi 


156 


THE    EPISTLE    OF   PAUL   TO    THE   ROMANS. 


historical  inforniiition  on  the  question  under  con- 
Bideriitiou,  see  Tlioluek,  p.  173. 

8.  On  the  nature  of  savinrf  faith,  sec  tiie  JExiy. 
No'es  on  ver.  19.  Litcewise,  on  the  signification  of 
the  re.suri'cction  for  faith,  those  on  ver.  25. 

9.  The  iini>ort:iiice  of  the  sentiment,  "  He  gave 
God  tlie  glory."     See  the  h'j-cff.  ^Vo/ts  on  ver.  20. 

[In.  On  ver.  2.5.  Tliis  important  and  comjjre- 
hensive  pa-^sage  clearly  sliows  tlie  inseiiambte  con- 
nedion  between  ChrisC^  death  and  Cnrii^Cs  resur- 
rec'hn,  as  also  the  connection  between  tlie  reinis- 
tion  of  sins  and  jiintijicatioii  to  a  new  life  (comp. 
T.  10 ;  vi.  4).  IJy  His  atoning  death  Clirist  lias 
abolirilied  the  guilt  of  sin  (iii.  25),  and  secured  our 
pardon  and  peace  ;  and  iience  it  is  generally  repre- 
sented ;is  the  ground  of  our  justification  ((Vi/tce/iDixti;) 
— i.  <".,  the  non-imputation  of  sin,  and  tlie  imputa- 
tion of  Clirist's  merits ;  comp.  iii.  24,  25 ;  v.  9  ; 
2  Cor.  V.  21  ;  Eph.  i.  7  ;  1  Jolin  i.  7.  But,  without 
the  resurrection,  tlie  death  of  Christ  would  he  of  no 
avail,  and  His  grave  would  be  the  grave  of  all  our 
hopes,  as  the  Apostle  clearly  says,  1  Cor.  xv.  17. 
A  gospel  of  a  ilead  Saviour  would  be  a  miseraljle 
failure  atid  delusion.  The  resurrection  is  the  vic- 
tory of  righteousness  and  life  over  sin  and  death. 
It  is  by  the  fact  of  the  resurrection  that  Christ's 
deatli  was  shown  to  be  the  death  of  tlie  innocent 
and  righteous  One  for  foreign  guilt,  and  that  it  vvas 
accepted  by  God  as  a  full  satisfaction  for  the  sins  of 
the  world.  If  man  had  not  sinned,  Christ  would 
not  have  died  ;  if  Clirist  had  sinned,  He  would  not 
have  been  raised  again.  In  the  next  place,  as  the 
resurrection  is  the  actual  triumph  of  Christ,  so  it  is 
also  the  necessary  condition  of  the  appropriation 
of  the  benefits  of  His  death.  It  is  only  the  risen 
Saviour  who  could  plead  our  cause  at  the  mercy- 
seat,  and  send  the  Holy  Spirit  to  reveal  Him,  and  to 
apply  the  benefits  of  the  atonement  to  believers. 
Just  as  little  as  ilie  death  and  the  resurrection,  can 
we  S('[)arate  the  cffi'cta  of  both — the  remission  of 
sins  and  the  new  life  of  Christ.  The  sinner  cannot 
be  buried  with  Clirist,  without  rising  with  Him  as  a 
new  creature ;  the  death  of  the  old  Adam  is  the 
birth  of  the  new,  and  the  life  of  the  new  presup- 
poses the  death  of  the  old. — P.  S.] 


IIOMILETlCAIi  AND  PUACTICAL. 

Vers.  1-8.  Abraham  and  David  as  examples  of 
the  righteousness  of  faith  :  1.  Abraliani ;  2.  David. 
— What  hath  father  Abraham  found  ?  1.  No  re- 
ward by  works ;  but,  2.  Righteousness  by  faith 
(vers.  1-5). — .Abraham  not  only  the  natural,  but 
also  the  spiritual  father  of  his  people  (vers.  1-5). — 
Glory  before  God  is  better  than  the  glory  of  works 
(ver.  2). — If  the  reward  is  reckoned  of  debt,  man 
loses  ;  but  if  it  is  reckoned  of  grace,  he  gains  (vers. 
4,  5). — How  blessed  is  the  man  to  whom  God  ini- 
puteth  not  sin,  but  righteousness  !  (vers.  6-8). — 
Two  beatitudes  from  tlie  moutli  of  David  (vers.  0-8). 

Vers.  9-12.  Why  must  even  the  Jews  acknowl- 
edge the  Gentiles'  righteousness  of  faith  V  An- 
swer :  Hecause,  1.  Faitli  was  not  counted  to  Abra- 
ham for  righteousness  while  in  circumcision  ;  but, 
2.  His  faith  had  already  been  counted  to  him  for 
righteousness. — .\s  the  sign  of  circumcision  wa.1  to 
the  Jews  a  seal  of  the  righteousness  of  faith,  so  are 
the  signs  of  i{a|)tisni  and  of  the  Lord's  Siijiper  seals 
to  Christians  of  tin;  righteousness  of  faith. — .Vlu'a- 
hani,  a  father  of  all  believers  :    1.  From  among  the 


Gentiles;  2.  From  among  the  Jews  (vers.  11,  12).— 
Walking  in  the  footsteps  of  Abraham  (ver.  12).— • 
The  promise  to  Abraham  of  the  inheritance  of  tha 
world  is,  first,  obscure,  as  a  germ-like  word.  But, 
second,  it  is  of  infinitely  rich  meaning;  for,  in  addi- 
tion to  the  redemption  of  the  world,  it  also  em- 
braces the  renewal  of  the  world  and  the  heavenly 
inheritance. — To  what  extent  does  the  law  work 
wrath?  (ver.  15). — It  is  only  by  faith  that  the  prom 
ise  holds  good  lor  all  (ver.  l(j). 

Vers.  18-22.  The  strength  of  Abraham's  faith. 
It  is  shown :  1.  In  his  believing  in  hope,  where 
there  was  nothing  to  hope ;  2.  In  holding  fast  to 
this  hope  against  external  evidence  ;  3.  He  did  not 
doubt,  but  trusted  unconditionally  in  the  words  of 
promise. — Believing  in  lioiic,  when  there  is  nothing 
to  hope  (ver.  18). — We  must  not  grow  weak  in 
faith,  even  if  it  be  long  before  our  hopes  are  real- 
ized (ver.  19). — The  worst  doubt  is  doubting  the 
promises  of  God  (ver.  20). — How  precious  it  is  to 
know  to  a  perfect  certainty  that  God  can  perform 
what  He  has  promised  (ver.  21). 

Vers.  23-25.  As  Abraham  believed  that  life 
would  come  from  death,  so  do  we  believe  in  the 
same  miracle :  1.  Because  God  has  given  us  a 
pledge  in  the  resurrection  of  Christ ;  2.  Because 
this  (iod  is  a  living  and  true  God,  who  will  keep  His 
promises  for  ever. — Our  faith  in  the  Lord  Jesua 
Christ  is  a  faith  in  the  Redeemer,  who  :  1.  Was  de- 
livered for  our  offences  ;  and,  2.  Was  raised  for  our 
justification  (vers.  24,  25). 

Lutiikk:  Faith  fulfils  all  laws;  but  works  can- 
not fulfil  a  tittle  of  tlie  law  (James  ii.  10).  A  pas- 
sage from  the  preface  to  the  Epistle  to  the  Romans 
is  in  place  here  :  "  Faith  is  not  the  human  delusion 
and  dream  which  some  mistake  for  faith.  .  .  .  But 
faith  is  a  Divine  work  in  us,  which  changes  us.  and 
gives  us  the  new  birth  from  God  (John  1.  \Z) ; 
which  slays  the  old  Adam,  and  makes  us  altogether 
diH'crent  men  in  heart,  spirit,  feeling,  and  strength  ; 
and  which  brings  with  it  the  Holy  Spirit.  Oh,  faith 
is  a  living,  creative,  active  power,  which  of  neces- 
sity is  incessantly  doing  good  !  It  also  does  not  iisk 
whether  there  arc  good  works  to  perform  ;  but,  be- 
fore the  question  is  asked,  it  has  already  done  thein, 
and  is  continually  doing  them,"  &c. — He  who  be- 
lieves God,  will  give  Him  the  glory,  that  He  is  truth- 
ful, omnipotent,  wise,  and  good.  Therefore  faith 
fulfils  the  first  three  (four)  commandments,  and  justi- 
fies  man  before  God.  It  is,  then,  the  true  worship 
of  God  (chap.  iv.  20). 

Staukk  :  The  Holy  Scriptures  must  not  he  read 
superficially,  but  with  deliberation,  and  with  careful 
reference  to  their  order  and  chronology  (clui]).  iv. 
10). — The  holy  sacraments  assure  believers  of  God's 
grace,  and  forgiveness  of  sins  and  eternal  .salvation 
(chap.  iv.  11). — It  is  vain  to  boast  of  pious  ancestry, 
if  you  do  not  walk  in  the  footsteps  of  their  faith 
(chap.  iv.  12). — God  has  His  special  gracious  gifts 
and  reward.s,  which  He  communicates  to  one  of  Mis 
believers  instead  of  another  (chap.  iv.  17). — We 
should  rely  on  and  believe  in  God's  W(U'd,  more  than 
in  all  the  arguments  in  the  world.  It  should  be 
enough  for  us  to  know,  "Thus  .saitli  the  Lord" 
(chap.  iv.  18). — The  heart  can  be  established  by  no 
other  means  than  by  grace.  But  there  can  be  no 
grace  in  the  heart  except  l>y  faith,  which  brings  in 
Christ,  the  source  of  all  grace  (chap.  iv.  21).  —  Blessed 
are  they  who  only  believe,  though  they  see  not  (ehap. 
iv.  22). — The  Epistle  to  the  Romans  w:us  also  written 
for  us,  and  it  has  been  preserved  until  our  day,  and 


CHAPTER  IV.    1-25. 


151 


given  to  us  as  a  precious  treasure  by  Divine  Provi- 
dence.— If  Christ  lias  been  raised  from  tlie  dead  by 
tlie  glory  of  the  Father,  His  death  is  truly  a  suffi- 
cient ofl'ering  and  ruusom  for  our  sins  (cliap.  iv.  25). 
— Heoinger  :  Away  with  the  leaven  of  Pharisaic 
delusion,  that  our  own  righteousness  must  build  a 
ladder  to  heaven  !  God  will  glorify  His  compassion 
to  publicans  and  sinners,  but  not  to  proud  saints. — 
Faith  is  in  its  highest  degree,  strength,  and  adorn- 
ment, wlien  it  beholds  nothing  but  heaven  and 
water,  God  and  despair,  and  yet  believes  that  all 
will  be  well,  glorious,  and  happy  (chap.  iv.  18). 

QuESNEL :  The  more  faith  in  a  soul,  the  less 
pride  there  is  in  it  (chap.  iii.  27). — Ye  magistrates, 
fathers,  and  mothers,  if  you  set  an  example  of  faith, 
fear  of  God,  love,  righteousness,  and  other  virtues, 
before  those  committed  to  you,  you  will  truly  be- 
come their  fatiiers,  just  as  Abraham  became  the 
father  of  the  faithful  by  his  faith  (chap.  iv.  11). — He 
who  malves  a  parade  of  himself,  may  easily  despair 
afterwards  because  of  his  insufficiency  in  every  re- 
spect ;  but  he  who  trusts  in  the  omnipotent  God, 
gets  strength  and  consolation  from  his  own  nothing- 
ness (chap.  iv.  18). — Cramer  :  The  sacraments  do 
not  help  for  the  work's  sake ;  otherwise  Abraham 
would  have  been  iunnediately  justified  and  saved  on 
account  of  circumcision  (chap.  iv.  10). — All  prom- 
ises spring  from  the  fountain  of  eternal  grace  (chap. 
iv.  13). — Nova  Bibl.  Tub. :  The  laws  of  nature  are 
set  by  God  for  nature,  but  they  are  not  binding  on 
God  Himself.  Faitli  looks  beyond  them  (chap.  iv. 
19). — Lange  :  As  sin,  because  of  its  magnitude  and 
multiplicity,  is  denoted  by  different  words,  so  is  jus- 
tification, as  something  great  and  important,  ex- 
plained by  three  words :  to  forgive,  to  cover,  and 
not  to  impute  (chap.  iv.  V). — The  creation  and  resur- 
rection of  the  dead  are  those  great  works  of  God 
which  confirm  and  explain  each  other.  Therefore 
he  who  believes  in  creation  will  find  it  easy  to 
believe  in  the  resurrection  of  the  dead  (chap.  iv.  17). 

Ben-gel  :  The  divine  promise  is  always  the  best 
support  of  faith  and  confidence  (ver.  20). — Why  do 
we  believe  in  God  ?  Because  He  has  raised  Christ 
(ver.  25). 

Gerlach  :  Abraham  only  received  the  promise 
that  his  seed  should  possess  the  land  of  Canaan  ; 
but  beyond  the  earthly,  there  lies  the  heavenly 
Canaan — the  renewed  world — which  he  and  his  real 
children,  the  believers,  shall  possess  in  Christ,  his 
seed.  The  earthly  Canaan  was  the  propiietic  type 
of  this  heavenly  Canaan  ;  it  was  the  external  shell 
which  enclosed  the  kernel — the  bud  which  bore  and 
enclosed  the  still  tender  flower  (chap.  iv.  13). — By 
the  clearer  knowledge  of  the  commandment  sin  be- 
comes more  sinful,  destruction  appears  more  promi- 
nently, lust  is  not  subdued  but  becomes  more  vio- 
lently inflamed ;  therefore  transgression  increases 
(chap.  iv.  15). — If  Abraham's  clear  eye  of  faith 
could  penetrate  the  veil  with  so  much  certainty  of 
God's  majesty,  how  powerfully  should  we — to  whom 
God  has  spoken  by  His  own  Son — be  kindled  by  this 
love  to  raise  our  idle  hands  and  to  strengthen  our 
weary  knees  (chap.  iv.  23). 

Lisco  :  Abraham's  faith  is  an  example  worthy  of 
our  imitation  by  faith  in  Christ  (chap.  iv.  18-25). — 
The  resurrection  of  Jesus  was  a  testimony  and  proof 
of  what  His  death  has  accomplished  for  us  (for,  with- 
out the  resurrection,  He  could  not  have  been  con- 
sidered the  Messiah,  and  IHis  death  could  not  have 
been  deemed  a  propitiatory  sacrifice  for  the  blotting 
out  of  our  sins),  Isa.  liii.  10  ff. ;  chap.  iv.  26. 


Heubner  :  The  appeal  to  Abraham's  example  is 

1.  Right  in  itself;  2.  Was  important  for  the  Jewg 
(chap.  iv.  1-6). — Why  docs  Paul  cite  Abraham's 
circumcision,  and  not  rather  the  ofll-ring  of  Isaac? 
Answer :  1.  Circumcision  was  tiie  real  sign  which 
Abraham  received  by  the  command  of  God  Himself; 

2.  It  was  that  which  all  the  Jews,  equally  with 
Aliraham,  bore  in  their  own  person,  and  on  which 
they  founded  their  likeness  to  Abraham  and  their 
glory  (chap.  iv.  1). — David's  feeling  in  the  Psalms  is 
humble,  and  was  exalted  only  by  grace. — The  uni- 
versal  confession  of  God's  children  is,  We  are  saved 
by  grace  (chap.  iv.  6-8). — In  the  historical  statement 
of  ver.  10  there  is  an  application  to  us ;  namely,  that 
justification  by  faith  must  precede  all  good  works, 
because  no  good  wxirk  is  possible  without  the  attain-  ■ 
ment  of  grace. — The  preaching  of  the  law  alone 
with  the  threatened  penalty  repels  our  heart  from 
God ;  and  when  carried  to  excess,  it  makes  man 
angry  with  God,  because  he  is  driven  to  despair 
(chap.  iv.  15). — Yea,  if  every  thing  were  brought  to 
us  cmte  oculos  pedesque,  there  would  be  no  room  for 
faith  (chap,  iv.  18). — Abraham  is  an  example  of  a 
holy  paternal  blessing,  of  holy  paternal  hopes,  and 
the  founder  of  the  most  blessed  family  among  men 
(chap.  iv.  18). 

Draseke  :  Easter ;  the  Amen  of  God,  the  Halle- 
lujah  of  men. — Our  faith  must  be  preserved,  and 
grow  amid  temptations  (chap.  iv.  20). — The  object 
of  his  faith  is  just  as  certain  to  the  believer,  as  a 
demonstration  is  to  the  mathematician  (chap.  iv.  21, 
22). — All  the  history  of  the  Old  Testament  is  appli- 
cable to  us.  The  circumstances  are  different,  but 
there  are  the  same  conflicts,  and  it  is  internally  and 
fundamentally  the  same  faith  which  is  engaged  in 
the  struggle  (chap.  iv.  23,  24). — Similarity  of  the 
Christian's  faith  to  that  of  Abraham. 

Besser  :  Luther  calls  ver.  25  a  little  covenant  in 
which  all  Christianity  is  comprehended. 

J.  P.  Lange  :  Abraham,  the  original,  but  ever-new 
witness  of  faith :  1.  As  witness  of  the  living  God 
of  revelation  and  miracle ;  2.  As  witness  of  the 
perfect  confidence  and  divine  strength  of  a  believing 
reliance  07i  Gocfn  word  ;  3.  As  witness  to  the  bless- 
ed operation  of  faith — righteousness  through  grace. 
— The  life  of  faith  not  dependent :  1.  On  natural 
ancestry ;  2.  On  works  of  the  law  ;  3.  On  visible 
natural  appearances. — Justification  and  sealing. — All 
faith,  in  its  inmost  nature,  is  similar  to  that  of  Abra- 
ham :  1.  As  faith  before  God  in  His  word ;  2.  As 
faith  in  miracles ;  3.  As  faith  in  the  renewal  of 
youth  ;  4.  As  faith  in  the  rejuvenation  of  life  from 
righteousness  as  the  root. — The  glorious  operation 
of  Christ's  resurrection. 

[Bdrkitt  :  We  must  bring  credentials  from  our 
sanctification  to  bear  witness  to  the  truth  of  our 
justification. — On  the  sacraments  in  general,  and 
circumcision  in  particulur.  There  is  a  fourfold 
word  requisite  to  a  sacrament — a  word  of  institu- 
tion, command,  promise,  and  blessing.  The  ele- 
ments are  ciphers  ;  it  is  the  institution  that  makes 
them  figures.  Circumcision  was  a  sign  :  1.  Repre- 
sentative of  Abraham's  faith  ;  2.  Demonstrative  of 
original  sin ;  3.  Discriminating  and  distinguishing 
of  the  true  church  ;  4.  Initiating  for  admission  to 
the  commonwealth  of  Israel ;  and  5.  Prefigurative 
of  baptism. — On  faith.  It  has  a  threefold  excel- 
lency :  1.  Assenting  to  the  truths  of  God,  though 
never  so  improbable ;  2.  Putting  men  on  duties 
though  seemingly  unreasonable  ;  and  3.  Enabhng  tc 
endure  sufferings,  be  they  never  so  afflictive. — DoD' 


158 


THE   EPISTLE   OF   PAUL   TO   THE   ROifANS. 


DRiDOR :  We  are  saved  by  a  pchcme  that  allows  us 
not  to  mention  any  works  of  our  own,  as  if  we  had 
whereof  to  glory  before  God,  but  teaclies  us  to 
ascribe  our  salvation  to  believing  on  Him  who  jiisti- 
fieth  the  ungoilly.  lie  who  has  promised,  is  able  to 
perform  ;  for  with  Ilim  all  tilings  are  possible.  Al- 
ready He  liatii  done  for  us  that  for  whieh  we  had 
Mueh  less  reason  to  expect,  than  we  now  have  to 
hope  for  any  thing  tliat  remains.  He  delivered  His 
own  Son  Jesus  tor  our  offenecs. — Hknry  :  It  is  the 
holy  wisdom  and  policy  of  faith  to  fasten  jiarticular- 
ly  on  that  in  God  whieh  is  accommodated  to  the 
difticulties  wherewith  it  is  to  wrestle,  and  will  most 
ett(!ctu,illy  answer  the  objections.  It  is  faith  indeed 
to  build  upon  the  all-sutticiency  of  God  for  the 
accomplishment  of  that  which  is  impossible  to 
any  thing  but  that  all-sufficiency. — Ci.akke  :  Ver. 
18.  The  faith  of  Abraham  bore  an  exact  correspon- 
dence to  the  power  and  never-failing  faithfulness  of 
God. 

Hodgf:  1.  The  renunciation  of  a  legal  self-righte- 
ou.s  .«pirit  is  the  first  rc(iuisite  of  the  gospel ;  2.  The 
more  intimately  we  are  actiuainted  with  our  own 
heart.i,  and  with  the  character  of  God,  the  more 
ready  shall  we  l)e  to  renounce  our  own  righteousness, 
ami  to  trust  in  His  mercy  ;  3.  Only  those  are  happy 
and  secure  wlio,  under  a  sense  of  helplessness, 
ca^t  themselves  on  the  mercy  of  God  ;    4.  A  means 


I  of  grace  should  never  be  a  ground  of  dependence ; 
5.  Tliere  is  no  hope  for  those  who  take  refuge  in  a 

'  law,  and  forsake  God's  mercy ;  6.  All  things  ara 
ours,  if  we  are  Christ's;  7.  The  way  to  get  your 
faith  strengthened,  is,  not  to  consider  the  difficulties 
in  the  way  of  the  thing  promised,  but  the  charaetei 
and  resources  of  (Jod  who  has  made  the  promise  ; 
8.  It  is  as  possible  for  faith  to  l)e  strong  when  the 
thing  promised  is  most  improbable,  as  when  it  is 

I  probable  ;  9.  Unbelief  is  a  very  great  sin,  as  it 
implies  a  doubt  of  the  veracity  and  power  of  God  ; 
10.  The  two  great  truths  of  the  gospel  are,  that 
Christ  died  as  a  sacrifice  for  our  sins,  and  that  He 
rose  again  for  our  justification  ;  11.  The  denial  of 
the  propitiatory  death  of  Christ,  or  of  His  resurrec- 
tion from  the  dead,  is  a  denial  of  the  gospel.— 
Barnes  :  On  tlie  resurrectioji  of  Christ  (ver,  26). 
If  it  be  asked  how  it  contributes  to  our  acceptance 
with  God,  we  may  answer ;  1.  It  rendered  Christ's 
work  compliie  ;  2.  It  was  a  proof  that  His  work  was 
accepted  by  the  Father  ;  3.  It  is  the  mainspring  of 
all  our  hopes,  and  of  all  our  eflbrts  to  be  saved. 
There  is  no  higher  motive  that  can  be  presented  to 
induce  man  to  seek  salvation,  than  the  fact  that  he 
may  be  raised  up  from  death  and  the  grave,  and 
made  immortal.  There  is  no  satisfactory  proof  that 
man  can  be  thus  raised  up,  but  by  the  resurrection 
of  Jesus  Christ. — J.  F.  H.] 


Ninth  SKcrroN. — Tlic  fruit  of  justification  :  Peace  vith  God,  and  the  dn<eIopnieni  of  the  new  life  info  the 
experience  of  Vhridian  hoi>e.  The  new  worship  of  Christians :  They  hctve  the  free  access  to  gract 
into  the  Holi/  of  holies.  Therefore  they  rejoice  in  the  hope  of  the  glory  of  God,  and  of  the  revelation 
of  the  real  Shekinah  of  God  in  the  real  Holy  of  holies.  They  even  glory  in  tribulation  also,  by  which 
this  hope  is  consummated.  The  love  of  God  in  Christ  as  security  for  the  realization  of  Christian 
hope;  ChrisCs  death  our  reconciliation  ;  ChrisCs  life  our  salvation.  The  bloom  of  Christian  hope  : 
The  solemn  joy  that  God  is  our  God. 

Chap.  V.  1-11. 


1  Tlierefore  being  justified  by  faith,  we  have '  peace  with  God  throiioh  our 

2  Lord  Jesus  Christ :  By  [Tlirouch]  whom  also  we  have  [liave  had  the] "  access 
by  faith  '  [^r  nmu  by  faith]  into  this  giace  wherein  we  stand,  and  rejoice  [tri- 

3  ninpli]  *  in  [the] ''  hope  of  the  glory  of  God.      And  not  only  so,  but  we  glory 

ttriiunjjh]"    in    tribulations    also;    knowing  tliat    tribulation    worketh    patience 
constancy];'    And    i)atience    [constancy],   experience    [api)rov:il]  ;'    and   expe- 

5  rience  [approval],  hope  :  And  hope  niaketh  not  ashamed  ;  because  the  love  of 
God  [Gods  love]  is  shed  abroad  [has  been  jioured  out]  in  our  hearts  by  [by 
means  of]  the  Holy  Ghost  which  is  [who  was]  given  unto  us, 

6  For  when  we  were  yet '  without  strength,  in  due  time  [xutu  x«jpo>',  at  the 

7  proper  time]  Christ  died  for  the  ungodly.  For  scarcely  for  a  righteous  man 
will  one  die  :    yet  ])eradventure  for  a  good  man  some  would  even  dare  to  die 

8  [though,  for  the;  good  man,  ]K'rha|)8  some  one  may  even  dare  to  die].  But 
God"  commendeth  [doth  establish]  his  love  toward  ns,  in  that,  while  we  were 

9  yet  sinners,  Clnist  died  for  us.  ISluch  more  then  [therefore],  being  nowjusti* 
tied"  by  [m]   his  blood,  we  shall  be  saved  from  wrath  through  him  [or,  through 

10  him  from  the  wrath].  For  if,  when  we  were  [being]  "  enemies,  we  were  recon- 
ciled to  God  by  [through,  dai]  the  de.ith  of  his  Son  ;  mueh  more,  being  recon- 

11  ciled,  w(;  sliall  be  saved  by  [in,  n]  his  life.  i\nd  not  only  so.  but  we  also  joy 
[  .Vnd  not  only  that — '.  <■,  rrconriua — but  also  triumpliing]  "  in  (iod  through  our 
r.,ord  Jesus  Christ,  by  [through]  whom  we  have  now .  received  the  atonement 
[the  reconciliation].'* 


CHAPTER  V.   1-11. 


159 


TEXTUAL, 

>  V<r.  1.— [The  reading  fxw/xei/  (subjunctive,  with  a  hortatory  sense)  is  strongly  attested  by  N*.  A.  B'.  C.  D.  K.  L., 
many  cursives  and  versions  (including  Syriao  and  Vulgate),  nlso  by  many  fathers  ;  adopted  by  Lachmann  (in  the  marginjy 
Scholz,  FritzEChe,  Alford  (5th  ed.).  This  array  nf  authorities  would  compel  us  to  adopt  it  instead  of  exo/nei-  (iJ'C, 
jjcor.  ii2_  p_)^  were  it  not  for  the  following  considerations:  1.  The  early  transcribers  frequently  interchanged  o  and  «i. 
2.  The  change  having  been  made,  it  would  be  retained  by  the  fathers,  since  it  "  indicates  the  incipient  darkening  of  the 
doctrine  of  the  righteousness  of  faitli  "  (I.ange).  3.  The  hortatory  meaning  is  not  in  keeping  with  the  context.  Even 
Alford,  after  adopting  the  subjunctive,  and  alleging  that  it  can  only  have  the  force  of  the  imperative,  denies  this  mean- 
ing. An  exhortation  on  a  new  subject  jnst  here,  would  introduce  a  foreign  element  (Meyer).  These  reasons  have  been 
deemed,  by  many  of  the  best  editors,  sufficient  to  outweigh  the  preponderant  MSS.  authority.  Comp.  the  Extg.  Notes. 
-R.] 

^  Ver.  2. — [The  perfect  itrx^Ko-f-^^  is  rendered  fr?(7??_i7<  7ia6f«  by  Lange  ;  /(are  ^drfis  the  literal  meaning,  implying 
continued  possession.  We  oblaiiied  (Amcr.  Biblr  Union)  is  open  to  the  objection  urged  in  Exig.  JVotes.  The  article 
should  be  retained  with  access,  as  conveying  a  slight  emphasis.— R.] 

3  Ver.  2.— [Ijango  rejects  rn  nCtrret.  (Rrc,  N'.  C.  K.  L.,  many  versions).  It  is  not  found  in  B.  D.  F.  G.,  and  is 
rejected  b^'  Lactiniann,  Tischendorf,  Ewald,  Alford.  Meyer  retains  it,  deeming  it  superfluous  after  ver.  1 ;  but  for  that 
very  reason  likely  to  be  omitted.  A  further  variation,  ev  rjj  7ri'crT«,  increases  the  proliability  of  its  genuineness,  since 
iv  might  readily  be  repeated  fitom  the  preceding  ea-xv^a-tJ-e  v ■  It  may  be  regarded  as  doubtful,  but  we  are  scarcely 
warranted  in  rejecting  it.— E..] 

*  Ver.  2. — [  Ti iidiipli  is  not  only  a  more  literal  rendering  of  Kavx'i'H'^^o-y  l^ut  can  he  retained  throughout,  where- 
ever  the  verb  occufs.    The  connection  is  with  have  had.    If  necessary,  a  semicolon  after  stand  would  indicate  this. — B..] 

*  Ver.  2. — [Lange's  view  of  this  passage  requires  the  insertion  of  the  article,  which  is  not  found  in  the  Greek.  See 
Exeg.  JVoles.—'R.'} 

*  Ver.  3. — [Ric.  :  (caux^Me^*.  N.  A.  D.  F.  K.  Alford  considers  this  a  mechanical  repetition  from  ver.  2,  and 
teads  Kavxiofiivoi  (B.  C),  but  the  other  reading  is  to  be  preferred. — K.J 

'  Ver.  3.— ['YTToiaocr/,  Slaiidhcfiigh-eit  (Lange);  endurance  (Alford);  patient  fnrfttrowce  (Wordsworth);  Ausdauer, 
ficrsevirantia  (Meyei).     The  idea  of  pat.ciice  is  implied,  but  the  result  is  referred  to  here. — E,.] 

8  Ver.  4. — [Aj)ptoval  is  certainly  prefciable  to  ii-piri'ncr ;  and  yet  it  is  not  altogether  satisfactory.  Lange,  Meyer: 
Bt'wdhrinig ;  "Wordswurth  :  proof;  Alford,  Amer.  BMe  Uniov,  as  above. — R.] 

'  Ver.  t).— [The  text  is  disputed  at  two  |  oints  in  this  clause.  Ere.,  with  N.  A.  C.  D'.^.  K.,  and  some  fathers,  read 
6Ti  yap  ;  which  is  adopted  by  most  modem  editors.  B.  (followed  by  Alford)  reads  dye,  however.  The  MSS.  authofity 
for  the  former  is  so  strong,  that  it  would  be  adopted  without  hesitation,  were  not  the  decision  complicated  by  another  va- 
riation, viz.,  the  insertion  and  omission  of  a  second  eri  after  a.<T$fvwv.  The  authority  for  it  fj^.  A.  1>.  O.I)'.  F.)  is  even 
stronger  than  for  the  first.  But  this  repetition  has  bei  n  deemed  unnecessary,  and  many  critical  editors  have  therefore 
rejected  the  second  In.  (So  ^cc,  Meyer,  Lange  apparcntlx.)  The  insertion  is  explained  as  a  displacemeat  growing 
out  of  the  fact,  that  an  ecclesiastical  portion  began  with  Xpio-rbs  k.t.A.  But  the  uncial  authority  is  too  strong  to 
warrant  its  rejection.  Alford  justly  remarks  :  "'We  must  cither  repeat  cti,  .  .  .  or  adopt  the  reading  of  B."  He  takes 
the  latter  alternative;  it  seems  safer,  with  Grieebach,  Lachmann,  Wordsworth,  to  take  the  former.  In  that  case,  crt 
may  either  be  regarded  as  repeated  for  emphasis  (see  Exiy.  A'olen),  or  Wordsworth's  view  be  adopted  :  Besides,  when  we 
were  yet  weak.    The  former  is  preferable. — R.] 

'»  Ver.  8.— ['O  Seds  is  wanting  in  B.  Its  position  varies  in  other  MSS.  j  .  A.  C.  K.  insert  it  after  ets  rjixcii  (so 
Hec.) ;  D.  F.  L.  before  (so  Tischendorf,  Meyer).  Alford  rejects  it,  mainly  on  account  of  this  variation  in  position.  It 
is  far  more  likely  to  have  been  omitted,  because  it  was  tnought  that  Christ  should  be  the  subject.  The  mo>t  probable 
view  is,  that  the  Aiiostle  intended  to  emphasize  the  fact  that  God  thus  showed  JHis  (cduroO)  love;  hence  the  position 
at  the  end  of  the  clause.     This  not  being  uuderstood,  it  was  moved  forward  and  then  rejected. — R.] 

"  Ver.  9. — [Literally:  having  been  then  justified.  The  E.  V.  means  to  convey  this  thought.  It  should  be  noticed 
that  €  /  follows  (E.  v.,  hy).  The  idea  of  instrumentality  is  not  prominent ;  the  sense  seems  to  he  pregnant.  So  also 
in  ver.  10:  iv  tj5  ^ajjj,  hy  his  ///>.— R.] 

^"^  Ver.  10.— [The  parallelism  is  marred  in  the  E.  V. — R.] 

1'  Ver.  11. — iRec:  Kavx>>>f^^6a,  poorly  attested.  Nearly  all  MSS.  read  KavxiatJ-evoL,  which  is  adopted  by 
modem  critical  editors.     On  the  meaning,  and  for  jn.stification  of  the  above  emendation,  sae  Exeg.  Antes. — R.] 

'*  Ver.  11. —[Alniiemeiil  is  a  correct  rendering  etymolo^ically,  but  not  theologically.  Reconciliation  is  preferable 
aleo  on  the  ground  that  it  corresponds  with  rtconcile  (ver.  10),  as  the  Greek  noun. does  with  the  preceding  verb. — R.] 


EXEGBTICAL  AJS'D   CRITICAL. 

General  Survky. — 1.  Peace  with  God  arising 
from  justification,  as  hope  of  the  gloiy  of  God  (vers. 
1,  2).  2.  The  continuance  in,  and  increase  of,  this 
peace,  even  by  tribulations,  amid  the  experience  of 
the  love  of  God  (vers.  3-5).  8.  The  proof  of  the 
continual  increase  of  the  peace,  and  the  certainty  of 
Balvation  of  Christians  (vers.  6-9).  '  4.  Reconcilia- 
tion as  the  pledge  of  deliverance  (salvation),  and,  as 
the  appropriated  atonement,  the  fountain  of  blessed- 
ness. On  vers.  1-8,  Winzer,  Cominenfat.,  Leipzig, 
1832.  [Ciiap.  V.  1-12  and  chap.  viii.  describe  the 
effect  of  justification  upon  the  feelings,  or  tlie  emo- 
tional man  ;  chap,  vi.,  the  effect  upon  the  will,  or 
the  inoro.l  man.  It  produces  peace  in  the  heart  and 
holiness  in  the  character  of  the  believer. — P.  S.l 

Ver.  1.  Therefore,  being  justified  by  faith 
[/t  i,y.ai,M  fyivT  tq  ovv  Ix  7r  t  (TTf  oit;].  The  oi"')' 
expresses  the  conclusion  tii'at  arises  from  the  pre- 
ceding establishment  of  the  truth  of  the  <)i.xai<t)mi; 
by  faith  [iii.  21-iv.  25].  Therefore  di^xcuioOivr ft; 
is  closely  connected  with  diKatoxnq.  [Tlie  aorist 
tense  ()  t  z  a  kd  fl- 1  r  t  f  ^• ,  which  is  emphatically 
placed  at  the  head  of  the  sentence,  implies  that 
justification  '.s  an  act  already  done  and  completed 


when  we  laid  hold  of  Christ  by  a  living  faith,  but 
not  necessarily  at  our  baptism  (Wordsworth),  which 
is  a  sealing  ordinance,  like  circumcision  (iv.  11), 
and  does  not  always  coincide  in  time  with  regenera- 
tion and  justification  (remember  the  case  of  Abra- 
ham and  Cornelius  on  the  one  hand,  and  Simon 
Magus  on  on  the  other),  in  nlcTTHfii:,  out  of 
faith,  as  the  siihjcctive  or  instrumental  cause  and 
appropriating  organ,  while  the  grace  of  God  in 
Christ  is  the  objective  or  creative  cause  of  justifica- 
tion, by  which  we  are  transferred  from  the  state  of 
sin  and  damnation  to  the  state  of  righteousness  and 
life._P.  S.]  Meyer  :  "  The  extent  of  the  blensed- 
ness  of  the  justified  (not  their  holinesx^  as  Rothe 
would  have  it)  shall  now  be  portrayed."  It  is  a 
description  of  the  blessedness  of  Christians  in  its 
source,  its  maintenance,  its  apparent  imperfection 
yet  real  perfection,  its  certainty,  and  its  ever  more 
abundant  development.  The  condition  of  one  who 
is  not  justified  is  that  of  fighting  with  God  (see 
ver.  9). 

[We  have  peace  with  God  through  our 
Lord  Jesus  Christ,  (i(jt']rt]v  e'/o/'fr  n()6<; 
rbv  &f6v,  y..T.?..  The  bearing  of  the  difference 
of  reading  here  deserves  more  attention  than  it  haa 
yet  received.      Wc  reluctantly  adopt,  for  internaj 


I    "V 


/ 


160 


THE   EPISTLE   OF   PAUL   TO   TDE   ROMANS. 


reasons,  with  Dr.  Lange  and  the  great  majority  of 
commentator:*,  the  indicative  t/o/itr,  we  have,  for 
the  sultjunetivc  t/ioittv  (Vulg. :  /tabeamm).  The 
latter,  it  nuidt  be  admitted,  lias  in  its  favor  not  only 
the  overwhelming  weiglit  of  ancient  ilSS.,  Versions, 
and  Fathers,*  but  also  the  critical  canon  :  lectio  diffi- 
cilior  princi  alum  tew  I ;  being  the  more  dillicult 
reading,  its  alteration  into  the  easier  i/o/itv  can  be 
better  accounted  for  tlian  its  introduction.  If  we 
retain  t/iontv  (with  Lachniann,  Tregclies,  and  Al- 
ford,  6th  ed.),  we  must  consistently  take  y.ni/o'>iiff)a, 
vers.  2,  3,  likewise  in  the  subjunctive  mood  ;  and 
,  thus  the  whole  passage,  instead  of  being,  as  usually 
/  understood,  a  statement  of  the  blessed  effects  of  jus- 
tification upon  the  heart,  becomes  an  cxhortntion  to 
go  on  from  peace  to  peace  and  from  glory  to  glory, 
on  the  ground  of  the  accomplished  fact  of  justifi- 
cation. DiH'ereut  e.xplanations,  however,  may  be 
given  to  t/iomv.  (1.)  T\ni  de/iLeratice  sense:  shall 
we  have  f  ^ut  tliedeliberative  subjunctive  is  only 
usftii  in^doubnuf  yucaBLons,  as  Mark  xii.  14:  dmin'v 
r  fill  ')''».'"  I' JKoni.  vi.  1:  i/ii,iitvm/niv  rfi  auctiJTin; 
(2.)  The  conceitniv^-^imasc :  we  may  have,  it  i}  our 
vrivilefje  tq'Jt(u:e.  This  would" give  excellent  sense. 
But  sucha  jlse^f  the  Greek  subjunctive  approach- 
ing the  flTpmnng- 3f ^-^e  Tuture,  thougii  easily  de- 
rived from  the  general  principle  that  the  subjunc- 
tive mood  signities  what  is  ohjcctivchj  posaiule,  as 
the  indicative  expresses  what  is  actual,  and  the 
optative  what  is  desirable  or  subjectivel fi  possible,  js^ 
Bonifiwhat  doubtful,  and  not  mentioned  by  Winer 
(p.  2tJ8,  7th  ed.),  who,  in  independent  sentences, 
adnaits  only  the  conjunctivus  adhorlatimis  and  the 
conj itncfiinis  deliberativus  ;  comp.  Kiihner,  §§  403, 
464,  and  Jelf,  §  415.  (3.)  There  remains',  there- 
fore, only  tlie  A*«4</i(ye_sense  t  let  m  have  peace. 
But  here  arises  the  doctrinal  dinicultyPtTffiTTfmiroE  is 
not  the  result  of  man's  exertions,  but  a  gift  of  God 
bestowed,  and  tiie  object  of  prayer  in  the  epistolary 
inscriptions  ;  comp.  1  and  2  Peter  i.  2  :  "  Grace  and 
peace  be  multiplied  unto  you ;  "  yet  two  analogous 
passages  might  be  quoted — viz.,  2  Cor.  v.  19  :  xa- 
ra)./.ccyt;Tf  nji  HuZ,  reconciliataini  Deo  ;  and  espe- 
cially Ueb.  xii.  28  :  t/wiitv  /ci(ji,v,  let  us  have  (jrace 
(where,  however,  some  MSS.  read  t/oittv,  the  Vulg, 
habemtis,  and  where  yapii;  is  understood  by  some  in 
the  sense  of  gratitndi:).\  It  might  be  said,  also,  in 
support  of  this  explanation,  that  faith,  hope,  love, 
and  all  Christian  gniees,  are  likewise  gifts  of  grace, 
and  yet  objects  to  be  pursued  and  maintained.  (4.) 
A  few  commentators,  quite  recently  Forbes  (not  in 
the  translation,  but  in  the  comments,  p.  179),  take 
H/iDftfv  =  xart/oi/ifv,    let  us  hold  fast  and  enjoy 

*  [See  Tfxi.  Note  ».  The  Sinaltic  MS.  reads  EXOM EN, 
the  small  o  on  the  top  of  w  beinpr  a  comctioii  liy  a  later 
hand,  thoiiirh  this  correction  may  possibly  have  l)c'en  tnkun 
from  an  older  MS.  Tiscliendorr,  in  his  recent  edition  of 
the  Vatican  MS.,  credits  the  correction  ixoiitv  to  B^., 
instead  of  n».,  as  is  done  by  Alford,  Meyer,  and  others. 
Dr.  Hodge,  who  pays  little  or  no  nttcniion  to  the  flitfcrent 
readinirs,  and  iifnnrcs  Cod.  Sin.  nltoRethor,  nlthoii(;)i  it  was 
published  iwo  years  before  the  revis<'d  edition  of  his  Comm. 
on  Rnmanf,  ii.conectly  says  (p  JOS)  that  "the  cxli-rnnl 
aulhoriticH  are  nearly  p(iually  divided"  bi-lwccn  ixoit-tv  i 
and  i\utti.tv.  Alford,  in  the  Mb  ed.,  has  a  lonif  note  and 
calls  this  "  the  crucial  instance  of  overpowerin(i;  diplomatic 
authority  compiUlnK  us  to  adopt  a  readinu:  ai^ainst  which 
our  subjective  foelinpi  rebel.  Evor^-  intriniil  consideration 
tends  to  impu(fii  it"  Uetainiiiu  txiafitv  In  the  text  (with 
Lachmann  and  Troprellrs),  ho  gives  it  up  In  the  notes, 
r.^rbes  very  strenuously  contiMids  for  ixmyitv,  and  consist- 
ently takes  nlMo  Kav^uiM'^a  in  the  hortative  sense. — 1'.  S.] 

t  (Rom.  xii.  IS  rcfiTS  to  peace  with  m-  n  (like  the  famous 
(cntonce  in  Ocn.  (Irant's  letter  of  acceptance  of  the  nurui- 
nation  for  the  Prosideno}- :  Let  ut  have  /waci).— r.  S. j 


peace ;  comp.  Ileb.  x.  23  :  xari/Mntv  rtjv  ouof.o- 
yiav  xTjii  i/.nidoi;  oixhi'tj.  But  in  this  ease  we 
should  expect  the  article  before  tl()ijvr,r,  and  a  pre- 
vious  mention  of  peace  in  the  argument.  The  in-"^ 
dicative  i'/unn;  on  the  other  hand,  is  free  from  all 
grammatical  and  doctrinal  difficulty,  and  i.s  in  keep., 
ing  with  the  declaratory  character  of  the  section.-^ 
Peace  with  God,  fi^ijrriv  nftbi;  ritv  (^tov'i 
in  our  lelation  to  God.  It  expres-ses  the  stale  of 
reconciliation  (opposite  to  the  state  of  condemna* 
lion,  viii.  1),  in  consequence  of  the  removal  of  God'i 
wrath  and  the  satisfaction  of  His  justice  by  tlie  sac- 
fice  of  Ciirist,  wlio  is  our  Peace ;  Eph.  ii.  14-16. 
Comp.  llcrodiaa  8,  7.  8:  cirrt  TioXt/ion  ftiv  tiot'jrtjv 
i/orrn;  ni)b<i  fyboix,  and  other  classical  parallels 
quoted  by  Meyer  and  Philippi.  On  niioq  rof  (-Jfnvy 
comp.  Acts  ii.  17 ;  xxiv,  16  ;  2  Cor.  vii.  4.  This 
objective  condition  of  peace  implies,  as  a  necessary 
consequence,  the  subjective  peace  of  the  soulj  the 
trauqnilUtas  aniwi,  the  pax  coiiscientice,  which  flows  . 
from  the  experience  of  pardon  and  reconciliation ;  / 1 
Phil.  iv.  7  ;  John  xvi.  'dZ.  Sin  is  the  source  of  all '  / 
discord  and  war  between  man  and  God,  and  between 
man  and  man ;  and  hence  there  can  be  no  peace 
until  this  curse  is  removed.  All  other  peace  is  an 
idle  dream  and  illusion.  Being  at  peace  v/ith  God, 
we  are  at  peace  with  ourselves  and  with  our  fellow- 
men.  Paul  often  calls  God  the  "  God  of  jjcace ; " 
XV.  33;  2  Cor.  xiii.  11  ;  1  Thess.  v.  23;  2  Thess. 
iii.  16;  Ileb.  xiii.  20,  Comp.  al.so  Isa.  xxxii,  17: 
"  the  work  of  righteousness  is  peace." — P.  S.] 

Ver.  2.  Through  whom  also  we.  These 
words  do  not  announce  a  climax  in  the  description 
of  the  merit  of  Christ  (Kiillner) ;  nor  do  they  state 
tl'.e  ground  of  the  preceding  <)i.a  ^Jr^aov  X.  (Meyer^, 
but  the  immediate  result  of  the  redcmiilioii.  [x«t, 
also,  is  not  accumulative,  but  indicates  that  the 
7T()0(;ayti)y'r)  fl<;  tijv  /c'((iiv,  itself  a  legitimate  conse- 
quence of  justification,  is  the  f/round  of  f('o/,'r</.— 
P.  S.] — Have  obtained  access.  [Ti;v  ttijoi;' 
ayioytjv  t(T/ r^  xa  fi  f  v  ;  literally,  have  had  the 
(well-known,  the  only  possible)  introduction  (in 
the  active  sense),  or  better,  access  (intransitive). 
The  perfect  refers  to  the  time  of  justification  and 
incorporation  in  Christ,  and  implies  the  .t^onlinucd 
result,  since  in  Him  and  through  Him,  as  the  door 
aiuniediator,  we  have  an  open  way,  the  right  and 
privilege  of  (^ai/jr^pprpach  to  the  throne  of  grace ; 
in  distinction  from  the  one  i/carli/  entrance  of  the 
Jewish  high-priest  into  the  Holy  of  Holies.  This  is 
the  universal  priesthood  of  believers. — P.  S.]  Ex- 
planations of  the  npo';ayi»yi^ :  1.  Meyer :  admit- 
sion,  introduction  (/liiizufuhrniuf).  This  is  claimed 
to  be  the  only  grammatical  signification.*  It  cer. 
tainly  denotes  tlie  entrance  eflected  by  mediatiotiy 
where  it  nieans  admission,  audience.  But  this  re- 
quirement  [the  7T(>o(Tnyctyn''i;,  sequester,  the  media- 
tor or  interpreter,  who  introduces  persons  to  sove- 

*  I  By  Pa]ic  (Lex)  and  ^feyer,  who  quotes  paRsages  ftom 
Xenophon,  Thucydides,  I'lutai-ch,  &e.,  and  explains :  "  Wir 
/iab''ii  DURCH  CiiitisTi'.M  uiK  Hi.vzupCnuu.vo  ritilir  Oiiadt 
u.f.w.,iffJinbl,  ihiiUirrh  ndmtiih  (lusn  £•■  trlh^t  (1  Peter  iii. 
18)  v.rmiye  sem'S  ilni  Z'nn  O'lt-s  tiUirnilen  Suhn«]ifi-rs  unttf 
irpofa-yuycvf  ff  wnnlen  ill,  lulr.r,  wie  rs  t'/iii/s.  trrffrni 
iiusilrficL-l :  iiaxpav  Ofxaf  npoKrjyayt ."  Cump.  1Ih]> 
less  (p.  ifin.-md  ]lni\iiie,  on  Kph.  ii.  18.  Chrysoslom  dls- 
tin'/uishcs.  Kph.  ii.  IS,  npo^ayioyq  and  irp6iolio^  :  ovk  tlntt 
np6ioSov,  aAAa  irpotayuiyiji'.  Hut  irpdfojot,  in  classic  (Ircckj 
has  ))otli  the  aciivo  and  pa.«give  uieanmg.  Uc.^ychlus  de- 
fines irpotriiyuyii  :  "  irpof  Aevtrit,  rr.c'r :  .\Cvi;.*,sio,  n-iiij>^.  aB 
UEORVM  AU.vs,  arrri.icATio."  The  word  occurs  only  thre« 
times  In  the  Xcw  Testament— here,  and  Eph.  ii.  18,  and  iU. 
VI,  where  the  Intransitive  meaning,  accesi  is  the  most  nata 
ral.— P.  8.] 


CHAPTER   V.    ItII. 


161 


reigns,  Lamprid.  ia  Alex.  Sev.  4. — P.  S.]  is  secured 
here  by  dl'  or,  which  does  not  well  suit  this  inter- 
pretation. 2.  Access.  [Vulg. :  accessjim;  7i()6i;odo(;, 
tii;o(hi;.]  The  view  of  CEcunienius,  and  most  ex- 
positors [Pliilippi,  Ewald,  Stuart,  Hodge,  Alford]  ; 
see  Eph.  ii.  18  ;  iii.  12.  (Tiioluck  finally  decides 
for  the  active  sense.)  The  image,  at  bottom,  is  plain- 
ly not  that  of  a  worldly  audience  with  an  Eastern 
king,  but  the  type  of  tlie  entrance  of  the  high-priest 
into  the  Holy  of  Holies  (see  1  Peter  iii.  18 :  Xtivaroq 
tna&fv,n'a  ?jfia<;  n(jo(;aydyri  rm  Ofiji;  Heb.  X. 
19  :  e/ovrti;  t/jv  nao^rjaiav  fn;  rijv  fi'codov  rmv 
ciyio)v  iv  rtj)  aifiari.  'Jij(ToT).  Tliis  view  is  also  in 
harmony  with  the  idea  of  the  Epistle,  by  which 
Christianity  is  the  true  worship  restored,  or  rather 
first  realized  ;  and  in  tliis  connection  the  doia  5fO(i 
has  reference  to  the  Shekinah  of  the  Holy  of  Ho- 
lies.— Obtained  (erlangt  haben).  Tholuck  justly  re- 
gards it  as  pedantic  prudery  in  Meyer  (after  Eritzsche) 
to  hold  that  ia/rj/.afifv  docs  not  mean  nacti  sumus 
et  habnnus,  but  habuimus  (when  we  became  Chris- 
tians). Meyer  more  appropriately  says :  "The  divine 
grace  in  which  the  justified  participate  is  represent- 
ed as  a  spacial  compass."  But  he  has  not  made 
good  this  remark.  We  have  free  access  into  the 
real  Holy  of  Holies,  which  is  grace ;  and  hope  to 
behold  in  it  the  real  Shekinah,  the  fJoJa  of  God  ; 
and,  looking  at  it,  to  participate  of  it. — Into  this 
grace.  [The  rainrjv  is  emphatic — such  a  glorious 
grace. — P.  S.]  Those  who  adhere  to  the  reading 
T'^  TTtcjTfi.  in  ver.  2  [see  Textual  Note  ^]  connect 
therewith  ili;  rtjv  )(d{>t,v  (a  connection  which  Meyer 
properly  rejects,  nlaTiq  fit;  Tt/v  /a^m-!),  and  under- 
stand Tr^offaj'foj'jy  absolntely  :  access  to  God.*  But 
the  niJoaayu)yi'i  can  refer  only  to  /d()i,q  (Meyer,  and 
others),  and,  indeed,  to  grace  as  justifying  grace; 
and  does  not,denote  saving  favor  in  general  (Chry- 
sostom),  atthough  that  central  idea  of  grace  com- 
prehends all.  For  other  untenable  explanations ; 
the  gospel  (Fritzsche) ;  hope  of  blessedness  (Beza) ; 
apostleship  (Semler) ;  see  De  Wette.  The  access 
to  this  grace  is  more  particularly  explained  by  the 
addition,  wherein  [iv  ji  refers  to  /a^n',  not  to 
the  doubtful  niarti,. — P!  S.]  we  stand,  or  into 
which  we  have  entered.  The  tar  i]  xa.fi  (v  there- 
fore does  not  denote  here,  standing  fost  (Tholuck, 
Meyer),  either  in  the  sense  of  subjective  activity 
(Beausobre),f  or  of  objective,  secure  possession  (Cal- 
vin ).:j:  It  refers  back  to  the  act  of  the  di^/.aioxrti;, 
with  which  the  introduction  into  the  /ct^*^  has  be- 
gun, and  accordingly  the  7i(>o(rayi>}ytj  denotes  the 
free  and  permanent  access  of  all  believers  into  the 
Xd^i<;,  in  contrast  with  the  once  yearly  entrance  of 
the  high-priest  into  the  Holy  of  Holies.  We  need 
hardly  mention  that  this  permanent  access  is  effected 
ond  conditioned  by  the  life  of  prayer,  and  especially 
by  dailv  purification,  in  the  comfort  of  the  atone- 
ment (Heh.  X.  22,  23). 

And  triumph  (glory)  in  the  hope  of  the 
glory  of  God    [/.at   xar/o'iiui&a  in     D.niiii 

*  [This  is  not  necessary,  tjj  wiorei  and  iv  rfj  Trt'o-Tci, 
whetner  jremiine  or  not,  can  be  taken  as  explanatory  of  the 
method  of  access  to  the  throne  of  grace.  The  phrase  "  faith 
on  praci'  "  nowhere  occurs  in  the  Bible. — P.  S.] 

t  ['^  Demeurer  ferme  signifie  comballre  courageusement." 
-P.  S.l 

J  ["  .  .  .  lit  Jirma  stabilisque  salus  nobis  maneat:  quo 
sJffiii^cnf,  pprseverantiam  non  in  virtu'e  inrluslriarii'.  nostra, 
sed  in  Ckristo  /tindalam  rsst."  So  also  Philippi  (ft'slslelten, 
blcih''n(l  vrhnrren),  and  Hodge  :  "  We  arc  firnriy  and  im- 
movably established."  Comp.  John  viii.  44,  where  it  is  said 
of  Satan  that  he  stood  not  (ovx  earijiceK)  in  the  truth  ;  1  Cor. 
xv.  1 ;  2  Cor.  i.  24.— P.  S.) 
11 


rtjq  ()'6if]c;  roil  &fovJ.  The  verb  y.ai  ■(do/icu 
[usually  with  iv,  also  with  inl,  l'ni(i,  and  with  tha 
accusative  of  the  object]  denotes  the  expression  of 
a  joyous  consciousness  of  blessedness  with  reference 
to  the  objective  ground  of  blessedness ;  in  which 
true  glorying  is  distinctly  contrasted  with  its  carica- 
ture, vain  boasting  in  a  vain  state  of  njind,  and 
from  a  vain  ground  or  occasion.  Reiche  emphasize! 
the  rejokiiici,  Meyer  the  glorying.  The  ini,  ex- 
plained as  jjrsijiter  (by  Meyer),  denotes  more  defi- 
nitely the  basis  on  which  Christians  establish  their 
glorying.*  Tlie  ground  of  the  glorying  of  Chris* 
tians  in  their  present  state  is  not  the  do'ia  dfoTi 
itself,  hnt  Ihejtope  p/t/ie  ^(jlorj/  ojti  God,  as  one  con- 
ception ;  indeed,  the  whole  Christianity  of  this  life 
is  a  joyous  anticipation  of  beholding  tlie  glory* 
Tholuck  :  "  fJoJa"  flfoT'  is  not,  as  Origen  holds,  the 
genitive  of  object,  the  hope  of  bcholdhig  this  glory, 
which  would  need  to  have  been  expressed  more  defi- 
nitely ;  still  less  is  Chrysostom's  view  right,  that  it 
is  the  hope  that  God  will  glorify  Himself  in  lis. 
Neither  are  Luther,  Grotius,  Calixtus,  Reiche,  cor- 
rect in  calling  it  the  genitive  of  author,  the  glory  to 
be  bestowed  by  God ;  but  it  is  the  genitive  of  pos- 
session, participation  in  the  glory  possessed  by  God ; 
comp.  1  Thess.  ii.  12."  But  more  account  should 
be  made  of  beholding,  as  the  means  of  appropria- 
tion. Toiiehold  God's  glory,  means  also,  to  become 
glorious.  This  is  definitely  typified  in  the  history 
of  Moses  (2  Cor.  iii.  13  ;  Exod.  xxxiv.  33).  Tho- 
luck also  remarks  :  "  The  duo^nv  rijv  <)6iav  rov 
J^Qiarov,  John  xvii.  24,  is  the  participation  in  the 
doia  Ofor,  the  avy/.).ri()o%'Ofi tlv,  the  aviipacn-hvuv, 
and  (nivi)ota(jf)Tivau  no  JV^kttw  ;  Rom.  viii.  17 ; 
2  Tim.  ii.  11.  Cocceius  :  ^  JJac  est  gloriatio  Jidcliwriy 
quod  persuasum  Juibent,  fore,  ut  Deus  gloriosus  et 
adinirah'lis  in  ipsis  Jiat  illuiiiinando,  sunctijir.ando, 
Ice'ificando,  glorificando  in  ipsis  ;  2  Thess.  i.  10.' " 
As  the  seeing  of  man  on  God's  side  perfects  the 
vision  of  man,  according  to  1  Cor.  xiii.  12,  it  is  the 
beholding  of  the  glory  of  the  Lord  on  man's  side  by 
which  he  shall  become  perfectly  conformed  to  the 
Lord,  and  thus  an  object  of  perfect  good  pleasure, 
according  to  1  John  iii.  2 ;  Matt.  v.  8  ;  comp.  2 
Peter  i.  4.  The  goal  of  this  reciprocal  dold^fv%'  and 
f)oiauo■l9^a^  is,  in  a  conditional  sense,  the  removal 
to  the  inheritance  of  glory  in  the  future  world ; 
2  Cor.  V.  1  ;  and,  in  the  absolute  sense,  the  time  of 
the  second  coming  of  Christ ;  Rev.  xx. 

[This  triumphant  assurance  of  faith  is  incom 
patible  with  the  Romish  doctrine  of  the  uncertainty 
of  salvation.  A  distinction  should  be  made,  how- 
ever,  between  assurance  of  a  present  state  of  grace, 
which  is  necessarily  implied  in  true  faith,  as  a  per- 
sonal apprehension  of  Christ  with  all  His  benefits, 
and  assurance  of  future  redemption,  which  is  an 
article  of  hope  (hence  in  i/.nltii,),  and  must  be  ac- 
companied with  constant  watchfulness.  Christ  will 
lose  none  of  those  whom  the  Father  has  given  Him 
(John  xvii.  12;  x.  28,  29);  but  God  alone  knows 
His  own,  and  to  whom  He  chooses  to  reveal  it.  We 
must  give  diligence  to  make  our  calling  and  election 


*  [So  also  Philippi:  "ejr'  ikiriSi, propter  spem.  enC  mil 
rlem  Dative  dient  bei  den  Verbis  dcr  Affecte  zur  Angahe,  dcs 
Grundes.  So  yeAav,  /A^ya  <j>povelv ,  piai  veo'Oai, 
ayavaKTelv    inC   Tivt." — P.  S.] 

t  I  The  reading  of  the  Vulu'ate :  glurix  filinrum  Dei,  is, 
according  to  Meyer,  a  gloss  which  admirably  hits  the  ncnse. 
But  Sofa  Beov  is  more  expressive  in  this  connection.  It  ia 
the  gloiy  wliich  God  Himself  has  (gen.  possessionis),  tntl  in 
which  believers  shall  once  share;  comp.  John  xvii.  2i; ;  1 
Thess.  ii.  12;  Apoc.  xxi.  11 ;  1  John  iii.  2.— P.  S.1 


162 


THE    EPISTLE    OF   PAUL    TO   THE   ROMANS. 


Bure  to  ourselves  (2  Peter  i.  10),  and  work  out  our 
own  sjilvntion  with  fear  and  trembling,  because  God 
workeih  in  us  both  to  will  and  to  do  of  His  good 
pleasure  (I'hil.  ii.  12,  13).  The  possibility  of  ulti- 
mate fiiilure  was  a  powerful  motive  and  stimulus  to 
faithfuluet-s  and  lioliness  even  in  the  life  of  an  apos- 
tle, wlio  exereised  severe  self-diseipline,  lest,  having 
preaehed  to  others,  he  might  himself  at  last  be  re- 
jected, and  lose  the  incorruptible  crown  of  the 
Christian  race  (1  Cor.  ix.  27).  IIow  much  more, 
then,  should  ordinary  Christians,  who  stand,  fcike 
heed  lest  they  full  (1  "Cor.  x.  12) !— P.  S.] 

Ver.  3.  And  not  only  so  [.v.,  do  we  triumph 
in  the  ho|)e  of  glory  ;  comp.  tlie  parallels  in  Meyer]. 
Tholuek  appropriately  says :  "  This  hope  of  the 
Christian — sure  of  its  triumph — seems  to  be  put  to 
Bcorii  by  the  present  condition,  as  those  first  Chris- 
tians had  to  bear  the  scorn  of  the  (icntiles  by  con- 
trasting their  gloomy  present  with  tlieir  abundant 
hope.  [(Quotations  from  Minucius  Felix,  Arnobius, 
and  Melanehthon.]  But  the  Apostle's  lofty  mind 
shows  how  that  doiot-ii*  not^auouitward^accident,  but 
a_moral  glorjlicatTon,  having  itd.rooi_uHhiA_^.<i/'igj 
theirefore  this  itseTf,  as  the  means  of  perfectiOTlTis 
the  sulijeet  of  triumph."  See  viii.  17,  28,  35 ; 
2  Cor.  xi.  30  ;  xii.  9,  10  [orro'  yatj  anOivoi,  rfcra- 
Toi;  dfn]  ;  2  Tim.  ii.  11  ;  Matt.  v.  10,  12  ;  Acts  v. 
41 ;  1  Peter  iv.  12  ;  James  i.  3,  12.  [It  is  a  uni- 
Tersal  law,  acknowledged  even  in  the  world,  that  no 
great  character  can  become  complete  without  trial 
and  suffering.  As  the  firmness  of  the  root  is  tested 
by  the  storm,  and  the  metiil  is  purified  in  the  heat 
of  the  furnace,  so  the  strength  and  purity  of  charac- 
ter is  perfected  by  trial.  The  ancient  Greeks  and 
Romans  admired  a  good  man  struggling  against  mis- 
fortune as  a  spectacle  worthy  of  the  gods.  Plato 
describes  the  righteous  man  as  one  who,  without 
doing  injustice,  yet  has  the  appearance  of  the  great- 
est injustice,  and  proves  his  own  justice  by  perse- 
verance again.st  all  calumny  unto  death  ;  yea,  he 
:predicts  that  the  perfect  man,  if  such  a  one  should 
■ever  appear,  would  be  scourged,  tortured,  and  nailed 
to  the  post  {Folitia,  p.  74  sq.  ed.  Ast.).  Seneca 
■Bays  (  iJe  prnv.  iv.  4) :  "  Gaudcut  maini  viri  rebun 
adversis  non  aliter  qnam  fortes  mililes  bellis  tri- 
urnphmiL"  Edmund  Burke  :  "  Oblocpiy  is  a  neces- 
sary ingredient  of  all  true  glory.  Calumny  and 
abuse  are  essential  parts  of  tiiumph."  But  what  a 
difference  between  the  proud  stoicism  of  the  hea- 
then, who  overcomes  the  misfortunes  by  haughty 
contem()t  and  unfeeling  indifferentism,  and  the  Chris- 
tian's gentle  patience,  forgiving  love,  and  cheerful 
submission  to  the  holy  will  of  (Jod,  who  ordered 
tribulation  as  a  means  and  condition  of  moral  per- 
fection !  C<imi).  mv  book  on  2'/ie.  Person  of  Christ, 
p.  Ito  li:,  21f)  f.— I'.S.] 

In  [on  account  of]  tribulations.  [Comp.  2 
Cor.  vii.  4.]  The  tv  must  cxjiress  the  antithesis  to 
■tlie  prc<:eding ;  it  mu-t  therefore  not  be  explained 
as  local:  in  [amiijstj  the  tribulations  (as  Kolluer, 
•Olockier,  Bautngarteii-Crusius).  In  that  case,  the 
very  olyect  of   the  y-nv/riirOa^  would   l)e  wanting. 

tOloriiinnir  de  enlmuitittibiis,  not,  in  cahimilatibns. 
he  /'/.ii/'Hi,-  (or  their  moral  results  rather)  are  the 
object  and  ground  of  the  ^.rti/i^ani ;  ^nxynnOax, 
•being  mostly  constructed  with  iv  \  v.  11;  Gal.  vi. 
13;  2  Cor.  x.  15.  The  Jew  is  said  to  glory  m 
the  law,  the  Christian  in  the  cro8.«,  &c.  So  also 
Tholuek,  Meyer,  Alford,  Hodge.  The  tribulations 
•re  to  th<?  Chrii-Liaa  what  the  scara  of  the  battle- 


field are  to  an  old  soldier ;  comp.  Gal.  vi.  17.— • 
P.  SJ* 

Knowing  [because  we  know]  that  tribula* 
tion.  This  is  the  normal  development  of  the  bo» 
liever's  life  out  of  its  tribulation.  Yet  this  develop- 
ment is  not  a  natural  necessity  (see  Matt.  xiii.  21). 
Yet  it  is  iissumed  in  the  exceptions  that  the  faith 
was  somehow  damaged.  [The  following  climax  is 
remarkably  vivid  and  pregnant.] 

Ver.  4.  Constancy  (endurance,  steadfastness). 
The  vnoiiovi]  is  not  /nitie/itia  hero  (Vulgate,  Lu- 
ther,  E.  V.).  Yet  steailfastncss  cannot  be  acquired 
without  jiaticnlia.  Luke  xxii.  28 :  oi  di-niif/if- 
vi/xotk;  /ur  iuov  iv  riut;  7in(ta(Tiiot<;.  Comp. 
James  i,  3.  [The  virtue  of  vnoiiorr,,  which  Chry. 
sostom  calls  the  lia<n).ti;  n'tv  aftfTtltv,  is  patient  en- 
durance {Ansdauer,  Slandhnfligkeit),  and  combiner 
the  Latin  patientia  and  perseveruniia.  It  involves 
the  element  of  avtS^iin,  the  bravery  and  manliness 
with  whicii  the  Cliristian  contends  against  the  storms 
of  trials  and  persecutions.  Meyer  adduces,  -as  ap- 
plicable here,  Cicero's  definition  of  pcrseverau'ia : 
"  in  ratione  bene  considerata  staiilhi  ct  pcrpetua 
permansio."  On  the  difference  between  vttoiiovij, 
/^taxpo&i'fiia,  and  avo/t'j,  comp.  Trench,  Si/noni/ins 
of  the  New  Testament,  Second  Series,  ed.  1864,  p. 
11.— P.  S.] 

Approval  (proof),  rfsjst/oj.  [Comp.  2  Cor. 
ii.  9;  viii.  2;  ix.  13;  Phil.  ii.  22.]  Not  trial  (Gro- 
tins),  for  the  .9/.('i;'tc  itself  is  trial ;  nor  experience 
(Luther  [E.  V.]  ),  fer  experience  is  the  whole  Chris- 
tian life.  It  is  the  condition  of  approval,  whose 
suljjective  expression  is  the  consciousness  of  being 
sealed;  Eph.  ii.  13.  [Bengel :  ^'^  iS  o  x  t,  ii  t;  ext  (juali- 
tas  ejus,  qui  est  i)6/.i.iin<;."  Hodge  :  "  The  word  is 
used  nietonymically  for  the  result  of  trial,  i.  e.y 
a/.probation,  or  that  which  is  proved  worthy  of  ap- 
probation. It  is  tried  integrity,  a  state  of  mind 
which  has  stood  the  test."  James  i.  3 :  to  doxlmov 
v/im'  TT;i;  TiiartMi;  xaTfQynifTai.  I'Tio/iovijv,  does 
not  contradict  our  passage ;  for  So/.iinov,  as,  Phi- 
lippi  remarks,  corresponds  to  .O/.hfii:,  and  is  a  means 
of  trial,  or  =  ()oxi,i(a(Ttct,  trial,  ju-obation,  the  re- 
sult of  which  is  Oozi;//,',  ajjproval. — P.  S.] 

Hope  [t/.;T«(V«,  viz.,  t^,-  ()6|»^,-  toT'  &fov, 
which  is  naturally  suggested  by  ver.  2.  Hope,  like 
faith  and  love,  and  every  other  Cluistian  grace,  is 
never  done  in  this  world,  but  always  growing,  and 
as  it  bears  flower  and  fruit,  its  roots  strike  deeper, 
and  its  stem  and  branches  expand.     Every  progress 


♦  [We  add  tho  comments  of  Hodpe  •  "  Afflictimis  them* 
selvosnre  to  tlie  Chris'.iun  a  irioiiiid of  ploryinc ;  ho  ffcls thom 
to  I'C  an  honor  und  n  blessing.  This  is  ii  scutiraont  often 
esprossod  in  Ihf  word  of  God.  Our  Ixjrd  ways :  '  Ulcsscd 
trre  they  who  mourn;'  '  JUes-od  are  tlio  jtorsooiitcd; ' 
'  lilessi'cl  arc  yc  wlicn  men  shall  revile  you.'  lie  calls  on 
His  suffcriiiR  disciples  to  rejoice  and  lie  exceeding  clad 
when  thev  mo  afflicted;  ^tiitt.  v.  4,  10-12.  'I'hc  ajiostle* 
di'parted  from  the  Jewish  council,  '  rejoicimr  tlint  they  were 
counted  worthy  to  sutler  shiime  for  C'liiist's  niinie; '  .\ot8  T. 
41.  Teler  culls  U]ii)n  (■hriiitians  to  rc|nice  "hen  ihey  aro 
pnrtakers  of  Christ's  sutrciinss,  and  pronounces  f  hem  liappy 
when  they  are  reprmu  hed  for  His  sake;  I  Teter  iv.  13,  H. 
And  I'liul  snys :  '  Most  plndly  thercfon'  will  I  dory  in  (on 
account  of)  my  infirinilies'  (/.  .-.,  my  sufferinps).  ''1  take 
pleasure,'  he  s.iys,  'in  iiiflrmities,  in  reproiiclies,  in  iiecos- 
sities,  m  pei-socutions,  in  distresses,  for  tlhrist's  sake;'  2 
Cor.  xii.  10,  II.  Tliis  is  not  irmtionnt  or  faniitiail.  Chris- 
tians ilo  not  plory  in  sutfcrinp,  as  such,  or  for  its  own  sako, 
hut  OS  the  Hihle  teaches:  1.  Hecaujie  they  consider  It  an 
honor  to  sulfer  for  Christ.  2.  Hecausp  they  rejoice  in  hoiiiK 
the  (M-casion  of  mnnilcstinp  His  power  in  their  support  and 
delivcnince;  and,  3.  Hccause  sutfcrinR  is  made  the  menni 
of  their  ovrn  sandifliatiiui  and  preparation  for  uscfulneaf 
here,  and  for  heaven  hereafter.  J'he  last  of  these  reason* 
is  that  to  wliich  tho  Apostle  refers  iu  the  coutuxV"— 1'.  S.J 


CHAPTER  V.   1-11. 


16a 


In  Christian  life  strengthens  its  foundations. — P.  S.] 
Thus  the  apparent  opposite  of  Christian  hope,  afflic- 
tion, or  tribulation,  is  changed  into  pure  liope,  so 
that  the  stock  of  Christian  liope  ever  becomes  more 
intensive  and  abundant.  Eternal  profit  is  derived 
from  all  temporal  loss  and  harm. 

Vcr.  o.  Maketh  not  ashamed.  Strictly :  it 
does  not  shame,  by  causing  to  be  deceived.  [Cal- 
vin :  Hahet  certissiinum  salutis  ix  turn.  Bengel : 
Spes  erit  res.  Comp.  Ps.  cxix.  116:  ^5\li"2ri"iiX  ; 
Sept. :  /irj  xaraiT'/vvrfi  /if  ano  tTjq  TTfiOiifioniai; 
fiov.  Meyer  quotes  parallels  from  Plato. — P.  S.] 
Christian  hope  is  formed  Irom  the  same  material  of 
divine  spiritual  life  as  faith  and  love ;  it  is  really 
faith  itself,  tending  toward  completion  ;  or  it  is  love 
itself  as  it  here  lives  in  the  principles  of  perfection. 
Therefore  it  is  infallible. 

Because  God's  love  [genitive  of  the  subject, 
not  of  the  object,  as  in  ver,  8  :  Ttjv  tavroT'  ayaTirjv 
fti;  Ij/ioii;.  The  ground  of  our  assurance  that  hope 
shall  not  put  us  to  the  shame  of  disappointment,  is 
not  GUI'  own  strength  or  goodness,  but  the  free  love 
of  God  to  us  and  in  us.-  —P.  S.]  It  is  plain  from 
the  context  that  God's  iOve  to  us  is  meant  (Ori- 
gen,  Clirysostom,  Luther,  Calvin,  and  down  to  Phi- 
lippi  [Meyer,  De  Wctte,  Tholuck,  Stuart,  Alford, 
Hodge]  ),  and  not  our  love  of  God  (Theodoret,  Au- 
gustine, Klee,  "Glockler  [Anselm,  St.  Bernard,  sev- 
eral Catholic  expositors  (amor  infnsus,  jvsti/ia  iii- 
fusa),  Hofmann],  and  others).  Our  love  of  God  can 
at  best  be  a  testimony  of  our  hope,  but  not  the 
ground  of  the  infallibility  of  our  hope.  See  also 
ver.  8.  Yet  the  antithesis  should  not  be  too  strongly 
pressed :  the  love  of  God  for  us  shed  abroad  in  the 
heart,  becomes  our  love  to  God.* — Has  been  (and 
continues  to  be)  poured  out  [as  in  a  stream, 
ixxiy  rrau].  Denoting  the  richest  experience  and 
sense  of  God's  love.  [Comp.  Acts  ii.  17  ;  x.  45  ; 
Titus  iii.  6,  where  nlovffiox;  is  added.  Pliilippi : 
"  The  love  of  God  did  not  descend  upon  us  as 
dew  in  drops,  but  as  a  stream  which  spreads  itself 
through  the  whole  soul,  filling  it  with  a  conscious- 
ness of  His  presence  and  favor." — P.  S.]  f — In  our 
hearts.  Strictly :  throughout  them :  iv,  not  flc. 
[eV  Tari;  xa(t()taL^  demotes  the  motns  in  loco,  as 
Meyer  says,  or  the  rich  diffusion  of  God's  love 
within  our  hearts.  Coiiip.  Pa.  xlv.  2,  Septwagint : 
iit)n''f)ti  xd(>i,q  iv  yjihal  aov.  Alford  (after  01s- 
hausen) :  "  iv  may  be  taken  pregnantly,  i/./.i/. 
fi<;  /.ai  /livfu  iv  —  or  better,  denotes  the  locality 
where  the  outpouring  takes  place — the  heart  being 
the  seat  of  our  love,  and  of  appreciation  and  sym- 
pathy with  God's  love."— P.  S.]— By  means  of 
the  Holy  Spirit  who  was  given  unto  us  [(Ucc 
n  V I  v /( (XT  o(;  aylov  roTi  d'oOevrnq  tjiiiv^. 
The  gift  of  the  Holy  Spirit  is  the  causality  of  the 
experience  of  the  love  of  God.  Chap.  viii.  15,  Ifi ; 
Gal.  iv.  6.  [The  Holy  Spirit  mediates  all  the  gifts 
of  grace  to  us,  and  glorifies  Christ  in  us.  Olshausen 
and  Alford  refer  the  aorist  participle  to  the  pente- 
costal  effusion  of  the  Spirit.      But  this  could  not 


*  [Similnrly  Olshaiisen  :  "  Dif  Go'fcah'ehe  ztim  Menschen, 
dii  abrr  in.  ihm  die.  GfgcnlirhK  lorckl.  (1  John  iv.  19),  iind 
ty.i'r  iiiclil  die  Gegcnlithe  mit  den  hloss  nalurlichcn  Kraflen, 
iondvrn  mil  den  hohnrnt  Kidfteii  des  gdHlirhi'n  Gristi'S." 
Forbes:  "The  love  here  spoken  of  is  not  God's  love,  as 
merely  ontivardly  shoM'n  to  us,  biit  as  shed  abroad  in  our 
heaits  ns  a  gift,  and  it  is  placed  in  connection  with  other 
Christian  (;;-afes — patience  and  hope." — P.  S.] 

■■  [Meyer:  "Der  S  griff  des  Itcichlichcn  Kept  scTwn  in 
ier  sinnliclien  Vfirstelhiiig  des  Ausschu'tenn,  Icunn  ohnr  auck 
wie  Tit.  iii.  6  tiock  besonders  ausgediuckl  werden." — P.  S.] 


apply  to  Paul,  who  was  called  afterwards.  Hence  it 
must  be  referred  to  the  time  of  regeneration,  when 
the  Pentecostal  fact  is  repeated  in  the  individual. — ■ 
P.S] 

Ver.  6.  For  Christ,  when  w^e  were  yet 
["Eri  yot^  A' (J  KT  T  6  v  ovrinv  rfiwv,  y..r.). 
On  the  different  readings,  trt  j'ci^,  for  yet,  or  sti'l, 
with  a  second  'iri,  alter  affDtvmv  (^t),  nyf,  if  in.' 
deed,  with  the  second  'itt.  (B.),  irt,  ya-Q,  without  tha 
second  eVt  {text,  rec),  tlq  ri  yen;  ((D-.  P.),  d  ydq, 
d  di,  see  2'extnal  Note  ^ — P.  S.]  The  ert  [lufit 
ad/iucl,  according  to  the  sense,  belongs  to  ovtoiVj 
&c.  [Comp.  Matt.  xii.  46 :  iVi.  atTor'  ).a}.o7<vT0ii ; 
Luke  XV.  20 :  eVt  <)*  arroTi  fiax^dv  rtTrt'/orToe. 
Similar  transpositions  of  tri^  among  the  classics. 
See  the  quotations  of  Meyer  iii  loc,  and  Winer, 
Gramm.,  p.  615. — P.  S]  Seb.  Schmid,  and  others, 
have  incorrectly  understood  frt  as  insvper  [more- 
over, furthermore ;  but  this  would  be  tVi-  ()i,  Heb. 
xi.  86,  not  £Tt  yciQ. — P.  S.]  ;  contrary  not  only  to 
the  meaning  of  the  word,  but  also  to  the  context. 
They  hold  that  the  IVt  does  not  enhance  the  pre- 
ceding, bnt  gives  the  ground  why  the  confidence  of 
salvation  is  an  ever-increasing  certainty.  Tholuck, 
with  Meyer,  favoring  the  en  at  the  beginning  of  the 
verse,  says  that  eri,  has  been  removed  at  the  begin- 
ning because  a  Bible-lesson  began  with  the  verse 
[with  the  word  X(>i(Tr6i:].  The  result  was,  that  it 
was  partly  removed,  partly  doubled,  and  partly  cor- 
rected. We  hold  that  the  twofold  eVt,  which  Lach- 
mann  reads  [and  which  Cod.  Sin.  sustains]  has  a 
good  meaning  as  emphasis. 

Ver.  7.  When  w^e  ^xrere  yet  weak,  or,  with- 
out (spiritual)  strength  [oi'to)i'  t)fnT)v  daOf' 
v<7)v  £Ti.].  The  state  of  sin  is  here  represented  aa 
weakness  or  sickness  in  reference  to  the  divine  life, 
and  consequently  as  helplessness,  in  order  to  de- 
clare that,  at  that  time,  believers  could  not  do  the 
least  toward  establishing  the  ground  of  their  hope. 
[Comp.  Isa.  liii.  4,  Septuagint :  rdq  d/ia(jTia(; 
tlfnov  <jif'(/ft,  with  Matt.  viii.  17:  rni;  dad  fvflaq 
tj/imi  'd/.afif.  Sin  is  here  represented  as  helpless 
weakness,  in  contrast  with  the  saving  help  of 
Christ's  love. — P.  S.]  The  uaO  tvfi<;  are  then  de- 
nominated d(Tf[>fli;,  ungodly,  in  order  to  express 
the  thought  that  we,  as  sinners,  could  not  add  any 
thing  to  the  saving  act  of  Christ,  but  did  our  utmost 
to  aggravate  the  work  of  Christ.  Sinfulness  is  rep- 
resented, therefore,  not  merely  as  "  the  need  of 
help,"  and  thus  ''  as  the  motive  of  God's  love  inter- 
vening for  salvation  "  (Meyer),  but  as  the  starting- 
point  of  redemption,  where  the  love  of  God  accom- 
plished the  great  act  of  salvation  without  any  co- 
operation of  sinners— yea,  in  «pite  of  their  greatest 
opposition. 

At  the  proper  time  (or,  in  due  season). 
Kara  x«^(Jor.  Two*  connections  of  the  xaroi 
r..:  1.  It  is  united  to  ovrmv,  &c.  We  were  ircak 
according  to  the  time  [pro  temporuni  rat/one],  in 
the  sense  of  excuse  (Erasmus) ;  in  the  sense  ot  the 
general  corruption  (according  to  Calvin,  Luther, 
Hofmann).  Against  this  are  both  the  position  of 
xaiQac,  and  its  .signification.  2.  It  is  referred  to 
aTTiOavfv,  but  in  different  ways.  Origen :  at 
that  time,  when  He  suffered.  Abelard  :  held  awhile 
in  death.  [Kypke,  Reiche,  Philippi,  Alford,  Hodge: 
at  the  appointed  time,  foretold  by  the  prophets.— 
P.  S.]      Meyer :  As  it  was  the  full  time  [proper 

•  [Or  three,  rather ;  for  the  words  have  also  been  con« 
nected  by  some  with  in  =  en  rort,  adhuc  eo  tempore,  at  ItU 
time  of  our  weakness. — P.  S.] 


164 


THE   EPISTLE   OF   PAUL   TO   THE   ROMANS. 


time]  for  the  deliverance  of  those  who  lived  at  that 
time.  Butter :  It  was  the  Jit  tune  in  the  history  of 
huiiianiti/.  Tills  by  no  means  weakens  the  prineipal 
thought,"  wliicli  nilher  reiiuiics  the  delinite  statement 
that  "the  saeritieial  death  of  Christ  was  aeeonling  to 
Divine  wisdom  ;  sinee  tlie  uecesiuty  for  salvation  and 
the  capacity  for  salvation  were  decided  with  the  ful- 
ness of  natural  corruption.  The  highest  heroism  of 
the  solf-sacrifice  does  not  exclude  its  reasonableness. 
See  Rom.  xvi.  25;  Gal.  iv.  4;  Eph.  i.  10;  1  Tim.  ii. 
6;  Titus  i.  3.  [xarci  )iai,()6v  is  =:  ii>  xcufjij), 
ft's"  xaijiov,  ini  xaifjor,  xaifjiioi;,  tempore  op/ior- 
tuno  ;  in  opposition  to  nai>a  xat^ior,  tempore  alietio, 
vniimely.  Here  it  is  essentially  the  same  with  the 
7T/.t'j(i<»fta  Ttov  xaifjt'n;  Eph.  i.  10,  and  the  /r/./j^yo/ia 
Tor  /fiovor,  Gal.  iv.  4;  comp.  Mark  i.  15.  Cluist 
appeared  when  all  the  preparations  for  Uis  coming 
and  His  kingdom  in  the  Jewish  and  Gentile  world 
were  completed,  and  when  the  disea.se  of  sin  had 
reached  tlie  crisis.  This  was  God's  own  appointed 
time,  aud  the  most,  or  rather  the  only,  appropriate 
time.  Christ  could  not  have  appeared  with  divine 
fitness  and  propriety,  nor  with  due  effect,  at  any 
other  time,  nor  in  any  other  race  or  country.  We 
cannot  conceive  of  His  advent  at  the  time  of  Noah, 
or  Abraham,  or  in  China,  or  among  the  savage  tribes 
of  America.  History  is  a  unit,  and  a  gradual  un- 
folding of  a  Divine  plan  of  infinite  wisdom.  Christ 
is  the  turning-point  and  centre  of  history,  the  end 
of  the  old  and  the  beginning  of  the  new  humanity — 
n  truth  which  is  conre.*sed,  wittingly  or  unwittingly, 
by  everv  date  from  A.  D.  throughout  the  civilized 
world.— r.  S.] 

For  the  ungodly.  vntQ,  for,  for  the  good 
of.  It  is  a  fuller  conception  than  the  idea  instead 
of,  avri,  if  we  remember  that,  wiiere  the  ques- 
tion is  concerning  a  dying  for  those  who  are  worthy 
of  death,  the  conception  naturally  involves  a  well- 
understood  ocvri.  See  Matt.  xx.  28.  The  terms 
!mio  and  nfol  [which  Paul  uses  synonymously. 
Gal.  i.  4J  are  more  ct)mprehcnsive ;  but  the  expres- 
sion avri  is  the  most  definite  one.  [Meyer  con- 
tends that  I'Tiiii  aud  ntiii  always  mean  for,  in  be- 
half of  ,  for  the  benefit  of  and  not  avti,  in  the  place 
of  loco,  although,  in  the  case  of  Christ,  His  death 
for  the  benefit  of  sinners  was  a  vicarious  .«acrifiee ; 
iii.  25 ;  Eph.  v.  2  ;  1  Tim.  ii.  (1.  Sometimes  the 
vnio,  like  tlie  English  preposition  for,  according 
to  the  context,  nece.-*surilv  involves  the  arri,  as  in 
2  Cor.  V.  15,  20,  21  ;  Gal."  iii.  Vi ;  Phileni.  13.  The 
Apostle  says  i'<7ii(>  aat{iuiv,  instead  of  Inif} 
iintirv,  in  order  to  bring  out  more  fully,  by  this 
strong  antithesis,  the  amazing  love  of  Ciirist.  — P.  S.] 

Ver.  7.  For  scarcely  for  a  righteous  man 
•will  one  die,  though,  for  the  good  man,  per- 
haps some  one  may  even  dare  to  die  [  M  i>  / 1^- 
ydu  I'iTi^i  (Kza/or  (witliout  the  article)  ti.,-  u/xo- 
O-avtit ai,'  rni(>  y«('  (the  second  y(i()  seems 
to  be  exceptive,  and  introduces  a  correction  of  the 
preceding  with  reference  to  /lokn;:  with  ditficully,  I 
say,  for  it  is  a  fact  that)  roTi  nyaOoT'  (with  the 
article)  rd/a  th;  xai  to?,  ft  a.  uno  I)  avtlv. — 
P.  S.].  The  difliculty  of  this  ver.se  has  led  to  vari- 
ous conjectures.*  The  Peshito  reads  Inin  ctiVtxov 
(unrighteous),  instead  of  Into  t)ixnioi' ;  Erasmus, 
Luther,  Melanchtlion,  &c.,  read  rVtxrd'oc  and  ciyaflor 
•3  neuter  words  ;  Hol'mann  [formerly,  not  now. — P. 
B.] :  at  least  the  latter  is  neuter;  Origen,  on  the  con- 


*  [Jororno,  Ep.  121  <id  Algat.,  mentiooB  five  explana- 
tion! ;  Tholuck.— P.  8.] 


trary,  held  merely  Stx.  as  neuter,  and  understood  by  i 
dya&oi,  Christ  as  the  perfectly  good  One.  Bat,  afl 
Meyer  properly  observes,  that  boiii  substantives  are 
masculine,  is  evident  from  the  antithesis  air .•,->»(<,•,  bj 
which  the  question  is  generally  concerning  a  dying 
for  persons.  [()i.xa»oi',  without  the  article,  must 
be  masculine  —  a  righteous  pn-son  (not  the  right , 
TO  dixciiov);  but  toT  dyaDoT;  witii  the  article 
may,  grammatically,  be  taken  as  neuter  =  suminun 
boHuin  (the  country,  or  any  good  cause  or  noble 
principle  for  which  martyrs  have  died  in  ancient  and 
modern  times).  Yet,  in  this  case,  the  anlithesii 
would  be  lost,  sinee  Christ  likewise  died  for  the 
highest  good,  the  salvation  of  the  world.  The  an- 
tithesis is  evidently  between  mtm  who  scarcely  are 
found  to  die  for  a  i)ixaio^,  though  occasionally  per- 
haps for  6  (their)  dynOoi;,  and  Christ  who  died  for 
datfifii;,  ver.  G  ;  or  d/tnoTot/.oi,  ver.  8 ;  and  even 
for  i/OfJoi  (the  very  opposite  of  dyaOo^),  ver.  10, 
In  both  eases,  the  death  for  peisons,  not  for  a  cause, 
is  meant. — P.  S.] 

Explanations  of  the  masculines  : 

(1.)  There  is  no  material  ditlerenco  between 
fy/zaioi;  and  dyaiyo^.  "  After  Paul  has  said  that 
scarcely  for  a  '  righteous '  man  will  one  die,  he  will 
add,  by  way  of  establishing  his  assertion,  that  there 
might  occur  instances  of  the  undertaking  of  such  a 
death."  Meyer,  in  harmony  with  Chrysostom,  Theo- 
doret,  Erasmus,  Calvin,*  &c.  But  <)('xaiog  is  noC 
dynO^ot;,  and  fiohi;  {scarcely)  is  not  rct/a  (possibly). 

(2.)  6  dyaOoi;  is  the  benefactor.  KnachtbuU 
[Atiimadv.  in  libros  X.  T.,  1C59,  p.  120],  Estius" 
[Cocceius,  Hammond],  and  many  othei-s ;  Reiche_ 
Tholuck  :  The  Friend  of  Man.     This  is  too  special. 

(3.)  The  dyaOoi;  stands  above  the  merely  right, 
eous  or  just  one.  Ambrosiaster  :  the  noble  one,  the 
dyaOo^  by  nature  ;  Bengel :  homo  innorius  txeinpU 
gratia,  &c.  ["  Jtx.,  indefinitely,  implies  a  harmless 
(guiltless)  man;  6  cij-oflo,-,  one  perfect  in  all  that 
piety  demands,  excellent,  bounteous,  princely,  bles» 
ed — for  example,  the  father  of  his  country." — P.  S.l 

Meyer  regards  all  these  as  "  subtle  distinctions." 
[He  quotes,  for  the  essential  identity  of  (i/xcttot;  and 
ciyaOoc,  Matt.  v.  45  ;  Luke  xxiii.  50  ;  Rom.  vii.  12, 
where  both  are  connected. — P.  S.]  Then  the  differ- 
ence between  the  Old  and  New  Testament  would 
also  be  a  subtle  drawing  of  distinctions.  The  Old 
Testament,  even  in  its  later  period,  scarcely  produced 
one  kind  of  martyrdom  ;  but  the  New  Testament 
has  a  rich  martyrdom.  Yet  we  would  understand  the 
n;'«.9o(;  in  a  more  general  sense.  The  ttlxa^nq  in- 
stills respect,  but  he  does  not  establish,  as  such,  a 
communion  and  exchange  of  life  ;  but  the  dya06<; 
inspires.  Paul's  acknowledgment  here,  which  was 
supported  by  heathen  examples,  is  a  proof  of  his 
apostolic  considerateiiess,  and  of  his  elevation  above 
ail  slavery  to  the  letter.  An  ecclesiastical  rhetorician 
would  have  suppressed  the  concession.  The  selec- 
tion of  the  expression  with  rd/a  and  rof./i^  is  ad- 
mirable ;  such  self-sacrifices  are  always  made  head- 
long in  the  ecstiusy  of  sympathetic  generosity. 

•  [Ciilvin:  "  Rarissimum  Mne  inter  Jiominft  txftnplum 
exslttf,  ut  pro  jualii  quia  mirri  siislinrol:  qiuimqwim  illwi 
tKiiiiiiinqwim  nrciiUre  patsil."  Tho  exception  ostabljshp* 
the  nilo.  Fritaschc,  Ilofmiinn  fin  tho  feconri  oilition  of  hit 
Schnflbnof.ii,  ii.  1,  p.  318),  imd  Moycr  (Itli  od.)  liave  ro- 
tumi'd  to  this  view.  In  tlio  1st  cd.  (which  llndRo,  p.  214, 
sccma  alone  to  liavo  consulted),  Meyer  took  roi  dyaSov,  on 
account  of  tho  article,  iiH  neuter  (iis  did  Jerome,  Eraamujt, 
l,uilnr,  ^[elanchthon,  UQckert,  and  Iloftnann  in  thcjirrf 
edition  of  his  Hhnftbrwdf),  and  rendered  the  latter  clauM 
of  the  verse  inlerroKiitively  :  "iktin  uxr  wagt's  auch  Icichlr 
lich/Hr  lUit  OuU  (U  »Urbcnt—V.  8.] 


CHAPTER  V.   1-11. 


165 


4.  It  is  hardly  necessary  to  mention  the  view 
[maintained  by  Meyer  in  the  first  edition,  but  now 
given  up  by  him. — P.  S.],  that  the  second  member 
of  the  sentence  is  interrogative  :  for  who  would  dare 
to  die  readily  eve?i  for  the  good? 

[I  can  see  no  material  difference  between  inter- 
pretations 2  and  3.  The  princijial  point  in  both  is 
tlie  distinction  made  between  (V/jiatoc  (talien  in  a 
narrower  sense)  and  6  aya-Ooc,  corresponding  to  our 
distinction  between  just  and  kind.  Such  a  distinc- 
tion is  made  by  Cerdo  in  Irenaeus  Adv.  hcer.  i.  27, 
quoted  also  by  Eusebius,  H.  E.,  iv.  11 :  rov  /liv 
diy.auov,  rov  i)k  ayaObv  v7ia(jyji,v,  alteram 
quidem  justum,  alterum  antein  bonum  esse  ;  and  by 
Cicero,  Dc  offic.,  iii.  15  :  "  Si  vir  bonus  is  est.  qui 
prodest  quibus  potest,  nocet  nemini,  recte  (certe)  jus- 
tum virum,  bonum  non  facile  reperiemtos"  (but  some 
editions  read:  ^^ eerie  istum  virttm  boiium").*  The 
righteous  man,  who  does  all  that  the  law  or  justice 
requires,  commands  oiu-  respect  and  admiration  ;  the 
good  man,  the  benefactor,  who  is  governed  by  love, 
inspires  us  with  love  and  gratitude.  Then  we  would 
have  the  following  sense :  "  It  is  hardly  to  be  ex- 
pected that  any  one  would  die  for  a  righteous  man, 
though  for  the  good  man  (i.  e.,  for  a  kind  benefactor 
or  intimate  friend),  this  self-denial  miglit  possibly  be 
exercised,  and  does  occasicmally  o<!cur.  So  Olshau- 
sen,  Tlmluck,  Philippi,  Turner,  Stuart,  Hodge,  Al- 
ford,  Wordsworth.  The  latter  refers  to  the  death 
of  Orestes  for  Pylades,  his  aler  ego,  and  of  Alces- 
tis  for  Admetus,  her  husband.  Webster  and  Wil- 
kinson :  "  To  make  the  admission  less  at  variance 
with  the  first  assertion,  he  substitutes  for  <%/.aior, 
rov  ayaf)oT',  the  man  of  eminent  kindness  and 
philanthropy,  the  well-known  benefactor,  y.(j^j(Tr6<;, 
'  bonus,'  in  advance  of  tftxa/oc."  The  article  be- 
fore ayaOov  may  be  pressed  as  justifying  the  dis- 
tinction :  a  righteous  man,  the  good  man,  good  to 
him,  his  benefactor.  I  confess,  I  am  not  quite  sat- 
isfied with  this  interpretation,  but  it  is  better  than 
any  other.— -P.  S.] 

Ver.  8.  But  God  doth  establish  [giveth  proof 
of,  (jvviartj(juv,  as  in  iii.  5;  comp.  Textual 
Xoie  ",  on  p.  113. — P.  S.]  God  proves  not  merely 
His  love  in  the  death  of  Christ  for  sinners,  accord- 
ing to  ver.  6,  but  He  makes  it  conspicuous  and 
prominent ;  He  exhibits  it ;  He  makes  it  the  highest 
manifestation  of  His  gospel.  See  John  iii.  16 ; 
2  Cor.  V.  19-21.  Luther:  He  praises  [E.  V.,  He 
coiinnendu^  His  love  toward  us  [  r »/  r  iavrov 
aydnijv.  His  own  love,  iu  contrast  with  the  love 
of  men,  ver.  7. — P.  S.] 

Ver.  9.  Much  more,  therefore,  being  now 
justified  by  his  blood,  vre  shall  be  saved 
through  him  from  the  wrath  [  « ;r  6  r'ji;  o^ytj^, 
from  the  well-known  and  well-deserved  wrath  to  come. 
— P.  S.]  According  to  Estius,  a  conclusion  a  ndnori 
ad  ma  jus  ;  according  to  Meyer,  a  conclusion  a  ma- 
jore  ad  minus.];  Both  are  in  part  right  and  in  part 
wrong,  because  neither  view  exactly  applies.  It  is 
a  conclusion  from  the  principle  to  the  consequence, 
and  a  conclusion  from  the  truth  of  the  almost  in- 
credible to  the  truth  of  that  which  is  self-evident. 
The  conclusion  is  still  further  strengthened  by  the 


♦  [Thohick  (and  Stuart  after  him)  quotes  a  number  of 
possasres  from  ihe  classics  and  the  Talmud,  which  to  my 
Dtind  have  no  force  at  all.— P.  S.] 

t  [So  .'ilso  Hodpra:  "It  is  an  argnment  a  fnrilnri.  If 
Jie  ei^eater  hi'uefit  has  heen  bestowed,  the  less  will  not  be 
withheld.  If  Christ  has  died  for  His  enemies,  He  will 
surely  save  His  frieods," — P.  S.J 


antithesis:  as  enemies,  we  were  justified  by  His  blood, 
and,  as  being  His  fellow-participants  in  peace,  w« 
shall  be  preserved  from  the  wrath  by  the  glorious 
exercise  of  His  authority,  and  then  by  His  liftj 
Preservation  from  wrath  is  a  negative  expression  of 
pei'fect  redemption.  1  Thess.  i.  10.  Compare  the 
positive  expression  of  1  Tim.  iv.  18.  —  [Ey  his 
blood,  uifia  is  the  concrete  expression  for  the 
atoning  death  of  Christ,  which  is  the  meritorious 
cause  of  our  justification.  This  does  not  rest  on 
our  works,  nor  our  faith,  nor  any  thing  we  have 
done  or  can  do,  but  on  what  Christ  has  done  for  us ; 
comp.  iii.  25. — P.  S.] 

Ver.  10.  For  if,  being  enemies  [fi  ya^ 
f/O^ol  o'i'Tft,].  It  may  be  asked  whether 
E/O(jol  —  that  is,  God's  enemies — is  to  be  ex- 
plained actively  or  passively ;  whether  it  denotes 
the  enemies  [haters]  of  God,  according  to  chap, 
viii.  7  [i^fl^a  n'c  .Ofov]  ;  Col.  i.  21  (Eph.  ii.  15 
does  not  belong  here),  or  those  who  are  charged  with 
God's  wrath  [hated  by  God],  for  which  view  Rom.  xi. 
28  [where  i/OiJol  is  the  opposite  of  a.yan>;roi ; 
comp.  also  Ontarvyhli;,  i.  13,  and  ri/.va  6^yT,Q,  Eph. 
ii.  3. — P.  S.]  has  been  cited.  The  passive  inter- 
pretation  has  been  supported  by  Calvin,  Reiche, 
Fritzsche,  Tholuck,  Krehl,  Baumgarten-Crusius,  De 
Wette,  Philippi,  Meyer  [Alford,  Hodge],  and  the 
active  or  subjective  interpretation  by*  Spener,  Titt- 
mann,  Usteri,  and  Riickert  [among  English  commen- 
tators, by  Turner].  Meyer  says  in  favor  of  the  first 
view  :  1.  "  Clu'ist's  death  did  not  destroy  the  enmity 
of  men  toward  God  ;  but,  by  effecting  their  pardon 
on  the  part  of  God,  it  destroyed  the  enmity  of  God 
toward  men,  whence  the  cessation  of  man's  enmity 
toward  God  follows  as  a  moral  consequence,  brought 
about  by  faith.  2.  And  how  could  Paul  have  been 
able  to  infer  properly  his  noXh'i  fia/.kov,  &c.,  since 
the  certainty  of  the  (jMOr^(T()uf-ba  rests  on  the  fact 
that  we  stand  in  a  friendly  relation  (grace)  to  God, 
and  not  on  our  being  friendly  tow-aid  God  ?  "  These 
tW'O  arguments  have  a  very  orthodox  sound,  but  are 
without  a  vital  grasp  of  the  fact  of  the  atonement, 
and  here  without  force.  For,  first  of  all,  the  death 
of  Christ  is  as  well  a  witness  and  seal  of  God's  love, 
which  overcomes  man's  enmity  and  distrust,  as  it  is 
an  offering  of  reconciliation,  which  removes  the  o^jyij 
Oio~<  in  His  government  and  in  the  conscience  of 
man.  This  element  constitutes  the  principal  motive 
force  in  the  living  preacliing  of  the  gospel ;  for  ex- 
ample, among  the  Moravians.  In  the  next  place,  if 
we  look  away  from  God's  work  in  man,  we  have  no 
ground  for  assuming  an  increase  \_7To).hJi  /ic'/./or]  in 
God's  love  and  grace  in  itself.  God  is  unchangeable ; 
man  is  changeable.  The  changed  relation  of  man  to 
God  is  indeed  conditioned  by  a  changed  relation  of 
God  to  him  ;  but  it  is  by  virtue  of  God's  unchange- 
ableness  that  the  work  of  God,  which  has  begun  in 
man,  bears  the  pledge  of  completion.  See  Phil.  i.  6. 
The  sealing  signifies,  not  a  sealing  of  God,  but  of  man 
by  God's  grace.  It  is  not  biblical  to  say,  that  Christ, 
by  His  death,  has  removed  God's  ennjity  toward  us. 
And  yet  the  Apostle  is  alleged  to  say  that  here,  just 
after  he  has  said  :  But  God  sets  forth  and  commends 
His  love,  &c.     Then  the  odd  sense  would  be :  We 

♦  [The  oriffinal,  by  mistake,  mentions  here  Tholuck, 
who  holds  the  opposite  view,  at  least  in  the  fifthand  last 
edition  of  his  Camm.,  p.  210,  and  says  that  the  opyr)  Scou 
necessarily  implies  also  an  ix^P"-  ^eoO,  although  both  are 
to  be  taken  in  a  relative  sense  only,  as  the  wrath  and 
enmity  of  a  fulher  toward  his  children.  He  quotes  th« 
sentence  of  Hupo  of  St.  Victor:  " yim  quia  reconciliavit 
amavit,  sed  quia  amavit  recunciliavil." — P.  S.] 


166 


THE    EPISTLE    OF   PAUL   TO   TIE   ROMANS. 


have  been  even  reconciled  when  we  were  not  yet 

'•ecoiicilfd  ! 

We  were  reconciled  to  God    [/.arrjlXd- 
Y  >;  II  !■  V    T  lo    i-t  nj>  \. 

[Soiue  prc'limiiiiiry  philological  remarks  on  this 
imporwiit  term,  which  occurs  here  for  the  fir:5t  time, 
may  be  found  useful.  The  verbs  di-aXuaaitt,  kutu- 
XdtjfTci,  ixTioxaTa/.daai'i,  arva/.daan)  (from  d/.da- 
am,  to  c.'iniic/c),  express  the  general  idea  of  a  change 
of  relation  of  two  parties  at  enmity  into  a  relation 
of  peace,  or  the  idea  of  reconciliation  (  Versdhuuug, 
Ausxo  .7tung),  with  a  slight  modification,  indicated 
by  the  prepositions — xard,  in  relation  to  ;  ()i.a,  be- 
tween ;  dno,  from ;  avv,  with,  but  without  refer- 
ence to  the  question  whetlier  the  enmity  be  mutual, 
or  on  one  side  only — wliicli  must  be  decided  by  the 
connection.  The  noun  ()(.«/./.«;'/;  is  more  frequently 
used  in  the  classics  than  xuTu/./.cty/i,  but  nowhere  in 
the  New  Testament ;  tlie  verb  dutldaad),  or  dt,a- 
XdzTii)  occurs  only  once;  in  tlie  pass.  aor.  2  imperat.. 
Matt.  V.  24  :  dia/.z-dytjOi.  roi  di)f/.qiji  aov,  be  recon- 
ciled to  thy  brother.  The  noun  xara/./xiyij  is  used 
four  times  in  the  New  Testament;  Kom.  v.  11  (E. 
v.,  atonement);  xi.  15  (the  reconciling);  2  Cor.  v. 
18,  19  (reconciliation,  twice);  the  corresponding 
verb  yMTaldaao)  occurs  six  times — Rom.  v.  10 
(twice);  1  Cor.  vii.  11 ;  2  Cor.  v.  18,  19,  20— and  is 
always  rendered  in  our  E.  V.  to  reconcile.  The 
ti'anslation  atonement,  at  the  close  of  Rom.  v.  11,  is 
etymologically  correct  (at-one-ment  =  reconcilia- 
tion), but  theologically  wrong  in  the  present  use  of 
the  term  =:  pro/iitiatl.on,  expiation  (which  corre- 
sponds to  the  Greek  t).a(Tii6i;;  1  John  ii.  2  ;  iv.  lo). 
The  y.aTa)J.ayr'i,  in  tlie  Christian  sense,  signifies  the 
great  change  in  the  relation  bctwen  God  and  man, 
brought  about  by  the  voluntary  atoning  sacrifice  of 
Christ,  whereby  God's  wrath  has  been  removed,  Ilis 
justice  .satisfied,  and  man  reunited  to  Him  as  His 
loving  and  reconciled  Father.  Some  confine  the 
word  sin)i)ly  to  a  rec(jnciliation  of  man  to  God,  on 
the  ground  that  no  change  can  take  place  in  God,  or 
that  (lod  never  hated  the  simier.  Others  forget  that 
the  d(!ath  of  Christ  is  itself  the  most  amazing  ex- 
hibition of  God's  love,  wliereby  He  attracts  the  sin- 
ner to  Him.  The  two  sides  must  not  i)e  abstractly 
separated.  It  is  God  who,  in  His  infinite  love,  es- 
tablishes a  new  relation  between  Himself  and  man- 
kind through  the  atoning  sacrifice  of  His  Son,  and 
removes  all  h.'gal  ol)structions  which  s<'parated  us 
from  Him  ;  and  on  the  ground  of  ihi."  objective  and 
accomplished  exjiiation  (i/rtff/ios)  and  reconciliation 
(xHTd/./.ixyt'i),  we  are  called  upon  to  be  reconciled  to 
Him  {xara/./.dyrjTf  r<J>  O'no  ;  2  Cor.  v.  20  ;  comp. 
aiitD^tjTf  dn'u,  z.t./..,  Acts  ii.  40),  i.  e.,  to  lay  aside 
all  enmity  and  distrust,  and  to  turn  in  love  and  grati- 
tuile  to  Hitn  wlio  first  loveil  us.  Hoih  sides  are 
beautifully  connected  in  2  Cor.  v.  18-20  (which  is 
often  one-sidedly  and  wrongly  quoted  against  the 
doctrine  of  the  vicarious  .sacrifice),  viz.,  the  reconcili- 
ation effected  once  for  all  l)y  God  Himself  through  i 
the  death  of  His  Son,  having  the  world  for  its  ol». 
jeet  and  remission  of  sins  for  its  effect ;  and  the  ' 
reconciliation  of  men  to  (lod  as  a  moral  jiroeess,  \ 
in  whicii  men  are  exliorted  to  take  part.  The  first  I 
is  a  finished  act  of  infinite  mercy  on  the  part  of  ; 
God  in  Christ ;  the  second,  a  change  of  feeling  and  j 
a  constant  duty  of  man  in  eonse<|uence  of  what  has  ! 
been  done  for  him.  Comp.  Kling  and  Wing  on  tlie 
pa.ssiige  in  LaTige  on  2  Cor.,  p.  98  f.,  Anier.  edition.  | 
Archbishop  Trench  (Si/noni/ofn  of'  the  Xew  TeKln.  \ 
tnent,  Second  Part,  p.  137  f.)  gives  the  foUowmg  j 


judicious  explanation  of  the  term:  "The  Cliristiai 
xaralXnyt'i  has  two  sides.  It  Is  first  a  reconciliiu 
tion,  *  (jiia  iJeus  7iox  nibi  recuncilini  it,''  laid  aside 
His  holy  anger  against  our  sins,  and  received  ui 
into  favor — a  reconciliation  effected  once  for  ail 
for  us  by  Christ  upon  His  cross;  so  2  ('or.  v. 
18,  19;  Rom.  v.  10;  in  which  last  passage  xaT«>U 
i.daaKjOai,  is  a  pure  passive,  '  (/6  <o  in  graliam 
recipi,  apud  quern  in  o.iio  fneria.''  But  z«T«/./.«yif 
is  secondly,  and  subordinately,  the  reconciliation, 
'(/?«<  itox  Deo  reconciliainus,''  the  daily  deposition, 
under  the  operation  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  of  the  en- 
mity of  the  old  man  toward  God.  In  this  passive 
middle  sense  xaral/.drrffKjOcu  is  used ;  2  Cor.  v. 
20;  and  cf.  1  Cor.  vii.  11.  All  attempts  to  make 
this,  the  secondary  meaning  of  the  word,  to  be  the 
primary,  rest  not  on  an  unprejudiced  exegesis,  but 
on  a  foregone  determination  to  get  rid  of  the  reality 
of  God's  anger  against  sin.  A\  ith  x«t«/./.«;'//  con- 
nects  itself  all  that  language  of  Scripture  which  de- 
scribes sin  as  a  state  of  enmity  {t/0(ia)  with  God 
(Rom.  viiL  7  ;  Eph.  ii.  15  ;  James  iv.  4) ;  and  sin- 
ners as  enemies  to  Him,  and  alienated  from  Him 
(Rom.  V.  10;  Col.  i.  21);  Christ  on  the  cross  as  the 
Peace,  and  Maker  of  peace  between  (iod  and  man 
(Eph.  ii.  14  ;  Col.  i.  20) ;  all  such  language  as  this, 
'  Be  ye  reconciled  with  God  '  (2  Cor.  v.  2(i)." — P.  S.] 
Meyer :  "  Accordingly  it  is  necessary  to  under- 
stand xax  rjlldy  tj  ft  fv  and  x  a  r  a  ).  ).  a  y  i  v  x  i(; 
not  actively,  but  passively :  reconciled  icith  God,  so 
that  He  is  no  more  hostile  to  us,  having  given  up  Hia 
wrath  against  us."  On  Tittmann's  attempt  to  distin- 
guish between  iha/./.uTTn-v  and  xaTu/./.drTnr,  see 
Tholuck  on  The  Sermon  on  the  Mount,  Matt.  v.  24.* 
Tlie  deMiiition  of  these  expressions  is  certainly  con- 
nected with  the  explanation  of  f/Ofiol.  It  may  be 
asked,  however,  whether  the  meaning  is :  God  has 
been  reconciled  toward  us  (Meyer,  Philippi) ;  or: 
we  have  been  reconciled  toward  (lod;  or:  there  has 
been  a  mutual  reconciliation?  The  first  cannot  be 
said  [?],  since  the  xnra/./.ny/;  denotes  a  change 
[from  enmity  to  friendshiji]  ;  also  the  xara/./.ay^ 
in  2  Cor.  v.  18,  "tot  y.ara/./.dtcivTo.;  ijufit;  iaiTiJi," 
must  be  carefully  distinguished  from  the  i/.«rT/(o,-  (see 
my  AngewiUidle  Dogmutik,  p.  858).f  The  sense  is, 
therefore  :  While  we  were  still  enendes,  adversaries 
of  God,  we  were  delivered  l)y  the  death  of  Jesus, 
and  the  expiating  D.nanoii,  which  is  identical  with 
it,  from  guilty  subjection  to  the  punishment  of  the 
h()yt],  and  have  been  made  objects  of  His  conquer- 
ing operation  of  love ;  and  now,  in  the  light  of  this 
operation  of  love,  we  have  a  heart  delivered  from 
the  enmity  of  alienation  from  God — a  heart  which,  % 
in  the  train  of  love,  has  joy  in  God.  But  how  can 
we  distinguish  between  the  objective  and  subjective 
change  of  humanity  '!  It  is  plain,  from  the  risen 
Redeemer's  salutation  of  peace  ami  His  guspeUmes- 
sage,  that  the  love  of  Christ  on  the  cross  conquered 
tlie  hatred  of  humanity.  The  risen  Saviour's  salu- 
tation of  peace  contains  the  "  peace  on  earth." 
Add  to  all  this  the  difference  and  antithesis  be- 
tween  vers.    8,    9,    10,    which   are   completely   olv 

♦  (And  aUo  the  note  of  Kritzsclio  on  Uom.  v.  10.  Titt- 
mnnn,  Dr  Synnn.  A".  T.,  \  I0'2  (iipprovoil  l>y  liubiiiiion  nA 
KaraXa<r<jiji),  makes  iiaXaTTtiv  to  niiNin  "rjji;  i-,-  u'  q  iir  /nit 
i'm'/iii<i7i(1  Ml'TUA,  r,t  i\is'-  ihaiii'il,"  and  KOTaAoTTCt*',  '\f'irfre 
III  ALTi.B  iiiimiiitm  animuin  tlrpomil."  This  dUlinction  it 
iirtiitrury  and  fiinciful.  Comp.  the  pn-codliig  n-miirks.— 
V.  S.] 

t  [In  vol.  iii.,  p.  S.'iS,  of  his  work  on  Pniimnltin,  T)r.  Lnncra 
distinKui.-itifs  Ix-twccti  (caraAAayij  as  belcncinK  to  the  jno- 

Lholii'ul,   iAdtTMOf  to   tlic  priostly,  uud  airoAvT/Muoit   tu   th( 
Lugly  otflcc  of  Ohridl.— r.  S.] 


CHAPTER  V.   1-11. 


167 


Bcured  by  the  prevalent  explanation  above  alluded 
to.  The  clause,  God  commendetli  his  love  toward  w*, 
is  the  inscription  tio  the  antithesis,  namely :  1.  Christ 
died  for  us  when  we  were  yet  si7itiers.  Through  His 
(atoning)  blood  we  have  been  justified,  delivered 
from  the  sense  of  the  6(>y»/.  The  effect  is,  that 
much  more,  as  being  juiftiped  (negatively),  we  shall 
be  saved  from  the  o^jv/  which  will  finally  come  upon 
the  world.  All  this  is  D.aafioi;,  expiating  destruc- 
tion of  the  guilt  of  sin.  2.  The  Son  of  God  of- 
fered death  while  we  were  enemies.  Through  wis 
death  we  are  reconciled  to  God.  The  effect  is,  that 
much  more,  as  being  reconciled  (positively),  we  shall 
be  delivered  in  the  mighty  power  and  rule  of  His 
life.     xara/J.ayfj  is  all  this. 

[In  {i.  e.,  in  vital  union  with)  his  life,  iv  ttj 
Coj'Jj  avTov,  in  antithesis  to  dtd  (through,  by 
means  of)  rov  &avdTov.  If  even  the  death  of 
Christ  has  such  a  saving  efficacy,  how  much  more 
His  risen  life,  which  triumphed  over  the  realm  of 
death  and  hell,  ascended  to  the  right  hand  of  God 
Almighty,  is  clothed  with  all  power  in  heaven  and 
earth,  and  which,  being  communicated  by  tlie  Holy 
Ghost  to  the  believer,  will  conquer  in  him  all  oppo- 
sition, and  bring  the  work  of  salvation  commenced 
here  to  a  final  and  glorious  consummation.  Comp. 
John  xiv.  19  :  "  Because  I  live,  ye  shall  live  also  ;  " 
Rom.  viii.  11  ;  Gal.  ii.  20  ;  1  Cor.  xv.  23  ;  Heb.  vii. 
25.  Salvation  is  effected  by  the  death  of  Christ, 
but  actually  applied  by  His  life  ;  or  His  death  is  the 
meritorious,  His  life  the  efficacious  cause  of  our  sal- 
Taton.  Hodge :  "  There  is,  therefore,  most  abundant 
ground  for  confidence  for  the  final  blessedness  of  be- 
hevcrs,  not  only  in  the  amazing  love  of  God,  by 
which,  though  sinners  and  enemies,  they  have  been 
justified  and  reconciled  by  the  death  of  His  Son, 
but  also  in  the  consideration  that  this  same  Saviour 
that  died  for  them  still  lives,  and  ever  lives,  to  sanc- 
tify, protect,  and  save  them." — P.  S.] 

Ver.  11.  And  not  only  that,  but  also  triumph- 
ing in  Qod  \^0v  i^iovov  dk,  a.).).a  y.ai  y.av/M- 
fiivoi.  (which  is  the  correct  reading,  instead  of 
the  red^x  a  V X (J) iLi  f  0  a ,  see  Textual  Note  '')  iv  nji 
0fw].  Explanations:  1.  The  participle  xav/o'- 
fifvoi,  stands  for  the  finite  verb ;  therefore  we 
must  supply  ta/niv  (hence  the  readings  xavydiittOa, 
y.av/M/ii-v).  Riickert,  Tholuck.  Only  aioOtjao/nOa 
must  be  supplied  to  /.tovov  ^L  The  construction 
then  runs  tlms,  according  to  De  Wette :  We  have 
not  only  ike  hope  of  escaping  from  the  wrath  of 
God,  but  \re  also  glory  in  God.  2.  The  participle 
cannot  stand  for  the  finite  verb  (see,  on  the  con- 
trary, the  discussions  with  Meyer,  in  Tholuck).  But 
even  here  ffoiOfjaoftfOa  only  is  to  be  supplied.  The 
sense,  tlien,  is  this :  but  not  only  shall  we  be  saved 
by  His  life,  but  so  that  with  this  (ju'ilktOw  we  shall 
also  glory  in  God.  [Alford  :  "  Not  only  shall  we  be 
saved,  but  that  in  a  triumphant  manner  and  frame 
of  mind."]  3.  KaraD-ayivrfq  must  be  supplied. 
Not  Only  reconciled,  but  also  glorying.  Thus  for- 
merly Fritzsche,  Kiillner,  Glockler,  Baumgarten- 
Crusius,  and  Meyer  in  his  earlier  editions.  This  ex- 
planation is  proved  to  be  relatively  the  most  cor- 
rect, as  the  (TMZft^ai,  deiiotes  not  a  mere  degree 
of  salvation,  but  comprises  salvation  to  the  pc#nt 
of  completion,  and  as  /.ax allay ivrn;  is  repeated 
in  di  ov  vvv  rijv  xar allay ijv  eldfioftfv.  Our  view 
is,  however,  that  we  have  here  an  antithesis  of 
climaxes.  Ov  /lovor  aoiO^ricrofifOa — /.arallayivrfi; 
ev  rfi  Utt'!]  A'piffTor — alia  xal  xav/dmtvni'  tv  n'> 
■&foj  d'M  roTi  xiifjiov  rj/.i(j)v   I^aav  X^.a^pi',      The 


rising  climax  is  the  following  :  1.  We  are  delivered 
from  the  wrath.  2.  We  are  safely  harbored  in  the 
life  of  Christ.  3.  God,  in  His  love,  has  become, 
througii  Christ,  our  God,  in  whom  we  glory.  We 
glory  not  only  in  the  hope  of  the  data  of  God,  and 
not  only  conditionally  in  tribulation.*,  &c.,  but  we 
glory  absolutely  in  God  as  our  God  ;  see  chap.  viii. 

Through  whom  w^e  have  now.  Eeflrence 
to  the  future  glory,  as  it  is  grounded  in  the  experi. 
ence  of  the  present  salvation,  and  ever  develops 
itself  from  this  base. — Have  appropriated  [ta/v 
xarallayijv  ildfl  Ojufv].  So  we  translate  the 
lid fio/ufv  {angerigiiet  haben),  to  emphasize  the 
fact  of  the  ethical  appropriation,  whicli  is  very  im 
portant  for  the  beginning  of  the  following  section. 

[It  is  safe  to  infer  from  ildfioiAtv  that  y.arallayr^ 
primarily  means  here  a  new  relation  of  God  to  us^ 
which  He  has  brought  about  and  which  we  receive, 
not  a  new  relation  of  man  to  Gad,  or  a  moral  change 
in  us,  although  this  is  a  necessary  moral  consequence 
of  the  former,  and  inseparable  from  it.  Hence 
y.ar allay ivrii;,  in  Rom.  v.  10,  is  parallel  with 
d ixai(i) Q  ivr 1 1;,  ver.  9:  diy-avoiOivrn;  amOtiao- 
fifOa  —  y.a-rallayivrn;  aiDiOtjdofifOa.  The  article 
before  y.ar  allay /]  i>  indicates  the  well-known,  the 
only  possible  reconciiiaUoii,  that  which  was  brought 
about  by  the  atoning  sacrifice  of  Christ.  The  E.  V. 
here  exceptionally  renders  y.ar.  by  atonement,  which, 
in  its  old  sense  (=  at-one-mcnt),  meant  reconcilia- 
tion, but  is  now  equivalent  to  expiation,  pr<  pitio' 
tion,  satix/ac  ion.  The  expiation  of  Christ  {llaa/uoi;, 
ilaarrjiiiov,  the  German  VersUhnung)  is  the  ground 
and  condition  of  the  uconciiiatiov  of  God  and  man 
[xarallayr],  Versohiiung).  Bengel  says,  on  Rom. 
iii.  24 :  "  Frojiitiation  (tlaaiuoi;)  takes  away  the 
offence  against  God  ;  reconciliation  (xatallaytj)  haa 
two  sides  {ext  <)lnlfi'^Oi;) :  it  removes  («.)  God's  in- 
dignation against  us;  2  Cor.  v.  19;  (6.)  om-  aliena- 
tion from  God ;  2  Cor.  v.  20."  In  the  same  place 
Bengel  distinguishes  between  y.arallayt'j  and  ano- 
li'TQiixn^  (redemption,  Erldsiiny),  by  referring  the 
former  to  God,  the  latter  to  enemies — i.  e.,  sin  and 
Satan.  He  remarks,  however,  that  llaff/wi;  and 
d7ioli'<TQio<ji,i;  are  fundamentally  one  single  benefit, 
namely,  the  restitutio  jjecca.toris  perditi. — P.  S.] 


DOCTEIKAL  AKD  ETHICAX,. 

1.  Ver.  ].  The  effect  of  justification  is  peace 
with  God.  Peace  with  God  takes  the  place  of  our 
guilty  relation,  in  which  God  seemed  to  be  our  ene- 
my, because  He  was  hostile  to  our  sins — with  which 
we  were  identified — and  in  his  oijyt'j  separated  us 
from  Him,  in  order  to  separate  us  from  sin.  In  this 
relation  of  guilt  we  were  recdly  Ris  enemies,  although 
we  wished  to  appear  to  be  the  contrary.  God,  in 
His  government,  likewise  seemed  to  oppose  us  unto 
death,  as  we  opposed  Him.  And  therefore  we  were 
at  variance  also  with  the  best  portion  of  the  world, 
and  with  the  kingdom  of  all  good  spirits,  as  we  were 
at  variance  with  ourselves  and  with  God.  But,  with 
our  justification,  peace  is  established,  and  with  it  the 
reverse  relation  in  all  these  respects.  We  should 
not  speak  of  the  peace  of  God  as  of  a  mere  sensa- 
tion ;  in  the  feeling  of  peace,  the  most  glorious 
actual  relation  is  reflected.  We  are  not  only  in  har- 
mony, but  in  covenant  union  with  God  ;  not  only  in 
harmony  with  ourselves,  but  true  to  ourselves  ;  nol. 
only  in  harmony  with  God's  presence  and  govern 
ment  in  the  world,  and  in  all  events,  but  also  in  con 


108 


THE   EPISTLE    OF   PAUL   TO    THE   ROMANS. 


nectiou  with  and  under  the  protection  of  "  all  the 
Btars  of  heaven." 

2.  [\'er.  2.  The  access  to  the  throne  of  grace.'\ 
Tlie  liigh-]jriest,  who  went  into  the  Holy  of  Holies 
in  the  iiope  of  beholding  tliere  the  glory  of  God, 
was  eliielly  a  type  of  Christ,  who  has  gone  into  the 
real  Holy  of  Holies  for  His  own  people,  and  has  be- 
come the  real  atonement  for  us  (Heb.  ix.) ;  but  he 
was  also  the  type  of  believers,  wiio,  tiirough  C'iirist, 
likewise  have  free  access  to  the  Holy  of  Holies  of 
grace,  in  the  hope  of  beholding  there  the  ()oJa  of 
God,  and  being  glorified  in  it  (see  chap.  viii.).  On 
the  certainty  of  the  Christian's  hope,  see  Tholuek, 
p.  202. 

3.  We  (/lor;/  in  tribulations  ako,  ver.  3.  Tribu- 
lations— subjectively,  sorrows  ;  and,  taken  together, 
the  cross  which  the  Christian  must  bear  after  His 
Saviour — arc  not  only  tiie  ordained  way  to  glory,  but 
also  the  means  of  promoting  glory.  For  Ijciicvcrs 
shall  attain  not  merely  the  gloiy  of  the  Adaniic  para- 
dise, but  rather  the  higlier  glory  of  Christ's  para- 
disc  ;  and  this  they  reach  because  they  are  similarly 
situated,  and  become  like  Him  in  death  as  in  life. 
The  Cross  effects  the  enriched  and  established  con- 
summation. 

4.  The  f/lori/inff  of  Christians  is  their  joyous  tes- 
timony of  a  blessed  experience — the  personal  shape 
which  tlie  gospel  takes.  It  is  always  conditioned  ac- 
cording to  its  changing  forms  by  a  fundamental  form 
of  salvation  ;  that  is,  established  on  tlie  glory  of  God 
and  Christ,  in  opposition  to  all  the  forms  and  dis- 
guises of  self-glory. 

T).  The  sorites^  Irihulntion  worketh  constancy,  &c. 
(vers.  3-5),  represents  tribidntion  also  as  a  spiritual 
experience.  Therefore  a  merely  external  suffering, 
such  as  any  body  may  have,  is  not  meant  thereby, 
but  the  cntss  as  a  conseciuence  of  Christian  faith. 
Faith  leads  into  tribulation,  because,  as  peace  with 
God,  it  leads  into  conflict  with  the  kingdom  of  dark- 
ness, and  also  with  sin  in  ourselves,  because  it  en- 
dows tiie  ordinary  suffering  of  this  life  with  a  spirit- 
ual character.  Such  a  beai-ing  of  the  cross  looks  to 
constuiu-y,  or  stealfasttirss  (passive  palientia  has 
active  patieutia  as  a  result) ;  steadfastness  reaches 
its  preliminary  is<ue,  as  well  as  its  final  issue,  in 
approval  (experience) ;  approval  converts  hope  to 
confident  assurance,  which  cannot  deceive,  because 
it  U  itself  the  [jrophccy  of  approaching  glory.  The 
Apostle's  tiiriles  desciibi'S  a  chain  of  blessed  expe- 
riences, which  cannot  Ijc  broken  unless  the  first  links 
to  approval  are  rendereil  brittle  by  insincerity,  but 
whose  strength  increases  from  link  to  link  to  that 
uncon(|ueral)le  assurance  of  hope. 

C.  The  elder  dogmatics,  esprcially  the  Reformed, 
have  made  prominent  the  doctrine  of  approval  and 
perseverance  in  grace  ;  or,  what  is  the  same,  the 
doctrine  of  sraliuij.  They  made  sealing  follow  jus- 
tification. If  this  great  truth  had  been  carefully 
guarded,  the  controversy  between  the  Lutheran  and 
Ref')rmeil  theology,  as  to  whether  a  pardoned  person 
can  fall  from  grace,  coidd  have  l)een  regarded  as  a 
mere  (juestion  of  words,  to  be  solved  by  tin;  further 
inquiry  as  to  whether  the  question  concerns  Chris- 
tians b'il'ore,  (ir  after,  they  are  sealed.  The  heart's 
experience  of  juslilication  ww*^  be  put  to  proof,  in 
which  it  becomes  the  historically  established  expe- 
rience of  life.  Steadfastness  in  such  jjroofs  results 
inwiirdly  in  sealing  by  flit;  Holy  S[»irit  (2  Tim.  ii.  19 ; 
Rev.  vii.  3;  ix.  4;  Efih.  i.  is  ;  iv.  W),  and  out- 
warilly  in  the  establishment  of  the  Christi.in  in  the 
ehai"acter  of  his  new  nature  ((Voxt/f;;).     The  nomm 


et  omen  iwlelebile  of  baptism,  confirmation,  and  ordi 
nation,  becomes  the  real  character  indelehllis  oidj 
by  ap|)roval,  or  sealing.  This  is  ethically  connected 
with  the  fact  that,  by  the  test  of  tribulation  and  stead, 
fastness,  a  purifying  process  has  Uiken  place,  by 
which  a  separation  of  the  most  combustible  material 
has  been  effected. 

7.  The  way  which  Christians  ptnsue  with  Christ 
goes  downward,  according  to  appearance,  and  often 
according  to  feeling  ;  bnt  it  goes  upward,  according 
to  internal  operation  and  exi)erience.  This  occurs 
in  a  threefold  relation  :  (1.)  Since  all  the  liigli  stand- 
points of  worldly  consciousness  are  without  support, 
the  Christian's  position  in  the  fellowsiii|)  of  Christ, 
who  is  above,  is  establisiied  as  his  second  nature. 
(2.)  The  pereevering  fellowshi|)  in  the  historical  igno- 
miny of  Christ,  is  fellowsliip  in  the  historical  honor 
which  shall  be  received  in  the  harvest  of  the  world. 
(3.)  There  is  forming  a  dynamical  nature  of  light 
and  heat  of  the  inner  man,  which,  by  its  impulsive 
and  sustaining  power,  as  well  as  by  the  still  stronger 
upward  attraction,  ascends  to  the  kingdom  of  glory. 

8.  The  experience  of  the  live  of  God  in  Christ 
for  us  is  changed,  with  its  joy,  into  pure  reciprocal 
love ;  and  from  the  complete  life  of  love  of  this 
new  birth  there  arises  pure  salvation,  which,  in  this 
world,  is  divideil  into  hope  and  patience.  See  chap, 
viii.  24,  25  ;   1  John  iii. 

9.  As  the  Holy  Spirit  caused  the  birth  of  Christ, 
so  does  He  cause  the  new  birth  of  Christians;  ver.  6, 

10.  The  contemplation  of  the  love  of  God  for  us, 
which  was  revealed  in  the  death  of  Jesus,  in  His 
dying  for  us  (ver.  8),  remains  the  ground  of  the  life 
of  love  of  believers.  See  Philip])!,  p.  Kit).  On  tiie 
I'Tiin,  sec  Meyer,  p.  150.  [P.  189  f.,  fourth  edition. 
Meyer  maintains  here  that  in  all  the  jiassages  which 
treat  of  the  object  of  the  death  of  Christ  (as  Luke 
xxii.  19,  20 ;  Hom.  viii.  32  ;  xiv.  15,  &c.),  the  prep- 
ositions i'TTti;  and  7Tf(^n  mean  in  cumrnodum,  for  the 
hencjit  of,  and  must  not  be  confounded  with  nvTi, 
loco,  ifistead  of,  which  Paul  never  uses  (but  Christ 
Himself  uses  it,  Matt.  xx.  28,  <)<i7rn^  ri^v  tii'/fjv 
nlrov  ).i'T(tov  cirrt  no'/.h'iv,  conip.  Mark  x.  45, 
/.i'Tfiov  ctrrl  nol/.m') ;  but  that  Paul  nevertheless 
teaches  a  satisfaclio  vicaria,  by  representing  Christ's 
death  as  a  propitiatory  sin-offering,  Rom.  iii.  26 ; 
Eph.  V.  2,  &c.— P.  S.] 

11.  After  the  .\i)ostle  has  represented  the  soritei 
of  the  Christian's  snhjcctice  certainty  of  salvation 
(vers.  1-5),  he  makes  a  sorites  of  his  objective  cer- 
tainty of  salvation  (vers,  ti-11).  The  thesis  froni 
which  he  proceeds  is  the  fact  that,  among  men,  there 
is  scarcely  one  who  will  die  for  a  right(M)us  man, 
tliough  perhaps  one  would  die  for  the  good  man  (see 
the  Exey.  Xotes  ;  comp.  Tholuek,  p.  208).  The  sen- 
tence must  l)e  enlarged  i)y  the  farthei  definition  : 
No  one  would  die  for  the  ungodly,  or  for  his  enemy; 
but  God  has  performed  this  miracle  of  love  in  tlie 
death  of  Christ.  For  Christ  died  for  us  when  we 
were,  in  a  negative  view,  incapable,  and,  in  a  posi- 
tive view,  even  ungodly.  Therefore  the  objective 
certainty  of  salvation  is  established  in  the  following 
coiu'lnsions :  (1.)  We  were  sinners,  debtors,  for 
whom  (Christ  died ;  much  more  shall  we,  since  wo 
are  justifiecl  and  reeoneiled,  bo  preserved  from  the 
wrath  to  come.  (2.)  The  death  of  the  S)n  of  God 
has  overcome  our  enmity,  and  reconciled  us  ;  much 
more  shall  His  lifi'  perfectly  retleem  us  as  reconciled 
until  the  eonsunmiation.  (3.)  Since  we  have  ob- 
tained reconciliation,  we  are  happy  even  now  in  the 
triumi)hant  joy  that  God  is  our  God. 


CHAPTER  V.   1-11. 


IGS 


12.  On  the  difter(>nce  between  the  D.aafioi;  and 
the  KC(Ta/./.ccyt';,  see  the  Exeff.  Xotcs  [p.  106]. 

[Bishop  Horsley  (Sorm.  on  Rom.  iv.  25)  on  the 
atonement  and  reconciliation :  "  Those  who  speak 
of  t/ie  wrath  of  God  as  appeased  by  Christ's  suffer- 
ings, speak,  it  must  be  confessed,  a  figurative  lan- 
guage. The  Scriptures  speak  figuratively  when  they 
ascribe  wrath  to  God.  The  Divine  nature  is  insus- 
ceptible of  tlie  perturbations  of  passion,  and,  when 
it  is  said  that  God  Is  angry,  it  is  a  figure,  which 
conveys  this  useful  warning  to  mankind,  that  God 
will  be  determined  by  His  wisdom,  and  by  His 
providential  care  of  His  creation,  to  deal  with  the 
wicked,  as  a  prince  in  anger  deals  with  rebellious 
subjects.  It  is  an  extension  of  ihe  figure  when  it 
is  said  tliat  God's  wrath  is  appeased  by  the  suffer- 
ings of  Christ.  It  is  not  to  be  supposed  that  the 
sins  of  men  excite  in  God  an  appetite  of  vengeance, 
whicli  could  not  be  diverted  from  its  purpose  of 
punishment  till  it  had  found  its  gratification  in  the 
sufferings  of  a  righteous  persou.  This,  indeed, 
were  a  view  of  our  redemption  founded  on  a  false 
and  unworthy  notion  of  the  Divine  character.  But 
nothing  hinders  but  that  the  sufferings  of  Christ, 
which  could  only,  in  a  figurative  sense,  be  an  ap- 
peasement or  satisfaction  of  God's  wrath,  might  be, 
in  the  most  literal  meaning  of  the  words,  a  satisfac- 
tion to  His  justice.  It  is  easy  to  understand  that 
the  interests  of  God's  government,  the  peace  and 
order  of  the  great  kingdom,  over  which  He  rules 
the  whole  world  of  moral  agents,  might  require 
that  His  disapprobation  of  sin  should  be  solemnly 
declared  and  testified  in  His  manner  of  forgiving 
it.  It  is  easy  to  understand  that  the  exaction  of 
vicarious  sufferings  on  the  part  of  Him,  who  under- 
took to  be  the  intercessor  for  a  rebelliobus  race, 
amounted  to  such  a  declaration.  These  sufferings, 
by  which  the  end  of  punishment  might  be  answered, 
being  once  sustained,  it  is  easy  to  perceive  that  the 
same  principle  of  wisdom,  the  same  providential 
care  of  His  creation,  wliich  must  have  determined 
the  Deity  to  inflict  punishment,  had  no  atonement 
been  made,  would  now  determine  Him  to  spare. 
Thus,  to  speak  figuratively.  His  anger  was  ap- 
peased ;  but  His  justice  was  literally  satisfied,  and 
the  sins  of  men,  no  longer  calling  for  punishment, 
when  the  ends  of  punishment  were  secured,  were 
literally  expiated.  The  person  sustaining  the  suf- 
erings,  in  consideration  of  which  the  guilit  of  others 
may,  consistently  with  the  principles  of  good  policy, 
be  remitted,  was,  in  the  literal  sense  of  the  word — 
so  literally,  as  no  other  victim  ever  was — a  sacrifice, 
and  His  blood  shed  for  the  remission  of  sin  was 
literally  the  matter  of  expiation."] 

13.  This  section  contains,  in  narrow  compass,  a 
sketch  of  i/ie  whole  development  of  Christian,  salva- 
tion, in  which  its  principial  perfection  *  is  made 
emphatic  at  the  beginning  as  well  as  at  the  conclu- 
sion, in  order  that  the  perlphericnl  imperfection  of 
the  state  of  faith  in  this  world  may  not  be  regarded 
in  an  Ebionitic  way  as  a  principial  one.  We  must 
observe  that,  in  Rom.  viii.,  this  designation  is  further 
elaborated  under  a  new  point  of  view,  and  that  there, 
too,  the  Kuhjerfive  and  objective  certainty  of  salvation 
can  be  distinguished. 

14.  The  idea  of  the  real  worship  of  God  reap- 

*  [PrixcIpieilt!  VnlUcommevheit,  perfpction  as  a  princi- 
ple. The  word  principinl  (from  privcipinm),  in  the  sense 
of  initial,  elementary,  /un'lameiilnl,  thoutth  now  obsolete, 
is  used  by  Bacon.  In  German,  the  word  is  almost  inciia- 
ren«ible.— P.  S.] 


pears  definitely  here  in  the  beginning  as  well  as  at 
the  end  of  the  section. 


HOMILETICAIi  AND  PRACTICAL. 

The  fruits  of  the  righteousness  of  faith.  Thej- 
are :  1.  Peace  with  God  through  our  Lord  Jesui 
Christ  (ver.  1) ;  2.  Hope  of  future  glory  in  the 
tribuhitions  of  the  present  time  (vers.  2-5) ;  3.  Con- 
fidence of  salvation  establisiied  on  the  love  of  God 
for  us  as  made  known  in  the  propitiatory  death  of 
Christ  (vers.  6-11). — Peace  with  God:  1.  In  what 
does  it  consist  ?  2.  By  whom  do  we  obtain  it  ? 
(ver.  1). — The  peace  of  heart  with  God  is  the  source 
of  all  other  peace  :  1.  In  homes  ;  2.  In  churches  ; 
3.  In  natidhs. — By  Christ  we  have  obtained  access 
to  the  grace  of  justification.  In  this  are  comprised  : 
1.  A  strong  consolation  (we  are  no  more  rejected 
from  God's  face  ;  the  door  is  opened  ;  we  can  come 
in)  ;  2.  A  serious  admonition  (we  should  not  disre- 
gard this  access,  but  make  use  of  it ;  and  3.  We 
should  often  come  with  all  our  burdens.). — In  what 
should  and  can  we  glory  as  Christians  ?  1.  In  the 
future  glory  which  God  shall  give;  2.  But  also  in 
the  tribulations  which  He  sends  us  (vers.  2-5) ; 
3.  In  God  Himself  as  our  God. — Why  should  we,  as 
Christians,  glory  also  in  tribulations  ?  Because  we 
know  :  1.  That  tribulation  worketh  patience  (endur- 
ance) ;  2.  Patience  (endurance)  worketh  experience 
(strictly,  approval) ;  comp.  2  Cor.  ii.  9 ;  ix.  13 ; 
James  i.  3) ;  [  ,8.  Experience  (approval)  worketh 
hope ;  and  iYHiTpe  maketh  not  ashan)ed  (vers. 
2-5). — Why  does  Christian  hope  prevent  shame? 
1.  Because  it  is  not  a  fiilse  hope  ;  but,  2.  It  has  its 
ground  in  the  love  of  God,  which  is  shed  abroad  in 
our  hearts  by  the  Holy  Ghost  which  is  given  unto  us 
(ver.  5). — In  what  respect  does  God  commend  (prove) 
His  love  toward  us  ?  1.  In  Christ's  di^inff  at  the 
appointed  time  for  us ;  2.  But  still  more  in  His 
dying  for  us. when  we  were  yet  sinners  (vers.  6-8). — 
It  is  nohle  to  die  for  a  benefactor,  but  it  is  divine 
to  die  for  evil-doers  (ver.  7).  —  The  importance  of 
Christ's  life  and  death  for  men  :  1.  His  death  brings 
reconciliation  when  we  are  enemies ;  2.  His  life 
brings  salvation  when  we  are  reconciled  (vers.  9-11). 
— Christ's  life  our  salvation  (ver.  10). — Salvation  by 
the  life  of  Christ  is  necessary  for  Christians  of  the 
present  time. — Let  us  speak  of  Christ's  death,  but 
let  us  also  speak  continually  of  His  life  (ver.  10). 

LcTHER  :  One  has  experience  when  he  has  been 
well  tempted,  and  can  therefore  speak  of  it  as  hav- 
ing been  in  it  himself  (ver.  4). — God  is  our  God,  and 
we  are  His  people,  and  we  have  all  good  things  in 
common  from  Him  and  with  Him,  in  all  confidence 
(ver.  11). 

Starke  :  Ver.  2.  Future  glory  is  connected  with 
justification  by  an  indissoluble  chain  ;  chap.  viii.  18, 
30,  32. — Ver.  2.  Nothing  can  make  so  happy  as 
the  hope  of  the  incorruptible,  undefiled,  and  imper- 
ishable inheritance  which  is  reserved  in  heaven ; 
1  Peter  i.  4. — Ver.  5.  He  who  has  the  Holy  Spirit, 
is  the  only  one  who  is  certain  that  God's  love  is  slied 
abroad  in  his  heart. — Ver.  10.  The  death  of  Christ 
is  the  principal  agency  toward  our  reconciliation  ; 
but  His  resurrection  is  the  seal  and  assurance  that 
we  are  truly  reconciled  to  God. — Ver.  10.  Christ's 
resurrection  is  the  ark  of  life  and  royal  city  of  our 
salvation. — Ver.  11.  No  one  can  glory  in  God  but 
he  who  has  Christ ;  for  He  is  the  way  by  which  we 
come  to  the  enjoyment  of  God ;  John  xiv.  6.     He, 


170 


THE    EPISTLE   OF   PAUL   TO   THE   ROMANS. 


therefore,  who  does  not  have  Him,  is  also  without  [ 
God  in  tlie  world;  Eph.  ii.  12. — Hkdingkr:  To  be  i 
certain  of  the  forgiveness  of  sin,  id  the  fountain  of  i 
all  joy  and  consolation  (ver.  1). — Beware  of  the 
hypocrite's  hope,  which  destroys  !  The  believer  i 
clings  to  God's  love  in  Christ  as  an  anchor  to  the 
rock ;  Heb.  vi.  19.  Would  to  God  we  understood  | 
this  well !  If  we  did,  nothing  could  grieve  and  '■ 
aflBii:t  us  (ver.  5). — A  Ciiriscian  must  regard  the  suf- 
fering of  Ciirist  not  only  as  a  mirror  ot  wrath,  but 
also  as  a  mirror  of  love  (ver.  8). — Wiiat  a  gloty  ! 
God's  child,  and  in  good  favor  with  Ilim  !  How  in- 
comprehensible, how  glorious,  and  how  blessed ! 
(ver.  II). — Cramkr:  If  we  are  justified  by  faith, 
we  have  free  access  to  God,  so  that  we  do  not  need 
any  patron  or  saint  to  prepare  the  way  for  us  (ver. 
2). — The  suffering  of  Cliristians  is  their  glory ;  for 
they  suffer  without  guilt,  and  for  Clirist's  glory  (ver. 
3). — OsiANiiKK  :  The  cross  and  tribulation  make  us 
humble  and  patient ;  they  are  therefore  the  most 
precious  gems  and  best  ornament  of  the  children  of 
God  (ver.  3).— Nova  Bill.  Tub. :  Oli,  how  blessed 
is  the  cross  !  Though  it  paiu  the  flesh,  it  brings 
eternal  good.  We  are  better  purified  by  it,  tiian 
gold  is  by  fire ;  our  hope  is  strengthened,  and  the 
love  of  God  is  slied  abroad  in  the  lieart  (ver.  6). — 
Love  is  rare  among  men,  yet  there  are  remarkable 
examples  of  some  wlio  liave  given  up  their  lives  for 
their  feilow-oitizens  and  brethren.  But  there  is  no 
comparison  between  ail  this  and  the  love  of  Christ 
(ver.  7). — Who  would  not  love  in  return  a  God  so 
full  of  love,  and  prefer  fellowship  with  Ilira  to  that 
of  ail  others  ?  (ver.  10). 

Gerlach  :  Justification  by  faith  not  only  gives 
free  access  to  God's  grace  at  the  present  time,  but 
it  also  confers  the  certainty  of  future  glory  (ver.  2). 
— In  justification  the  believer  receives  the  first  germ 
of  tiie  wliole  new  life.  But  since  the  germ  grows 
into  a  tree,  and  the  tree  ever  becomes  more  firmly 
rooted  amid  storms,  all  that  the  believer  had  at  tlie 
beginning  is  renewed  and  estalilislied  at  every  new 
stage  of  trial  (ver.  5). — Since  God  has  performed  for 
tinners  and  vncmiex  the  greatest  service,  He  will  cer- 
tainly not  leave  unfinished  for  the  reconciled  and 
rxjhleoHx  the  much  smaller  remaining  |)art  of  His 
work  (ver.  9). — The  Apostle  begins  to  indicate  liere 
what  he  treats  more  at  length  in  chap.  vi. :  Faith  so 
transposes  us  into  Christ,  that  His  life,  death,  resur- 
rection, and  glory,  become  ours.  Each  circumstance 
from  His  history  becomes  the  history  of  mankind 
believing  in  Him,  as  well  as  of  each  individual  be- 
liever (ver.  10). 

Lisco :  The  saving  fruits  of  the  righteousness 
acquired  by  faith  in  Jesus  Christ  (vers.  1-11). — The 
fruit  of  this  righteousness  (vers.  l-o). — The  most 
certiin  sign  of  the  love  of  God  toward  us  just  men- 
tioned, is  the  redem[)tion  made  by  Christ  (vers.  G-8). 
— The  blessi'd  result  of  this  love  of  (Jod  and  Christ, 
is  the  certain  hope  of  the  eternal  duration  of  this 
love,  and,  finally,  of  our  attainment  of  glory  (vers. 
9-11). 

llKunsEn:  Paul  here  strikes  the  note  of  the 
trium[)hal  sr)ng  of  the  justified.  Listen  :  His  read- 
ers should  participate  in  his  joy;  we  are  reconciled, 
wc  are  pardoned. — Without  justification,  there  is  no 
joy,  no  love,  no  happiness  in  life  ;  without  it,  noth- 
ing can  m.ike  us  h.''.pi)y — neither  nature,  nor  the  love 
of  men  (ver.  1). — firace  is  ])repiiriMi,  and  ofli-red  to 
all.  Many  accept  it,  but  all  do  not  remain  steadfast 
(ver.  2). — He  on  whom  God  has  placed  many  bur- 
ieus,  has  much  entrusted  to  him ;    God  haa  made 


him  an  object  of  distinction.  Therefore,  the  highei 
and  more  joyous  the  Christian's  spirit  is  in  suffer- 
ing, the  greater  will  be  the  increase  of  his  joy  and 
strength  in  conflict  (ver.  3). — What  influence  does 
suffering  exert  on  the  Christian  V  (ver.  3). — The 
sacrel  hope  of  the  Christian  maketli  not  ashamed  ; 
it  is  holy  in  its  object  and  ground. — Faith  in  the 
love  of  God  is  the  ground  of  all  hope  (ver.  5). — The 
helplessness  of  the  unimproved  heart  is  followed  by 
the  saddest  results  of  sin  ;  just  as  severe  sickness  ia 
succeeded  by  weakness  (ver.  6). — God's  holy  love 
of  His  enemies  (ver.  8). — The  greatest  misery  of  a 
crciUed  being,  is,  to  bear  the  wrath  of  God  (ver.  9). 
— God's  love  of  us  is  a  i)revenient  love  (vei-.  10). — 
Christ's  life  is  the  ground  of  our  salvation  (ver.  10). 

Bksser  :  The  salvation  of  those  who  are  justi- 
fied by  faith.  It  is:  1.  A  present  salvation  ;  2.  Also 
a  future  one  (vers.  1-11). — Tribulation  is  praisewor- 
thy, because  the  evergreen  of  hope  is  sprinkled  with 
the  tears  of  tribulation  (vers.  3-5). — God's  wr:uh  is 
not  human ;  God  is  love,  and  Divine  wrath  is  con- 
nected with  the  love  which  takes  no  pleasure  in  the 
death  of  the  sinner,  but  is  an  ardent,  compassionate 
desire  to  save  the  sinner.  lieconciliation  is  the  exe- 
cution of  this  loving  determination  of  God  by  means 
of  the  atonement  through  the  death  of  Jlis  Son  (ver. 
10). — God  unites  in  the  Church  with  pardoned  sin- 
ners— who  have  faith  in  Jesus,  and  glory  in  God  as 
their  God — more  intimately  and  gloriously  than  in 
Paradise  with  innocent  man  (ver.  11). 

ScnLEiKRMACiiEit,  On  vcrs.  7,  8  :  The  death  of 
Christ  is  the  highest  glorification  of  God's  love  toward 
us.  1.  God  imposed  death  on  our  Redeemer  as  the 
most  perfect  proof  of  obedience ;  2.  Many  are  jus- 
tified by  this  obedience. 

Spener  :  1.  The  fruits  of  justification :  (a.) 
Peace  ;  {h.)  Access  to  God  ;  (c.)  The  joy  of  future 
hope;  ((/.)  Victorv  in  tribulation  and  the  cross; 
(e.)  The  gift  of  the  Holy  Ghost.  2.  The  cau.ses  of 
justification  (vers.  1-11). 

[BnuKiTT :  One  grace  generates  and  begets  an- 
otlier ;  graces  have  a  generation  one  from  another, 
though  they  all  have  one  generation  from  the  Spirit 
of  God. — He  that  does  not  seek  reconciliation  with 
God,  is  an  enemy  of  his  soul ;  and  he  that  rejoices 
not  in  that  reconciliation,  is  an  enemy  to  his  own 
comfort.  —  Lor. A.N  (sermon  on  Jesus  Christ  hying 
for  Sinners,  Rom.  v.  7,  8) :  The  greatest  trial  and 
exercise  of  virtue  is  when  an  innocent  man  submits 
to  the  imputation  of  a  crime,  that  others  may  be  free 
from  the  punishment.  This  Christ  did.  He  was  be- 
trayed like  an  impostor  by  one  of  His  own  disciples, 
apprehended  like  a  robber  l)y  a  band  of  soldiei-s,  led 
like  a  malefactor  through  the  streets  of  Jerusalem, 
nailed  like  a  murderer  to  the  accursed  tree,  and,  in 
the  sight  of  all  Israel,  died  the  death  of  a  traitor  and 
a  slave,  that  he  might  atone  for  the  real  guilt  of 
men. — Coutp.  Ui>vim.  :  He  that  ])uts  himself  to  the 
charge  of  iiurcha.sing  our  Siilvation,  will  iKjt  ilecline 
the  trouble  of  applying  it. — IIodok  :  As  the  love  of 
(lod  in  the  gift  of  Ills  Son,  and  the  love  of  Christ  in 
dying  for  us,  are  the  peculiar  characteristics  of  the 
gospel,  no  one  can  be  a  true  Christian  cm  whom 
these  truths  do  n(jt  exert  a  governing  influence. — 
Aiinot.  I'araiinrjih  liible  :  (Jod  estal)lishcs  His  love 
toward  man  by  demonstraticm  ;  it  is  a  love  worthy 
of  Himself,  and  which  none  but  Himself  can  feel. 

Com]).  CnitTsosToM,  De  Gloria  in  Tribulation- 
ihus  ;  Aitcniiisnoi"  I'siikr,  Four  Sermons,  Worku, 
vol.  xiii.  22ft;  Jons  Howk,  lufuenceof  ][i,pe,  \\\irkii, 
vol.  vi.  277  ;  Bishop  Mant,   The  Love  of  God  tht 


CHAPTER   V.    12-VIII.    39.  171 


Jfotive  to  Manh  Salvation,  Sermons^  vol.  i.  115 ; 
Jonathan  Edwards,  3fen  naturally  God 's  Enemies, 
Works,  vol.  ii.  130. — On  the  Section  vers.  1-5,  see 
Nath.  Hornes,  The  Bracelet  of  Pearl  of  Sanctify- 
ing Gracts,  Works,  207  ;   Richard  Baxter,  Short 


Meditations,  Works,  vol.  iviii.  503 ;  C.  Simeon, 
Binefits  arising  from  a  Justifying  Faith,  Works 
vol.  XV.  116;  J.  Morgan,  The  Hidden  Life  Dis- 
closed in  Rom.  v.  1-5,  an  Exposition,  Belfast,  1856 
—J.  F.  H.] 


SECOND     DIVISION. 

SIN  AND  GRACE  IN  THEIR  SECOND  ANTITHESIS  (AS  IN  THEIR  SECOND  POTENCY): 
ACCORDING  TO  THEIR  NATURAL  EFFECTS  IN  HUMAN  NATURE,  AND  IN  NATURE  IN 
GENERAL.  THE  SINFUL  CORRUPTION  OF  THE  WORLD,  PROCEEDING  FROM  ADAM, 
AND  INHERITED  IN  COMMON  BY  ALL  MEN,  AND  THE  LIFE  OF  CHRIST  AS  THB 
INWARD  LIVING  PRINCIPLE  OF  THE  NEW  BIRTH  TO  NEW  LIFE  IN  INDIVIDUAL 
BELIEVERS,  IN  ALL  MANKIND,  AND  IN  THE  WHOLE  CREATED  WORLD.  (THE 
PRINCIPLE  OF  DEATH  IN  SIN,  AND  THE  PRINCIPLE  OF  THE  NEW  LIFE;  AS 
WELL  AS  THE  GLORIFICATION  OF  THE  NEW  LLFE,  AND  OF  ALL  NATURE,  IN 
RIGHTEOUSNESS.) 

Chapters  V.   12-VIII.   39. 

First  Section. — Adam^s  sin  as  the  powerful  principle  of  death,  and  God 's  grace  in  Christ  as  the  more 
powerful  principle  of  the  new  life  in  the  nature  of  individual  men,  and  in  mankind  collectively. 
The  law  as  the  direct  medium  of  the  complete  manifestation  of  sin  for  the  indirect  mediation  of  tht 
completed  and  glorious  revelation  of  grace. 

Chap.    V.   12-21. 

12  Wherefore,  as  by  one  man  sin  entered  into  the  world,  and  death  by  sin ; 
and  so  death '  passed  upon  all  men,  for  that  {Iq!  qj,  i.  e.,  on  the  ground  that,  because] 

13  all  have  [omit  have]  sinned :  (  [omu  parenthesis]  *  For  until  the  law  sin  was  in  the 
world :    but  sin  is  not  imputed  when  there  is  no  law  [where  the  law  is  not]. 

14  Nevertheless  death  reigned  from  Adam  to  Moses,  even  over  them  that  had  not 
sinned  [those  that  sinned  not]  '  after  the  similitude  [likeness]  of  Adam's  trans- 
gression, Avho  is  the  figure  [a  type]  of  him  that  was  to  come  [the  coming  one, 

16  i-  e.,  the  second  Adam].  But  uot  as  the  offence  [fall,  transgression],*  so  also  is  the 
free  gift :  for  if  through  the  offence  [transgression]  of  [the]  one  [the]  many 
be  dead  [died],  much  more  [did]  ^  the  grace  of  God,  and  the  gift  by  grace, 
which  is  by  one  man  [the  gitl  by  the  grace  of  the  one  man],  Jesus  Christ,  hath 

16  abounded  [abound]  unto  [the]  many.  And  not  as  it  icas  {omit  it  icas^  by  [the] 
one  that  sinned,"  so  [omit  so\  is  the  gift ;  for  the  judgment  icas  [came]  by 
[f|,  of]  one  {fall)  to  condemnation,  but  the  free  gift  is  [came]  of  many 
offences  [falls,  transgressions]  unto  justification  [5fx«<'cojW«,  sentence  of  acquittal, 

17  righteous  decree,  or,  righteous  act].  For  if  by  one  man's  offence  [by  one  trans- 
gression, or,  by  the  transgression  of  the  one]  ''  death  reigned  by  [through  the] 
one ;  much  moie  they  which  [who]  receive  [the]  abundance  of  [the]  grace 
and  of  the  gift  of  righteousness  shall  reign  in  life  by  [the]  one,  Jesus  Christ.) 

18  {omit  parenthesis.]  Therefore,  as  by  the  offence  of  one  judgment  came  upon  all 
men  to  condemnation  ;  even  so  by  the  righteousness  of  one  the  free  gift  came 
upon  all  men  unto  justification  of  life  [So  then,  as  through  the  transgression 
of  one,  or,  one  transgression,  it  came  upon  all  men  to  condemnation  ;  so  also 
through  the   8iy.ut(a^iurog,  righteous  act  of  one,  or,  one  righteous  act,  it  came 

19  upon  all  men  imto  justification  of  life].*  For  as  by  one  man's  disobedience 
[through  the  disobedience  of  the  one  man]  [the]  many  were  made  [consti- 
tuted] "  sinners,  so  [also,  ovrctig  nui']  by  the  obedience  of  [the]  one  shall  [the] 

20  many  be  made  [constituted]  righteous.  Moreover  the  law  entered  [came  in 
besides],"  that  the  offence  [transgression]  might  abound  [multiply].     But  where 


172  THE   EPISTLE   OF  PAUL  TO  THE   ROMANS. 

21  sin  abounded  [mnltii'liedj,  grace  did  much  more  [exceedingly]"  abound:  That 
as  sin  hath  [""">  hatli]  reigned  unto  [h\  in]  death,  even  so  [so  also]  might 
grace  reign  through  righteousness  unto  eternal  life  by  [through]  Jesus  Cliriat 
our  Lord. 

TEXTUAL. 

>  Vcr.  12.— ['O  BavaTOi  {Rfc.)  is  found  In  N.  B.  C.  K.  Ii ,  some  vereions  and  futhcrB  ;  is  adopted  by  Lachmann, 
Meyer,  'Wordsworth,  and  Lniigo.  Tischendorf  ;ind  Alford  oinit  it,  on  the  authority  of  D.  E.  F.  G.,  and  many  fiitjicrs 
Alf'ird  coa^i  lers  it  a  marginal  jrloss,  to  define  the  subject  of  Siri^Otv.  But  the  external  authority  for  it  is  suUicieiit 
to  overcome  the  doubt  ari.'-ing  from  the  variation  in  position  found  in  some  nuthorities,  especially  as  the  ondssion  may 
have  readily  arisen  from  the  transcriber's  mistaking  -ous,  which  precedes,  for  the  close  of  the  word  he  was  about  to 
write:  -Tos  (Meyer). 

■■'  Ver.  13. — [On  thr  pnrenlhfsis  of  the  E.  V.  This  is  to  be  omitted  ;  for,  altliough  it  might  be  a  help  to  the  ordinary 
reader,  it  is  inserted  on  the  view  that  ver.  18  is  strictly  resumptive,  ■which  is  not  in  accordance  with  Lanjfc's  exe- 
gesis. Even  were  it  the  case,  vers.  13-17  comprise  an  argument  so  important,  that  it  does  not  deserve  the  subordination 
implied  in  a  parenthesis.  The  E.  V.  is  frequently  unfortunate  in  this  regard  :  e.  g..  Gal.  i.  7,  where  the  very  theme  of 
the  Epistle  is  put  in  parenthesis. 

5  Ver.  14.— [Some  cursives  and  fathers  omit  fiij.  This  probably  arose  from  a  wish  to  make  this  verse  correspond 
with  ver.  12,  the  meaning  of  which  was  misunderstood.  There  is  lo  question  as  to  the  correctness  of  its  insertion. — The 
pluperfect  of  the  E.  V.  is  to  be  changed  to  the  simple  past :  sinned,  as  a  more  correct  rendering  of  the  aorist  participle. 
The  other  emendations  are  not  absolutely  necessary,  but  are  ofifered  a,smore  literal,  and  perhaps  preferable  for  otner 
reasons. 

*  Ver.  15. —[The  word  TrapaTrroi^a,  occurring  five  times  in  this  section,  is  rendered  off- nee  in  the  E.  V. ;  by  the 
Amer.  Bible  Union:  Irtspiss.  Both  are  etymologically  correct,  but  more  modem  usage  compels  u.s  to  reject  offfiice. 
T/vx/XLv*- would  be  prrferable  to /i-Krt.-Y^n.ssiV;)/,  on  the  ground  that  n apd^aan  (ver.  14)  must  also  be  rendered  by  the 
latter  word;  yet  Irespuxx  has  at  present  a  technical  meaning,  which  is  legal,  tniDs^rtfSKin  being  more  theological.  The 
veiy  slight  distinction  between  irapa/Sao-is  and  Trapan-Tw/iia  is  suflicienily  implied  in  the  clauses  where  the  word*  occur. 
Lange  renders  the  latter  :  Suml'  nfull,  /'ill,  to  distinguish  it  from  irapd^aaii,  U'boirelnni/,  ver.  14. 

*  Ver.  15.— (^The  aorist,  e  jrepia treuo-e  v,  is  to  be  rendered  (//(/  nhound,  and  the  auxiliary  (/I'rf  placed  after  much 
more,  as  indicitiiiir  more  pla  nly  that  mtnh  mure  is  rather  quantitative  than  logiail.— Tlie  articles  are  unfortunately 
omitted  throughout  in  the  E.  V. ;  Ihc  one,  the  many,  express  the  definitencss  of  the  Greek. 

*  Ver.  16.— [Lange  adopts  the  reading  ofiopTi^/n oto?  (D.  E.  F.  G.,  some  fatliers,  cursives,  and  versions,  Gries- 
bach),  urging  that  it  is  required  as  an  antithesis  to  TrapaTrTw/noTioi'.  But  this  is  the  very  reason  for  deeming  it  a 
gloxs.     'A/xapT^<ravTo«  is  found  in  N.  A.  B.  C.  K.  L.,  adopted  I'y  Tischendorf,  Meyer,  Aifoi-d,  Wordsworth. 

'  Ver.  17. — I  The  two  renderings  coiTespond  to  two  various  readings  ;  in  any  case,  /«»»',<,  of  K.  V.,  must  be  rejected. 

A.  F.  G.  have   iv    iv\    ir apawToiixari.   (1).  E.,  iv  tw  iyl  tt.)  ;   adopted  by  Griesbach,  Tischendorf,  Meyer,  Lange.     N". 

B.  C.  K.  L.,  many  versions  and  fathers,  read  Tip  rod  evb^  tt apaTTTw/it art  ;  adopted  by  Lachmann,  Alford,  and 
Wordswnrth.  It  is  a  question  which  is  correct,  but  Meyer's  explanation  is  most  satisfactory.  He  considers  the  former 
reading  the  original  one.  "  because  thus  the  origin  of  the  other  variations  are  very  natiu-all^-  explained.  For  more  defi- 
nite description  the  article  was  added  by  some  (I).  E.) ;  by  others,  ivi  was  changed  ii.to  ivoi.  but  since,  at  all  events, 
the  sense  was  the  same  as  tw  toS  cvbt  jr.  (ver.  15),  this  was  at  first  added  as  a  parallel  passage,  and  then  received  ii.to 
the  text." 

"  Ver.  18. — [The  questions  respecting  the  changes  to  be  made  in  this  verse  are  exegetical.  It  is  only  necessary  to 
note  here,  that  the  above  rendering  indicates  the  doubt  as  to  the  precise  meaning  of  fit'  evbs  irapatrTw/xarot,  and 
St'  iv'ot  fiiKaiui^aro;  ;  leaving  the  subjects  indefinite  (instead  of  retaining  the  italicized  glosses  of  the  E.  V.). 
Lange  supplies  napdirTmixa  and  ji/caiw/ua.     On  all  the  points,  see  Eng.  Nutes. 

»  Ver.  19.— [So  Ainer.  Bilde  Union.  Lange:  haausgesldU.  The  rendering  given  above  is  correct;  any  dogmatic 
questions  that  arise  cannot  affect  this. 

">  Vcr.  20.— [  napeij^Affei',  only  Gal.  ii.  4;  there,  in  malam  partem.  The  above  rendering  is  literal  and 
exact.     Lange  translates  :  came  in  betwrin.     See  Exeg.  Notes. 

"  Ver.  JO.— [Alfoid  suggests  that  words  compounded  with  vitip  have  a  sHp^'r/a/irc,  not  a  comparative  force.— Fht 
change  ir.  the  first  verb  in  English  is  to  indicate  that  two  ditferent  words  are  used  in  Greek.— R.] 

(The  following  is  the  Greek  text  of  this  section,  in  parallelistic  arrangement,  from  Forbes  : 

12.  ('nanep  5i'  tvh^  avdpiawov 

I         19  anapria  €19  toi'  Koa/iov  (l<TfiK0(v, 
KaX  Sid  T^9  dft.apTia';  6  fldraros, 

Kal  ovTu;  et9  Troit'Ta;  ayOpJiirovf  b  dacarof  SiriXOev, 
<j»  TTocTtv  ij/xapTOV 

13.  r  ^XP^  Y°^P  vofiov  a/iapria  ^v  iv  Kotrfiu), 
J         afxapTta  hi  OVK   iWoytnai  p.ri  ottos  vomou" 

14.  B  ]  aAAa  ipa<ri\(va(v  6  flafaTO?  airb  'ASdfi  M<XP^  Muucre'us 
(^       Ka't  «irt  TOtif  ixr)  anaprijaai^ai  iirl  Tcp  o/xoiu/iari  T^f  irapo^ao'cuis  *A£afi* 

C  •{        6«  »<rTi»'  Tvjroi  Toi!  fie'AAoi^o?. 

I)  s  I'oints  of  disi)arit>  in  the  comparlBon 
Z>  (      stated  in  vers.  15,  16,  17. 

18.  f  ( 'Apa  ovv  in  Si    ivhi  irapairrufiaro« 

J         ci;  iraCTat  avBpuiiTOV^  tit  (caTaxpt/ua, 
Justification.  )  ourw;  xal  61*  ivh^  fiiKaiuj^taroc 

l^        ctf  ndvrai  avSpJinovi  (if  SiKoiuaiv  ^uirji' 


19. 


C 


f  ioirntp  yap  fia  Tri<;  7rapouco>)f  ToO  ivbt  dvOputnov 
\        a/xapTu>Aol  KaTtaraff-qtrav  01  iroAAoi, 
Sanctiflcation.  J  ovrutx  xai  Sid  t^s  iiiroxo^t  ToO  ivb<; 

(_       SiKaioi  KaTa<TTa07J<TOVTai  oi  iroAAoi. 


20.  C  tiofiot  Si  irap€i<Tri\0tv, 

•jj  iva  irAfOvaiTJl  TO  napdiTTuna' 
I  ot  Si  cn-Atovao'cc  Tf  dfiapTia, 
(vnt(untpi<r<Ttv<7tv  i)  x^'P^fi 

91.  (iua  uxnrtp  ifiaaiKtvatv  q  a/tapria 

t'arttf, 

\dpii  fiaaiKtvKTji  Sid  SiKauxrurnm 
aiittviov 
\piaToi  ToO  Kvpiov  ijiJiuiv. — P.  S.J 


f  'iva  uxTTTfp  i^aaik* 
1  iu  Tbj  Qavdrto, 
A  '.  OUTcot  Ka\  i)  X'^'P'f 
I  ci?  ^u>'r\v  aiuiviov 
^jid  'lijcrov 


CHAPTER  V.    12-21. 


173 


EXEGETICAIi  AND  CBITICAIi. 

[Special  Literature  on  Chap.  V.  12-21.— S.  J.  Battm- 
OAKTEN,  De.  ivtpittotione  peccati  Adnmitici  posteris  facta, 
1742.  S.  ScHOTT,  02>iiscuia,  i.  p.  313  sqq.  C.  F.  Schmid, 
Vtbirr  Rom.  V.  12  ff.,  in  the  Tubing.  Zeilschrifl  for  ISoO, 
No.  IV.  p.  161  ft".  (A  very  able  and  sound  discussion. 
Comp.  the  same  author's  Bi'bl.  Thtolngie  des  N.  T.,  vol.  ii. 
pp.  2.>6-'26-2.)  KiCH.  KoTHE  (died  1868),  N'Wr  Versiuh  '■iaa- 
Audeguiig  der  Paidiii.  Sidle  Mdni.  V.  12-21,  "Wittenberg, 
1836.  (A  masterpiece  of  e.\egetical  acuteness  and  finesse.) 
I.  Chh.  K.  v.  Hofmann,  D<r  Sihn'/ibewn's,  2d  ed.,  Nijrd- 
lingen,  1857,  vol.  i.  pp.  524-541.  Jul.  Mijller,  Chris  I. 
Lahre  van  dir  Siiiide,  vol.  ii.  p.  407  ff.,  472  ff.,  od  Germ,  ed., 
1849.  H.  EwALD,  Adam  und  Chrislus,  Rom.  V.  12-21,  in 
his  Jahrhucher  fur  bihl.  Wisscnachafl,  ii.  p.  166  fif.  Timo- 
thy DwiGHT  (of  Yale  College),  Princdon  Exegesis.  A  Re- 
view of  Dr.  Hedge's  Commtntary  on  Romans  V.  12-19,  in 
the  JS'ew  Englandcr  for  July,  1868,  pj).  551-603.  (Polemical 
against  Hodce).  A.  Stolting,  Bcilrage  zur  Exegese  d'  r  Pnu- 
lin.  Bricfe,  Gott.,  1869,  pp.  1-1-'.  Ebiche,  Olshausen,  Tho- 
LUCK,  Stuart,  Hodge,  and  Foebks,  are  most  full,  though 
widely  divergent,  in  the  exposition  of  this  passage,  which 
many  regard  as  the  most  difficult  in  the  whole  Bible. — P.  S.] 

[Introductory  RE^fAKKS. — This  section  is  diffi- 
cult in  proportion  to  its  deptli,  grandeur,  and  world- 
historical  comprehensiveness.  Only  a  mind  of  the 
very  highest  order — to  say  nothing  of  inspiration — 
could  conceive  such  vast  thoughts,  and  compress 
them  within  so  few  words.  The  beginning,  the  mid- 
dle, and  the  end  of  history,  are  here  brought  to- 
gether in  their  representative  moral  powers  and  prin- 
ciples. Paul  deals  with  religious  truths  and  facts, 
■which  are  much  broader  and  deeper  than  the  after- 
thoughts  of  our  logic  and  theology,  and  cannot  be 
squeezed  into  the  narrow  limits  of  particular  schools 
and  schemes.  The  exegesiso£  this  part  of  the  Ro- 
t  witt^^ugustine.'jh  his  contest 
with  the'vPelagian~~ITergsy ;  it  was  resumed  in  the 
Reformation  pei-iod^"TInQ  carried  further,  philologi- 
cally  and  doctrinally,  in  the  present  century,  but 
is  by  no  means  exhausted,  and  puts  exegetical  skill 
again  and  again  to  the  severest  test.  Every  line 
bears  the  marks  of  theological  controversy  about 
original  sin,  free  agency,  imputation,  limited  atone- 
ment, universal  salvation,  and  other  questions  which 
will  occupy  the  human  mind  to  the  end  of  the  world. 
The  section  is  not  a  mere  episode,  but  a  progress  in 
the  argument  from  the  doctrine  of  justification  to 
the  broader  doctrine  of  a  life-union  of  the  believer 
with  Chrut,  which  prepares  the  way  for  the  doctrine 
of  sanctification,  in  chap,  vi.,  and  glorification,  in 
chap.  viii.  Like  a  skilful  physician,  the  Apostle 
goes  not  only  to  the  root  and  fountain-head  of  the 
evil,*  but  also  to  the  root  and  fountain  head  of 
the  cure.  In  bold  antithetical  contrasts,  and  on  the 
basis  of  a  vital,  organic  union  of  humanity,  both  in 
the  order  of  fallen  nature  and  the  order  of  redeeming 
grace,  he  presents  the  history  of  the  fall  by  the  first, 
and  the  redemption  by  the  second  Adam.  ,Adamand 

! Christ  are  the  two  representative  heads  of  the  whole 
acgj^the  one  the  u_aturaljJhj_otherjthe  supernatural : 
i-omthe  one,  thepower  of  sin  and  the  power  of  death 
lave  proceeded  upon  all  men  through  their  participa- 
ion  in  his  fall ;  from  the  other,  righteousness  and  life 
lave  come  upon  all  on  condition  of  faith,  or  a  hving 
pprehension  of  Christ.  But  the  gain  by  the  redemp- 
tion greatly  surpasses  the  loss  by  the  fall.  The  main 
stress  lies  on  the  idea  of  life  in  its  progress  from 
Christ  to  the  believer.      The  same  parallelism  be- 


*  [As  Chrysostom  remarks  in  the  beginning  of  his  tenth 
Homily  on  Komans,  Opera,  torn.  ix.  p.  519,  ed.  Montfaucon, 
but  he  omits  the  positive  part,  which,  is  more  important. — 
P  8.] 


tween  the  first  and  second  Adam,  but  with  exclusive 
reference  to  the  contrast  of  death  and  the  resurrec 
tion,  occurs  in  1  Cor.  xv.  21,  22,  45-48,  which 
should  be  kept  in  view.  It  is  impossible  to  under- 
stand this  section  from  the  standpoint  of  a  mechani- 
cal and  atomistic  conception  of  humanity  and  of  sin, 
such  as  Pelagianism  and  cognate  systems  maintain. 
On  the  surface,  all  things  appear  separate  and  iso- 
lated ;  in  the  hidden  roots,  they  are  united.  It  it 
characteristic  of  all  deep  thinking,  to  go  back  to 
principles  and  general  ideas.  JP""'  Ptjdently  Yiew;3 
t^<^  ^^1111""  '"■^'''''  as  itn  organic  unit.  Adam  and 
Christ  sustain  to  it  a  central  and  universal  relation, 
similar  to  that  which  the  fountain  sustains  to  the 
river,  or  the  root  to  the  tree  and  its  branches. 
Adam  was  not  merely  an  individual,  but  the  natu- 
ral head  of  the  human  family,  and  his  transgression 
was  not  an  isolated  act,  but  affected  the  whole  race 
which  sprung  from  his  loins ;  just  as  the  character 
of  the  tree  will  determine  the  character  of  its 
branches  and  fruits.  So  it  is  with  Christ.  He  calls 
himself  emphatically  the  (not  a)  Son  of  Man,  the 
universal,  normal,  absolute  Man,  the  representative 
head  of  regenerate  humanity,  which  is  from  heaven, 
heavenly,  as  Adam's  fallen  humanity  is  "  of  the 
earth,  earthy  "  (1  Cor.  xv.  47,  48).  Both  were  tried 
and  tempted  by  the  devil,  the  one  in  the  garden  of 
innocence,  the  other  in  the  desert ;  but  the  one  suc- 
cumbed, and  dragged  his  posterity  into  the  ruin  of 
the  fall ;  while  the  other  conquered,  and  became  the 
author  of  righteousness  and  life  to  all  who  embrace 
Him.  Christ  has  gained  far  more  for  us  than  Adam 
lost — namely,  eternal  reunion  with  God,  in  the  place 
of  the  temporary  union  of  untried  innocence.  The 
resurrection  of  humanity  in  Christ  is  the  glorious 
solution  of  the  dark  tragedy  of  the  disastrous  fall 
of  humanity-  in  Adam.  In  view  of  the  greater  merit 
of  Christ  and  the  paradise  in  heaven,  we  may  rev- 
erently and  thankfully  rejoice  in  the  guilt  of  Adam 
and  the  loss  of  his  paradise  on  earth — always,  of 
course,  detesting  the  blasphemous  maxim :  Let  us 
do  evil,  that  good  may  come.  It  is  God's  infinite 
wisdom  and  mercy  alone  which  overrule  the  wrath 
of  man  for  His  own  glory. — P.  S.] 

Meyer  inscribes  this  section  :  The  drawing  of  a 
parallel  between  salvation  in  Christ  and  the  ruin 
produced  by  Adam.  But  this  does  not  do  justice  to 
the  context  of  the  section.  Tholuck  adopts  Bengel'a 
view :  "  Bespicit  lotam  iraciationem  supcriorem,  ex 
qua  hoEC  infert  apostolus,  non  tarn  digrcssionem  fa- 
ciens  quam  regrcssum,  de  peccalo  et  de  justiiia.^' 
[Bengel  continues  :  "  In  imitation  of  Paul's  method, 
we  should  treat  first  of  actual  sin  (chaps,  i.-iii.),  and 
then  go  back  to  the  source  in  which  sin  originated." 
Philippi  also  regards  this  section  as  a  comparative 
or  contrastive  retrospect  and  comprehensive  conclu- 
sion ;  De  Wette  and  Rothe  as  an  episode. — P.  S.] 
We  difter  from  all  these,  and  refer  to  our  division 
of  the  Epistle,  and  to  the  superscription  here. 

1.  The  principle  of  sin  and  death  become  imma- 
nent (hereditary)  in  humanity  (vers.  12-14). 

2.  The  opposing  principle  of  the  gift  of  grace 
and  of  the  new  life  made  immanent  (spiritually  he- 
reditary) in  humanity  (vers.  15-19). 

3.  The  cooperation  of  the  law  for  the  finished 
revelation  of  sin  and  for  the  communication  of  the 
finished  revelation  of  the  grace  of  justification  (vefs. 
20,  21). 

1.  Arrangement  of  the  first  paragraph,  vers. 
12-14. 

(a.)    Sin   and  death,   proceeding  from  Adam'i 


174 


THE   EPISTLE    OF   PAUL   TO   THE   R05LVXS. 


7Taod;jc<fTu;  upon  all,  under  the  form  of  an  ethical 
appioprhition  by  all  (ver.  12). 

(i.)  Death  as  rcvealer  of  the  improperly  appre- 
hended sin,  from  Adam  to  Mosea,  or  to  the  law  (not 
by  Uic  law,  vers.  13,  14). 

2.  Tiie  second  paragraph,  vers.  16-19. 

((I.)  The  actually  manifested  contrast  in  the 
effects  of  the  two  principles,  {aa.)  The  contrast  be- 
tween the  natural  and  actual  effects,  according  to 
their  quantitative  extension  to  persons  ;  or  the  con- 
trast in  Us  personal  relation  (ver.  15).  (66.)  Tlie 
contrast  between  the  positive  effects,  according  to 
the  quaiitiitive  intensity  of  judgment  and  justifica- 
tion;/or,  the  contrast  in  its  essential  relation  (ver. 
16). 

(6).  The  contrast  in  the  potential  and  prospec- 
tive effects  of  the  two  principles,  (aa.)  The  con- 
trast between  the  enslavennnent  of  all  personal  life 
by  impersonal  (merely  personified)  death,  and  the 
future  glory  of  the  pardoned,  immortal,  and  reign- 
ing personalities  in  the  new  life  (ver.  17,  at  the  same 
time  a  proof  for  ver.  16).  (66.)  The  contrast  in  all 
its  ideal  magnitude  :  One  condemnation  came  upon 
all  men,  because  of  the  power  of  the  fall  of  one 
man ;  so,  by  the  righteousness  of  one,  can  all  men 
attain  to  the  justification  of  life  (that  is,  not  merely 
of  faith,  ver.  18). 

(c.)  The  contrast  in  the  final  effects  disclosed  by 
the  gospel.  By  the  effect  of  one  man's  disobedience, 
the  many  are  represented  in  the  light  of  the  g0Hp(!l 
as  sinners  exposed  to  the  judgment ;  finally,  by  tiie 
obedience  of  one,  the  many  are  to  be  represented  as 
righteous  in  the  judgment  (ver.  19). 

3.  Third  paragraph,  vers.  20-21. 

The  law  is  designed  to  effect  directly  the  devel- 
oping process  of  sin  to  historical  completion,  in 
order  to  effect  indirectly  that  revelation  of  grace 
which  far  ])reponderates  over  the  development  of  .sin 
(vers.  20,  21). 


FiBST  Fabagrafr  (tees.  12-14). 
The  principle  of  sin  and  death  in  humanity. 

Ver.  12.  Wherefore  [//^«  rorro].  Ruck- 
ert,  KoUner  [Tholuck,  Rciclie,  Stuart],  &c.,  refer 
dia  ToT'TO  to  the  entire  discussion  from  chap.  i. 
17  ;  *  Uothc,  to  the  previous  section,  v.  1-11,  which 
he  cliiims  to  treat  of  holine.«s  ;  Tlioluck,  to  vers.  11, 
10,  9,  &c.  ;  Meyer,  to  ver.  11  alone. f  We  refer  it 
merely  to  i/.diiofuv  in  the  previous  verse.  The 
verb  /.aiiftdvuv  does  not  denote,  in  the  New  Testa- 
ment, a  piis-ive  rccepti(jn,  but  an  ethical,  religious, 
and  moral  appropriation;  for  example,  Joiin  i.  12. 
And  tliis  is  here  tlie  point  of  comparison  between 
vers.  11  and  12. 

Uecause  this  point  has  been  overlooked,  an  in- 
credible amount  of  vexation  has  been  produced  in 

*  [So  nlso  Bcnjrel  •  "Sia  tovto  refers  to  the  whole  of 
the  prcooilinR  di-scns'tioii,  from  which  the  ApostU>  driiws 
those  cnncltisions,  herein  ninkinor  not  oo  miich  a  diBTC^Rion 
so  a  ri-fropTon«ion."  IludKe  :  "  The  whfrrfnrt  in  to  bo  taken 
as  illntivc,  or  tnarkin^  an  inference  from  the  whnU  of  the 
pr>-Ti<MH  p  ivt  "f  the  Kpistle,  anil  espei-ially  from  the  prc- 
Ceilinir  verses."—!'.  S] 

t  (>[eyer:  "  DAUeM,  %orH  wi'r  nilmlidi  dnrch  CJiriilum 
dif  (coTttAAayT  mul  <ti''  G  wisfhril  d'X  i\nig  ii  !!•  ih  f.mn- 
faiiij'n  hi'brii,  ver.  11."  Hut  Meyer  n'RiirdH  ver.  11  n»  the 
jummnry  of  the  wholii  pneedinp  doctrine  of  jiistifleation 
ftnil  ■'III nation.  I'hilippi  likewine  refers  iid  towto  to  ver. 
11  ill  Kueh  ii  w:iy  thnt  It  looki  nt  the  wime  time  to  the  whole 
dciluclion  froiii'i.  17-v.  11.  This  to  us  seems  to  be  the  most 
iatiKfiiclory  connection. — I'.  8.] 


reference  to  the  presumed  anacoluthon,  or  dravrn' 
TTodurov  [an  incomplete  sentence,  a  protasis  without 
an  ajiodosis].  Conjectures  [concerning  the  construe* 
tion  or  the  apodosis  corresponding  to  v>ann>,  likt 
a«]  : 

1.  According  to  Calvin,  Tholuck,  Philippi,  and 
others,  the  conclusion  is  indicated  in  the  words 
6,-  inn  rrnoi;  Tor  /it/./.ovTOi;,  ver.  14.  [Meyer  also 
regards  the  clause :  "  who  is  a  type  of  tlie  future 
(Adam),"  as  a  substitute  for  the  apodosis,  which  was 
swept  away  by  the  current  of  idciis  in  vers.  13  and 
14.— P.  S.] 

2.  According  to  Riickert,  Fritzsche,  and  De 
Wette  [?],  Paul  dropped  the  comparison  between 
Adam  and  Christ  alter  enumerating  the  points  of 
analogy,  because  their  dissimilarity  occurred  to  his 
mind  (ver.  15).  De  Wette  translates  ver.  12:  There, 
fore  (is  it)  as  by  one  man,  &c.  According  to  Orlgen, 
Bengel  [Rothe],  and  others,  the  Apostle  designedly 
.suppresses  the  conclusion.  [Bengel  says  sini[)ly : 
"  Apodosis,  variata  oratione,  latet  in  seq."  is  con. 
cea/cd  in  what  follows.  But  Rothe  holds  that  Paul 
dcsirinedlii  omitted  the  apodosis,  to  prevent  the  ille- 
gitimate doctrinal  inference  of  a  universal  salvation. 
See  below.— P.  S.] 

3.  According  to  Grotius,  [E.  V.,  Stuart,  Barnes, 
Uodge],  &c.,  vers.  13-17  are  parenthetical;  and  the 
conclusion  follows  in  ver.  18.  [Against  this  con- 
struction  may  be  urged,  with  Meyer,  the  unexampled 
length  and  importance  of  the  supposed  parenthesis, 
and  that  ver.  18  is  not  so  much  a  reassuniption  as  a 
recapitulation. — P.  S.] 

4.  According  to  Clericus,  Wolf,  and  others,  the 
conclusion  is  already  in  ver.  12,  and  begins  with 
y.al  ol'TMi,-  [as  if  this  could  be  synonymous  with 
oi''T(«»  y.ai,  so  also,  which  is  impossible. — P.  S.]  ; 
according  to  Erasmus,  Beza,  and  others,  it  begins 
with  xni  (Vtfi  [which  makes  diet  rorro  superfluous, 
and  sets  aside  the  comparison  between  Adam  and 
Christ.— P.  S.] 

5.  The  proper  view  is  the  one  defended  by  Koppe, 
in  harmony  with  [Cocceius]  Eisner,  and  others. 
The  apodosis  begins  as  a  com|)arative  statement  with 
(i)(Tnf(>,  since  i/.a.;;iOfitv  xnrn/./.nytjV  i)i  arm?  is 
brouglit  over  from  ver.  11.  [In  other  words,  mnjitQ 
introduces  the  sicond  member  of  the  comparison, 
while  the  Jirsi  must  be  supi)lied  from  ver.  11  in  this 
way :  Therefore  (we  received  and  appropriated  the 
r.'conciliation  through  Christ  in  the  same  manm-r)  as 
by  one  man  sin  entered  into  the  world,  &c. — P.  S.]  * 

♦  [This  construction  is  favored,  upon  the  whole,  by  De 
■Wi'tte  (who,  however,  ohjects  to  it:  "  Ergdnzt  mnn  t»)k 
KaraWayriy  iAipofitv  it*  airoi,  .«<  M>''i.««  man 
iiiihl  rirh\  wif  iniiii  mil  ihr  V  iglfichimij  on/aiiffri,  snil"), 
Umbreit,  Thco,  Scliott,  ■Wordsworth,  Alfiird,  "Jowott,  Coiiy- 
V>enre  and  llowxon.  I  subjoin  Alford'H  note  in  full,  though 
I  <li!i>.sent  from  it :  "This  verse  ik  one  of  ucknowledirod  dilB- 
ciilly.  The  two  questions  mertinp  us  directly,  are:  (1.) 
To  wh:it  docs  Sia  toOto  refer  ?  (2.)  ia<rntp,  //A--  'is,  may 
introduce  the  first  mrmber  of  a  compiirison,  the  second 
hciiiir  to  be  diMcovered  ;  or  mav  inlroiluce  the  second,  the 
RrA  hnviii(f  to  be  discovered.  1  .•■hull  endeavor  lo  answer 
both  questions  in  connection.  1  conceive  Sia  toCto  to 
refer  to  thnt  blexscd  state  ol  confidence  and  hope  just  de- 
scribed :  'on  this  account,'  liere  mennini;,  'quir  mnt  ila 
sinl :'  '  this  state  of  Ihinirs,  thus  broucbl  about,  will  justify 
the  folbiwinK  annlojrj'.'  Thus  we  must  take  uaircp,  either 
{a\  ns  1)cp;innini;  the  comparison,  mid  then  sujiply,  'so  by 
Christ,  in  His  resurnctUm,  came  justlliratioii  into  tho 
world  ;  :ind  by  juslitic:ition,  life  ;'  or  O)  as  concluJinK  the 
com]Miri«on,  and  sujqily  before  it,  '  it  was,'  or  '  Christ 
wroURht.'  This  latter  method  seems  to  me  far  the  l)est. 
For  none  of  tlie  endeavors  of  commentators  to  supply  the 
second  limb  of  tho  comparison  from  tho  follow  ini;  versci 
has  succeeded  :  and  we  c:in  hardly  suppose  such  .m  ellip» 
sis,  when  the  next  following  >umpari<on  'ver.  16)  is  ratliei 


CHAPTER  V.    12-21. 


175 


Tholuck  remarks,  that  then  we  do  not  know  exactly 
what  to  do  with  the  comparison.f  But  the  com- 
parison is  contained  in  the  already  indicated  concep- 
tion of  the  etliical  appropriation  of  the  principle  of 
the  reconciliation  on  one  hand,  as  of  the  principle 
of  sin  and  death  on  the  other.  Tlie  antithesis,  more 
fully  extended,  is  the  following :  z/tc<  TorTo  c/cip'o- 
(Afv  Trjv  y.aTCi/./.aytjv,  i(p  (<>  nt7Ti,(jTtv/.a/(iv — itiantq 
du  iro?  «r  5^(^(1)710 1 1  ^  duaiJTta  n't;  Tor  y.6(T/iov 
it(;7j).0fv  xcu  ()i.«  T^i,'  a/ta^riaq  6  Odvaroc,  y.ai  oi'- 
TO)ii  6  SccvaToi;  ft,-  Trwrra?  avO(>o')7Tot'i;  duf/.Otv,  iip 
w  ndvTfi;  i'jua^Tov.  It  is  very  plain  that,  without 
the  conception  of  kafi^Jdvuv,  the  whole  of  the  fol- 
lowing antitheses  would  appear  as  a  series  of  blind 
natui-al  necessities ;  see  Book  of  Wisdom  i.  16 ; 
ii.  24,  and  the  explanation  of  sV  <:h  which  follows 
below.  Rothe  thinks  that  tlie  Apostle's  supposed 
anacoluthon  was  even  premeditated — according  to 
the  idea  of  Origen — in  order  to  conceal  the  doctrine 
of  the  apocatastasis  which  might  be  deduced  from 
the  protasis.     See  thereon  Tholuck,  p.  215. 

[I  cannot  bring  my  mind  to  adopt  Dr.  Lange's 
construction,  which  evades  a  grammatical  difficulty 
only  to  give  room  for  a  more  serious  logical  one,  and 
mars  the  beauty  and  completeness  of  the  analogy.  It 
seems  to  me  that  tlie  most  natural  solution  of  the 
diflSculty  is  either  (1.)  to  take  iitanfi)  elliptically  : 
"  This  is  therefore  like  the  case  when  ; "  comp. 
Matt.  XXV.  14:  inanff)  j'«(»  drfiQionoc,  as  a  i  utn 
going  abroad^  where  Hxmi^if  neither  has,  nor  neces- 
sarily requires,  a  corresponding  ovtmi;  (see  Textual 
Note  in  the  Amer.  edition  of  Lange  on  MattJuiv,  p. 
442);  Gal.  ill.  6;  1  Tim.  i.  3,  where  y.nOik:,  and 
Mark  xiii.  34,  where  mv  is  used  elliptically  ;  or  (2.) 
to  assume  an  intentional  anacoluthon  (comp.  Winer, 
Gramni.,  p.  52V  fif.,  on  the  two  kinds  of  anacolutha,  in- 
voluntary and  intentional).  I  prefer  the  latter  solu- 
tion. The  complete  antithesis  would  read  thus :  "As 
{(f'xrnfQ)  by  one  man  (Adam)  sin  (>}  dfi(x()ria)  en- 
tered into  the  world,  and  death  (6  ndraroc)  through 
sin,  and  thus  death  extended  {()i,ij/.Ofv)  to  all  men, 
inasmuch  as  all  sinned  {tjf(a(>Tov) :  so  also  (oi'twc 
xai)  by  0!<e  man,  Jesus  Christ,  rig/deounness  (>]  iVt- 
Ttaioffivt])  entered  into  the  world,  and  life  {!j  unt'f) 
thronf/7i  righteousness,  and  thus  life  shall  extend 
((ivflivdirai,)  to  all  men,  inasmuch  as  [on  conditioti 
that)  all  shall  believe  {maTfvaovTai.)."  We  might 
also  supply,  after  the  second  "  righteousness  "  :  "m 
order  that  all,  being  justified  by  faith,  may  be 
saved."  Rothe  (p.^61)  supplies  as  the  last  clause  of 
the  apodosis  :  icfi  m  jrdvn^  dixatoi,  y.araaraS  tjaov- 
Tat ;  Philippi :  fi/'  ot  Trnrrf?  fiiy.ai,(nStiaovrai,.  But 
these  are  unessential  differences.  The  great  points 
of  comparison  are:  (1.)  Sin  and  death,  as  a  prin- 
ciple and  power,  proceeding  from  Adam  ;  righteous- 
ness and  life,  as  a  counteracting  and  conquering 
principle  and  power,  proceeding  from  Christ,  upon 
the  whole  human  race.  (2.)  Death  passing  upon  all 
men  by  participation  in  the  sin  of  Adam  ;  life  pass- 
ing upon  all  men  by  participation  in  the  righteous- 
ness of  Christ.  But  the  analogy  is  not  absolute ; 
for  (1.)  the  participation  in  Adam's  sin  is  universal 
in  fact,  while  the  participation  in  the  rigliteousness 

a  weakening  than  a  strencrthenine:  the  analocy.  "We  have 
examnies  for  this  use  of  uKrnep  in  Matt.  xxv.  14,  and  of 
(caflws',  Gal.  iii.  6."— P.  S.] 

*  [This  ohjection  was  made  hy  De  Wctte,  from  whom 
Tholuck,  p.  215,  quotes.  Mever  calls  this  explanation 
illoirical,  hecause  the  universality  of  Adam's  corruption, 
which  is  the  prominent  idea  in  ver.  12,  has  no  correspond- 
inp:  parallel  in  the  protasis  which  is  supplied  from  the  pre- 
ceding verse.— P.  S.l 


of  Christ,  though  this  righteousness  is  equally  uni. 
versal  in  power  and  intention,  is  limited  in  fact  to 
believers ;  in  other  words,  all  are  sinners,  but  not 
all  are  believers  ;  all  men  are  one  with  Adam,  but 
not  all  are  one  with  Christ  (hence  the  past  tense 
y-arKTrdOtjaav  in  the  case  of  the  dfiaQToi^.ol,  but 
the  future  y.araaTaSt'jdovTai.  in  the  case  of  the 
diy.aioi.,  ver.  19).  (2.)  What  Christ  gained  for  us  ii 
far  greater  (tto/mo  ftdX/.ov  ini^laaivafv,  ver.  16, 
comp.  rtjv  TTf^i^fffffiav  tTc;  yd^t.ro<.:,  ver.  17,  and 
{<7if(jf7if()i<j(Tfvatv  ?]  /«(j«,',  ver.  20)  than  what  was 
lost  by  Adam.  Paul,  therefore,  in  the  rush  of  ideas 
suggested  by  the  parallel,  intentionally  suspends  the 
apodosis,  to  make  lirst  some  explanatory  and  qualify- 
ing statements  in  regard  to  the  difference  in  the  mode, 
extent,  and  quality  of  tlie  effects  proceeding  respec- 
tively from  Adam  and  Christ,  and  then,  after  hinting 
at  the  second  member  of  the  comparison,  at  the  close 
of  ver.  14,  he  brings  out  the  double  parallel  of  simi- 
larity and  dissimilarity  in  full  as  a  conclusion,  vers. 
18,  19,  and  21.  The  whole  section,  as  Meyer  justly 
remarks,  bears  the  impress  of  the  most  studied  and 
acute  premeditation  ;  and  this  must  apply  also  to 
the  apparent  grammatical  irregularity  in  the  absence 
of  the  apodosis.  The  Apostle  might  have  spared 
the  comujentators  a  great  deal  of  trouble,  if  he  had^ 
according  J^  the  ordinary  rules  of  composition,  first 
stated  the  comparison  in  full,  and  then  given  the  ex- 
planations and  qualifications  ;  but  such  grammatical 
difficulties  in  tiie  Scriptures  are  generally  overruled 
for  a  profounder  investigation  and  elucidaton  of  the 
sense. — P.  S.] 

As  by  one  man  [wt;7rf()  (Jt  fro?  ard-Qii')- 
nov,  "by  one  man,  single  and  singular  in  his  posi- 
tion, and  so  presented  as  the  rvnoc.  ror  /li/./.ovrocy 
the  type  of  the  one  greater  man ; "  Webster  and 
Wilkinson. — P.  S.]  Kot  by  his  guilt  (Meyer)  [f)t 
h'ot;  diia^Tt;(javToc,  ver.  16],  which  would  by  no 
means  suit  the  antithesis :  Christ.  But  rather  by 
one  man,  as  the  hunian  principle,  as  the  historical 
cause.*  The  one  man  is  Adam,  as  representative 
of  the  first  human  pair  in  their  unitv.  The  sin  of 
Eve  (Sir.  xxv.  24  ;  2  Cor.  xi.  3  ;  1  Tim.  ii.  14)  did 
not  fully  decide  concerning  the  future  of  the  human 
race,  because  Adam  was  the  head.  It  was  with  his 
sin  that  the  sin  of  Eve  was  consummated  as  the 
guilt  of  the  fiist  man  [and  acquired  its  full  power 
over  posterity].  Therefore  Adam  is  meant  as  the 
head,  as  tlie  principle,  and  not  merely  with  regard 
to  propagation.  [Webster  and  Wilkinson  :  "  Adam, 
not  Eve,  is  charged  with  the  primal  sin,  as  he  re- 
ceived the  command  direct  from  God,  and  his  sin 
was  without  excuse.  Here,  only  the  guilt  of  the 
transgression  is  in  view  ;  in  2  Cor.  xi.  3  ;  1  Tim.  ii. 
14,  the  mode,  instrument,  and  process."  Bengel 
assigns  three  reasons  for  the  omission  of  Eve  :  (1.) 
Adam  had  received  the  commandment ;  (2.)  He  was 
not  only  the  head  of  his  race,  but  also  of  Eve ;  (3.) 
if  Adam  had  not  obeyed  his  wife,  one  only  would 
have  sinned.  The  omission  of  the  mention  of  Satan, 
the  primary  cause  of  sin  (comp.  Gen.  iii.  ;  John  viii. 
44 ;  2  Cor.  xi.  3),  he  accounts  for  because  (1.)  Satan 
is  opposed  to  God,  Adam  to  Christ,  whose  economy 
of  grace  is  here  described ;  (2.)  Satan  has  nothing 
to  do  with  the  grace  of  Christ.     It  should  be  re- 

*  [And  also  the  ffficiatt  cause  in  the  same  sense  in  which 
Christ  is  the  efficient  cause  of  ris-hteousness  and  life.  Ac- 
cording to  the  Pelagian  and  Unitarian  theory,  Adam  waa 
mrroly  the  nccagidii)  he  sinned,  and  set  a  bad  example  to 
others,  as  Christ  set  a  good  example.  Here  Christ  sinliB  t« 
the  position  of  a  mere  teacher.— P.  S.] 


176 


THE    EPISTLE   OF   PAUL   TO   TOE   ROMANS. 


memhered,  also,  as  Forbes  lemaiks,  that  in  Gen- 
esis tlie  very  name  of  Adam,  with  the  article  pre- 
fixed (  ZTxn ,  the  Adam,  the  man),  is  treated  as  an 
appellative  more  than  as  a  jiroper  name,  and  that,  in 
Gen,  i.  27,  it  includes  generieally  both  sexes  :  "  So 
God  created  Adam  (in  Hebrew)  in  his  own  image,  in 
the  image  of  (iod  created  he  iiim  :  male  and  female 
created  lie  them ; "  comp.  Gen.  v.  1,  1.  It  was 
wan,  or  human  nature  which  we  have  in  common 
with  him,  tliat  was  put  on  trial  in  Adam.  Paul 
draws  a  parallel  between  Adam  and  Christ,  but  never 
between  Eve  and  Mary.  The  latter  analogy  is  an 
unju:<titiable  inference,  first  iiinted  at  by  Irenaeus, 
and  more  fully  developed  by  Roman  Catholic  divines, 
and  became  a  fruitful  source  of  Mariolatry,  wldch 
virtually  makes  the  human  motlier  of  Christ  the 
fountain  of  tiiC  Christian  salvation. — P.  S.] 

Sin.  [ //  u/i  ctQTia.  The  definite  article  be- 
fore ciiin(jTict,  and  also  before  Odfaro^,  denotes 
sin  and  dcatli  as  a  i)Ower  or  principle  wiiich  controls 
man  and  reveals  itself  in  hereditary  corruption,  and  in 
every  form  of  actual  sin.  So  ij  dtxcuoGiytj,  which 
corresponds  to  it  as  its  opposite,  vers.  17,  til,  is  not 
a  single  righteous  act,  but  the  power  of  gooil  as  a 
Btate  and  as  a  workirig  principle.  Sin  is  personified 
08  a  fearful  tyrant,  who  acquired  universal  dominion 
over  the  human  race ;  he  "  reigns  in  d?ath,"  ver. 
21  ;  "  works  death  in  us,"  vii.  IS  ;  "  lords  it  over 
us"  vi.  14  ;  "  works  all  manner  of  concupiscence," 
vii.  8  ;  "deceives  and  slays"  the  sinner,  vii.  11,  &c. 
In  all  these  cases  the  force  of  the  definite  article  can 
De  rendered  in  German,  but  in  English,  on  the  con- 
trary, the  ahseiu-e  of  the  article  has  tlie  force  of  gen- 
eraMzing,  not  so  niuch,  as  far  as  I  know,  from  any 
rule  of  grammar,  as  from  usage,  and  perhaps  (or 
euphony's  sake. — P.  S.]  In  what  sense  V  Explana- 
tions :  1.  Original  sin,  or  natural  depravity  (Augu.s- 
tine,  Calvin);    2.  Sinfulness  [S'liiulhaftigke.t,  habitus 

«eccfi7i(U],  (Koppe,  Olshausen  [also  Webster  and 
rilkinson  :  sinfulness  personified  ;  a  sinful  dispo- 
sition, our  sinful  nature;  vi.  12,  14]);  3.  Actual 
6in  (Limborch,  Fritzsche)  ;  4.  Sin  ius  a  ruling  power 
(Meyer  [De  Wette],  Tholuck),  or  better  as  a  prin- 
ciple (Kothe).  I'hilippi,  on  the  contrary,  under- 
stands sin  as  the  unity  of  i)ropensity  and  deed,  as 
also  Aret.,  Schmid,  J.  MiiUer.  But  sin,  as  an  in- 
dividual deed,  is  expressed  l^y  tr/'  w,  &c.  It  is 
therefore  tiie  principial  or  fundamental  power  {die 
princi/ieUe  Machf)  of  sin  as  the  mother  of  death 
(James  i.  15).  [The  Apo>tle  very  carefidly,  through- 
out this  wliole  section,  distinguislies  between  unai)- 
Ti'a,  as  the  generic  idea,  and  rtcnid^laaii;  and 
nai>u.nri')iia,  iis  a  concrete  act,  the  transgression 
of  a  law;  conii>are  vers.  12,  13,  20,  21,  with  1.5, 
10,  17,  18.  By  the  naiictTTToi/ia  of  Adam  the 
UfiaoTtu  entered  into  the  human  world,  and  this 
aiiuoria  again  became  the  fruitful  mother  of  the 
innumerable  7ia<^>a7ztilinara  of  his  descendants. — 
P.  S.] 

Entered  into  the  world.  [m'<;  rov  xrxruor 
iliTrj/.f)fv ;  comp.  tiie  Book  of  Wisdom  ii.  24  (m  ex- 
planation of  Gen.  iii.):  qOorot  c)wu/?o^.or  Ouvaroi; 
nnTi'/.fltv  hiii  ritv  xniT/iov.  Sin  tistj/.Dt,  came  in  ; 
death  i)i,Tj).Of,  pasxed  Ihronrfh  ;  the  Mosaic  law  ;r«- 
otn;7//.f)t  (ver.  20),  came  in  bi)  the  aide,  or  heheeen.li 
Limborch  :  a  popular  personification.  On  the  ex- 
cessive personification  of  sin  and  death  in  Fritz.sche, 
sec  Tlioluck,  p.  219. —  futn  the  irorld.  Not  merely 
into  the  luinan  world  (Meyer),  or  into  human  nature 
(Ruthe)    but  aa  ruin  and  destructive  power  in  the 


whole  sphere  of  humanity  in  general  (see  Rom.  viii 
20).  It  is  plain  that  the  human  spliere  of  the  world 
alone  is  assumed  here  (according  to  Abelard :  in 
hanc  partem  viuudi  sc.  tcrreiiam,  in  qua  liominet 
/labitant),  as  Tholuck  remarks,  from  the  fact  that, 
"according  to  the  A[i08llc's  conviction,  evil  was 
already  in  existence  in  anotiier  world."  [Comp. 
1  Cor.  xi.  3  ;  Gen.  iii. ;  Book  of  Wisdom  ii.  24  ; 
John  viii.  44. — P.  S.]  The  exi)re8sion  indicates  not 
only  tlie  tendency  to  sin  and  death  in  huuian  natura 
(Rothe),  but  also  the  propagation  of  sin  (Augustine), 
because  the  xoa/ioi,-  is  a  conjunction  of  things,  and 
means  an  organic  connection.  Tiic  woids  <)i7/.0fr 
and  iif^  III  refer  to  the  individual  and  etiiical  appro- 
priation of  sin  which  is  in  the  x6(T/ioi;  sinr-o  Adam'a 
fall. 

Death  (namely,  entered  into  the  world).  Ex- 
planations :  1.  Physical  death  (Chrysostom,  Augus- 
tine, Calov.,  Me  ver.  Reference  to  Gen,  ii.  17  ;  ilL 
19);*  2.  Spiritual  death  (Pelagius) ;  3.  Phy.sical, 
sjiiritual,  and  eternal  death  ;  or  the  collected  evil  re- 
side of  sin  (Olshausen,  De  Wette,  Tholuck  [I'liilippi, 
Schmid,  Jon.  Edwards,  AU'ord,  Stuart,  ilotlge]  ). 
This  is  no  douljt  correct,  for  physical  death  in  itself 
has  no  Ijiblical  and  ethical  significance  (^sec  Rom, 
viii,  6  ;  1  Cor.  xv.  56  ;  James  i.  15). 

[The  Bible  uniformly  connects  .stw  and  deaf/i  as 
cause  and  effect ;  comp.  Gen.  ii,  17  ;  Ezek.  xviii.  4 
("  The  soul  that  sinneth,  it  shall  die  '') ;  Jer.  xxxi. 
30;  Rom.  vi.  10,  21,  24;  vii,  10;  viii.  13;  James  I 
15,  &c.  '■'^  Jeder  Silndeufall"  says  Dr.  Nitz.>ich,  " /«< 
eiu  Todesfall^  und  jeder  Fortnthritl  In  dcr  Hiinde 
ein  nenes  Sterben."  Without  sin,  there  would  be 
neither  spiritual  nor  physical  death.  This  was  sym- 
bolically intimated  by  the  tree  of  life  in  jjaradise,  of 
which  fallen  man  was  forl)iddcn  to  eat,  "  lest  he  live 
for  ever."  Adam,  if  he  liad  not  sinned,  miglii  have 
passed  to  higher  I'orms  of  life,  but  without  a  violent 
separation  of  body  and  soul,  without  being  "  un- 
clothed," but  by  being  "  clothed  upon  "  (2  Cor,  v. 
2-4),  or,  in  the  beautiful  figure  of  the  Raljbins,  "  by 
a  kiss  of  the  Almighty."  Death  and  /</<■  are  very 
deep  and  comprehensive  terms  in  the  Scriptures,  and 
the  connection  must  decide  wliether  all,  or  which 
of  the  meanings  are  exclu.-iveiy  or  j)rominently  kept 
in  view.  There  are  three  kinds  of  death  :  (1.)  The 
death  of  the  itoul  (1  John  iii.  14  ;  con. p.  Matt,  viii 
22  ;  Eph.  ii.  1),  which  is  properly  tlie  first  and  ini- 
mediate  effect  of  sin,  since  sin  is  a  separation  of  the 
soul  from  God,  the  fountain  of  life  ;  (2.)  The  death 
of  the  bodi/  (Rom.  v.  10;  Matt.  xx.  IS;  xxvi.  66 
John  xi.  4,  13  ;  Acts  xiii.  28  ;  Phil.  i.  20  ;  ii.  8), 
which  is  the  culmination  and  end  of  all  physical 
malady  and  evil  in  this  world;  (3.)  the  terual 
death  of  soul  and  body  (Rom.  i.  32  ;  2  Cor.  iii,  16  ; 
vii.  10;  James  v.  20;  1  John  v.  10),  which  is  also 
called  the  second  death,  6  flurotroi;  6  dtvrt^oi;  (in 
the  Apoc.  ii.  11  ;  xx.  6,  14;  xxi.  8).  In  our  pas- 
sage (as  also  Rom.  vii.  21,  23  ;  vii.  6 ;  2  Tim.  i.  10), 
o  Oc'tvnrni;  is  as  comprehensive  as  tj  ri/iftor/a,  its 
cause,  and  as  i;  ^'d/J,  its  opposite.  It  emliraces  alt 
fdii/i<ical  awl  niorol  rvll,  as  thr  petinl  cuiiscipience  of 
sin ;  it  is  death  temporal  and  spiritual,  viewed  as 
one  united  power  and  principle  ruling  over  the  hu- 
man race.  That  the  Ajiostle  meant  pliysieal  deith, 
is  clear  from  ver.  14,  and  from  his  unmistakable  ref- 

•  [Opn.  ii.  17,  where  death  in  mentioned  for  the  flrst 
time,  spcnkit  mthcr  for  a  more  coniprolioiifivc-  view,  sea 
i>clow,  euh  O) ;  since  tlip  flrwt  purcnts  were  thii'.'itonoil  with 
tho  pennlly  of  death  to  l>c  inllirtod  on  the  vriy  day  of  thoil 
full,  and  long  before  'iicir  physical  death.— P.  S.J 


CHAPTER   V.    12-21. 


m 


erence  to  Gen.  ii.  17  ;  iii.  3,  19  ;  while  from  vers. 
17,  18,  21,  we  rnuy  infer  that  lie  had  also  in  mind 
epiritual  and  eternal  death,  as  the  contrast  to  eternal 
life,  unij  auorwc,  in  which  the  Scripture  idea  of 
lift  cuhiiiuates,  as  the  idea  of  death  culminates  in 
etc  mal  damnation.  Ewald  has  an  excellent  note  on 
this  passage  {Z)ie  Sendschreiben  d<s  -A p.  I'aulus,  p. 
873) :  "  Paul  knew  that,  notwithstanding  the  words 
Gen.  ii.  17,  Adam  did  not  literally  die  immediately 
after  his  sin  ;  consequently  he  must  mean  by  death 
that  entire  inner  corruption  {jenes  game  innere  Ver- 
derben)  by  which  even  the  physical  death  only  be- 
comes true  death ;  just  as,  on  tlie  other  hand,  he 
ascribes  true  life  to  the  genuine  Christians  even  now 
before  the  resurrection  of  the  body.  All  this  is  so 
well  founded  in  his  constant  use  of  language,  that  it 
needs  no  explanation."  Comp.  also  the  remarks  of 
Philippi  in  loc,  and  Cremer,  BibL  llieol.  Worierbuch, 
sub  &dvaToc,  p.  232  :  "  Daher  ist  Tod  zummmenfas- 
sender  Ausdmck  fur  die  gesammte  gkrichtijche 
CoNSEQCF.xz  der  Sun  e,  Rom.  v.  12,  14,  17,  21  ;  vi. 
16  ;  James  v.  20,  in  icelchem  alles  durch  die  Siinde 
bedingte  Uebel  sich  concentrirt,  synon.  Verdcrben, 
a;r(il/. f  t«." — P.  S.] 

And  so  (death)  passed  upon  all  men.  The 
second  duvuroq  was  left  out  probably  because 
dt,Tj).&(v  would  be  referred  equally  to  sin  and 
death.  But  both  are  comprehended  in  the  &dvaTOi; 
in  its  spiritual  character.  The  di^i^iytaOut,  denotes 
the  extension,  the  universal  progress ;  though  a 
germ-like  development  is  not  contained  in  the  word, 
but  in  the  thing  itself.  [ot'Twc;  {demzufdge,  der- 
gestalt,  consequently)  connects  the  universal  reign  of 
death,  chronologically  and  logically,  with  the  uni- 
versal reign  of  sin,  as  its  preceding  cause.  Some 
make  xal  oYro)!;,  anc? //twv,  equivalent,  by  trans- 
position, to  oi'tw  y.ai,  so  also,  and  regard  this  as 
the  apodo-sis  of  the  first  clause  of  the  twelfth  verse  ; 
but  this  is  entirely  ungrammatical,  and  inconsistent 
with  the  main  object  of  this  section,  which  is  to 
draw  a  parallel,  not  between  Adam  and  his  poster- 
ity, or  sin  and  death,  but  between  Adam  and  Christ. 
—  ft?  ndvrai;  dvd  (><i)novi;,  upon  all  men,  is 
equivalent  to  the  preceding  y.oniiOQ,  but  differs  from 
it  "  as  the  concrete  parts  from  the  abstract  whole ; 
and  (iitQ/faSav  differs  from  fliiio/faOai,  as  the 
going  from  house  to  house  differs  I'rom  entering  a 
town;"  De  Wette.  Luther  well  translates  diTj/.- 
&iv:  ist  durchgedrungen,  passed  through  and  per- 
vaded, as  a  destructive  and  desolating  power. — 
P.  S.] 

In  such  a  manner  that  [solcheriveise  dass,  or, 
on  the  grouxid  that ;  better :  inasmuch  as]. 
iq'  (',)  (^  t(p  ok)  is  as  much  as  ini  toi'tw  oti.. 
It  can  therefore  mean  here :  on  the  ground  that ; 
dtoTt,  propter  ea  quod  (Meyer) ;  under  the  suppo- 
sition that  (Baur) ;  on  condition  that  (Rotiie) ;  in 
conformity  with  it,  that.  Tholuck  [p.  234]  favors 
the  meaning  because,  with  reference  to  2  Cor.  v.  4  ; 
Phil.  iii.  12  ;  yet  he  makes  the  because  relative,  and 
translates,  so  far  as  they  all. 

[It  is  almost  unanimously  agreed  now,  that  Itf' 
Z,  for  which  the  Greeks  generally  use  the  plural, 
irf'  oh  {propter  ea  quod),  has  here  the  sense  of  a 
conjunction,  and  that  o>  is  the  neuter,  not  the  mas- 
culine to  be  referred  back  either  to  ni;  dvOQionoi; 
(with  Augustine,  some  Roman  Catholics,  older  Lutlier- 
jins  and  Calvinists),  or  to  Odvaroc;  (with  Glockler, 
Hofmann).  It  can  mean  neither  in  quo,  h  i<>  (Au- 
gustine), nor  per  quern,  du  on  (Grotms),  nor  prop- 
ter quern  or  cum  quo,  iii  ov  or  avv  m  (Chrysostom, 

12 


Theophylact,  Q]cumer.ius,  Eisner).  But  it  must  be 
resolved  cither  into  ini  roi'rio  oxirf,  ea  conditions 
ui,  ea  ralione  ut,  unter  der  Voraussetzung,  un  er  der 
ndhcren  Bestimtntheit  dass,  on  the  prcxn/ipfosition, 
on  the  definite  ground  that,  on  condition  that  (so 
Rothe,  in  a  learned  and  subtle  discussion,  1.  c.  pp. 
17-38,  and  Sclimid,  BiM.  Tlicol.  des  N.  T.,  ii.  26C 
f.)  ;  or  into  tnl  toi'Tw  ort  =  fVtoTt  (Thomas  Magis- 
ter  and  Phavorinus  :  £?'  m,  uvrl  tov  OtoTt),  propt- 
tir  id  quod,  auf  Grnnd  dessen  dass,  darum  dass 
weil,  on  this  account  that,  because  ;  comp.  2  Cor.  v 
4  ;  Phil.  iii.  12,  and  classical  passages  quoted  bj 
Meyer,  p.  204  f.  (so  Fritzsche,  Horn.  1.  299  sq.,  Mey- 
er, Tholuck,  Phili[)pi,  Winer,  Grrnm.,  p.  StiS,  who 
are  followed,  without  further  discussion,  by  Alford, 
Webster  and  Wilkinson,  Stuart  and  Hodge).  The 
latter  explanation  gives  the  plain  sense,  that  the 
universal  reign  of  death  is  caused  by  universal  sin , 
while  Rothe's  explanation  conveys  the  more  subtle 
idea  that  the  actual  sin  of  individuals  is  a  conse. 
queiice  of  the  same  proceeding  by  which  death^ 
through  Adam's  sin,  passed  upon  all  men,  or  that 
the  sin  of  Adam  has  caused  the  sin  of  all  others  in 
inseparable  connection  with  death.  I  prefer  the 
translation,  so  far  as,  inasmuch  as,  which  gives  good 
sense  in  all  the  Pauline  passages  (2  Cor.  v.  4  :  eV 
I'l  ov  di/.Ofti%'  ty.()r(TaaOai,  d/.)l  inivd i  (J a<T Sew, 
Phil.  iii.  12  :  iq!  w  y.ai  y.c<.Tfh]qO  tjv).  It  is  not  so 
much  a  causal,  as  a  qualifying  and  conditioning  con- 
junction (a  relative  or  modified  oti.),  which  in  our 
passage  shows  more  clearly  the  connection  of  death 
with  sin.  It  implies  that  a  moral  participation  of  all 
men  in  the  sin  of  Adam  is  the  medium  or  cause  of 
their  death  ;  just  as  faith  on  our  part  is  the  moral 
condition  of  our  participation  in  Christ's  life.  It  is 
unfavorable  to  the  doctrine  of  a  gratuitous  imputa- 
tion. The  legal  act  of  imputation  is  not  nibitrary 
and  unconditioned,  but  rests  on  a  moral  ground  and 
an  objective  reality. — P.  S.] 

[All  sinned  (not,  have  sinned,  E.  Y.),  ndv- 
m;  tj^ta^Tov.  The  aor.  II.  presents  the  sinning 
of  all  as  a  historical  fact,  or  a  momentary  action  of 
the  past ;  comp.  aniQavov,  in  ver.  15  ;  o'l  ndvTft; 
dniSavov,  2  Cor.  v.  14  ;  and  especially  Rom.  iii. 
23,  where  precisely  the  same  phrase  occurs:  "all 
sinned,"  as  in  one  act  (in  Adam),  and  consequently 
became  sinners  (comp.  Textual  Note  ^,  p.  128).  Some 
take  the  aorist  in  the  sense  of  tlie  p.erfect  Ijiia^rti- 
y.aat,  =  rr;'  d,i'C(()Tiav  tldi  \  but  the  aorist  w\"is  cho- 
sen with  reference  to  the  past  event  of  Adam's  fall, 
wiiich  was  at  the  same  time  virtually  the  fall  of  the 
human  race  as  represented  by  him,  and  germinally 
contained  in  him.*  'yf/ia^Tcivfi'V  cannot  mean  :  to 
be,  or,  to  become  sinful  (=  ctfia^r o)}.6v  ftrat,  or,  yiy- 
rfvOat.),  although  this  is  the  necessary  residt  of  the 
first  sinful  act ;  still  less,  to  suffer  the  punishment 
of  sin ;  but  it  means  real,  actual  sinning.  In  what 
sense  ?  The  choice  in  the  following  list  lies  between 
interpretations  (4)  and  (5),  which  are  both  equally 
consistent  with  the  natural  grammatical  sense  of 
ijfictQrov ;  while  the  other  interpretations  are  more 
or  li'ss  strained  or  false. — P.  S.] 

E.Splanations  of  ;7«i'Tf <,■   rjiia^xov: 
/{l.))/«  quo,  namely,  in  Adam,  the  whole  ruce 

*  ['Winer,  p.  259,  denies  that  the  aorist  is  ever  confoun  1- 
ed  with  the  perfect.  Even  in  Luke  1. 1  (iTTex^i(ir](jav) ;  John 
xvii.  4  (eSo^aa-a,  ireKeiucra)  ;  Phi),  iii.  12  (eAajSoi'),  and  simi- 
lar cases,  the  action  is  related  simply  as  pa?Ecd.  Tlie  per- 
fect expresses  the  past  action  in  its  relation  to  the  present, 
so  that  the  resiiH  of  the  action  is  generally,  though  not 
necessarily  (see  Kruger,  151,  and  'Winer,  254),  supjc^d  t« 
be  continued.— P.  S.] 


178 


THE   EPISTLE   OF   PAUL   TO   THE   ROMANS. 


sinned.  (Origen,*  Chrysostom.f  Theopliylu-t,  Augus- 
tine X  [Hezii,  Bicnz,  Bucer,  Este,  Erariiuus  Sciiiuid], 
and,  :is  piob;ibly  '^  tlie  last  among  rrotestaiit  exposi- 
tors" [yj,  Bt-njamiu  Carpzov,  175S).  §  The  suppo- 
sitioiiJjorc  is  tl'ic  organic  unity  of  the  human  race. 

^2WBecause  all  have  become  sinful  [ri/iafi  sunt, 
pecc^rts  fiidi  xntd^  —  that  is,  sinners  by  original 
BinXCijlvin",  Melanchthon,  Flatt).|| 

l^j  Metonymically,  because  all  have  been  pun- 

•  (Origen  taught  a  persona?  fall  of  all  men  in  a  pre- 
eanj^fj/ stale  In  J5/j.  a</ i?'<Hi.  (Opp.  iv.  p.  546) :  "  Si  Li'vi 
in  luiiilii  Abr(ihx/ui.<se  perhihdttr,  rnuUn  mogis  humims  in 
luinbis  enint  Adie,  cum  adhw:  I's.^el  i ii  p'lnirtiso,  el  nmiirs  limn i- 
ties  ciiin  ipso  vd  in  ips'i  expul.-i  sinit  de  paradixo." — P.  S.] 

♦  [Chi-ysostom  {Hnmilia  X.)  explains  raUier  looscjy  and 
supoificially  :  rt  6c  eo-rii',  ij)'  <a  n-oi'Tes  TJ/iaproi' ;  tKeivoy 
jre<rdi'T09,  ical  oi  fj-rj  (^ayoma  djrb  ToO  fi/Aou  yiyovaaiv  ff 
tKiivov  n-oi'Tes  dvyfroC,  i  e.,  "by  the  la II  of  Adam,  even 
tliose  who  did  not  oat  of  the  forbidden  tree  liave  all  become 
mortal."  This  is  all  he  says,  and  then  he  parses  imme- 
diately to  vor.  13.— P.  S.  I 

X  [Augustine,  following  the  wrong  tran.slation  of  the 
Vulgate — in  qu< — used  this  passage  as  an  argument  for  the 
doctrine  of  original  bin  and  the  fall  of  the  human  race  in 
Adam.  De  pccc.  mcr.  et  rem.  iii.  7  :  "In  Aditmo  omnes 
tunc  prccaviTun',  qnnndo  in  ejus  vatura,  ilia  insila  vi  qua 
COS  gignere  poteral,  adhue  itmnes  ille  uiius  fucrunC."  Conira 
Jul.  V.  12  :  "  Faerunt  itmnes  ralione  srminis  in  tinnbis  Admni 
qwindn  tlamnaUis  es'.  .  .  .  quemuilmo'lnm  fuerunt  Israeli'ie 
tn  Inmbis  Abrahx,  quandn  dechnntus  est,"  lich.  vii.  9,  10. 
J)e  Civilate.  Dei,  1.  xiii.  c.  14  :  "  Omnes  tnim  fuimus  in  itlo 
unn,  quando  omnef  fuimus  ille  iinus,  qui  per  Jeminnm  lap- 
sus esl  in  peccolum.  .  .  .  jyondnm  eral  nobis  singillalini 
creala  et  dislrihuta  forma,  in  qua  siiiguU  viveremiis ;  s<d 
jam  nnlura  eral  seminalis,  ex  qwr  pr<>i>agareniur;"  i.  e., 
"the  form  in  which  we  were  to  live,  as  individuals,  had 
not  yet  been  created  and  assigned  tn  us,  but  that  seminal 
nature  was  already  in  existence,  from  which  we  were  to  bo 
propasjated."  From  this  last  passage  it  is  evident  that 
Augustine  did  not  teach,  as  he  is  sometimes  misrepresent- 
ed, a  personal  and  conscinus  coexistence  and  coagcucy  of 
Adam's  posterity  in  Adam  and  his  fall  (which  involves  the 
contradiction  of  an  existence  before  existence),  but  simply 
a  ptilinlidt  or  germiual  coexistence.  The  ge.nus  hmno  or 
human  nature  which  he  represtnted,  was  not  a  receptac'e 
of  millions  of  human  beings,  bnt  a  single,  simple  es-cni-e, 
•which  became  manifold  V)y  pro])agation.  As  in  the  doc- 
trine of  the  Trinity  and  of  the  Person  of  Christ  we  distin- 
guish t3t  Teen  nature  and  person,  so  also  here.  Our  hu- 
man nature  was  on  trial  in  Adam,  and  fell  in  him  ;  conse- 
quently we  all  fell  as  partaking  of  that  nature,  and  share 
in  hirt  guilt.  This  seems  to  me  to  be  Augustine's  view. 
Eslius,  one  of  the  best  Roman  Catholic  coniuicntators, 
gives  the  same  interpretation  on  the  bas'e  of  the  Vulgate 
translation  :  " D'lun'ur  omne.i  prccissc  in  Adam,  tonquam 
in  prini-ipio  et  rndice  loliuf  generis,  quoniam  in  lnmb:s  ejus 
eranl,  quando  ille.  prrcibat."  Then,  after  quoting  several 
passages  from  Aug.,  he  continues,  in  explanation  of  the 
Angustinian  theory  :  "Id  virosic  in'elligr  ;  qni.i  innc quan- 
do tile  propria  volunlale  pe-civH,  in  quo  tauquam  in  prin- 
Cipio  generis,  omnes  erant,  causa  data  esl,  per  quom  deinceps 
univrrsum  genus  infli-erelur,  el  singuli  cmflilU'  retilnr  pcca- 
tores,  videlicet  a  sua  quisque piccolo,  qnnd  ex.  ilia  origine  con- 
trahrrel ;  quomodo,  si  pater  altaminalus  Ipra  fiUos  giguat 
lepro.ios,  direntur  fllii  facli  hprosi  a  poire,  lice'  unwqnisqne 
siiam  ex  illo  contralial  'hpram."  This,  in  a  certain  sense,  is 
thcoloLrically  ti-uc,  but  excgetically  false— i'.  <■.,  the  doctrine 
of  original  sin,  or  total  depravity  as  derived  from  Adam,  is 
implied  in  the  whole  pa.s«agt\  especially  in  7ra»'T<«  riixapTov, 
but  not  in  «</>'  a>.  For  i<i>'  lo  is  not  enuivaleut  to  fV  u>  (se^e 
above);  avSpuinov  is  too  far  separated  from  the  relative  <p, 
and  tho  who  c  phrase,  aiiapTayeiv  ini  rti't,  meaning,  lo  sin 
in  some  one,  or  by  nne,  is  wilhoiit  example.  For  a  mudiftca- 
tion  of  the  Augu«lini  an  interpretation,  see  (4 1  below.— P.  S.J 
S  (S:iin.  J.  IJaird,  Elohim  R vah^l,  P|iil.id.  ISliO,  p.  417, 
dcfunds  the  siiiie  view  ;  taking  e<fr'  i^  =  iv  u>,  as  In  vor.  14; 
Mark  ii.  4  ;  Luke  v.  25  ;  iv  jii  "A«o>i,  1  Cor.  xv.  22.— P.  8.) 

I  I  .Mel  inchthoD  :  "  Omnes  liahenl  perc  Hum,  srilicel  prar- 
itntem  propiga'am  et  realiini."  Calvin:  "  .Xempr,  inquit, 
qunniam  omnes  prrcavimuf.  Porro  isliid  peicare  esl  rorrup- 
lot  use  el  vilioxus.  Ilia  enim  iinliiralls  pravitas,  qiiam  e 
malris  u'ern  nfferimus,  laniOsi  nnn  iUi  rilo  friirlus  suns  edi', 
peccalum  lanun  est  coram  Domin",  et  ijns  nllioiem  merrhir. 
A'frie  hnr  esl  prrcalnm,  quod  vocanl  ntiturole."  According 
to  Calvin,  then  the  inherent,  tureditary  depranty  derived 
irom  Adam  is  the  reason  why  all  die.  This  interpretation 
Is  not  only  ungrammaticnl,  since  aiiapravtiv  cannot  mean, 
lob'come  corrupt,  but  it  al«o  vitiates  the  analogy  between 
Adam  and  Cbrliit.^P.  8.] 


ished  as  sinners,  or  are  involved  in  the  consequences 
of  the  fall  (Chryso-stom,*  Grotius,f  Arminians  and 
Sociiiians  [and  Calvinists  of  the  Federal  school,  Mac- 
knh»b»5Nllodge]  ).X 

{l^-y  Some  supply  even  Adarno  peccante  after 
tV'  '."  (Parens,  and  others;  Bengel,  Olshausen,  &c.). 
I'hilippi,  p.  179  :  "  We  must  mentally  supply  h 
'^()«/(,  or  more  specifically,  Adaino  peccante,  tc 
rifiatJTov."  ^Icyer,  liiiewise,  "  because  all  sinned 
when  Adam  sinned,  in  and  willi  him  !  "     1  Cor   iV 


*  l'E(  tKeivov  irdvTti  Bvriroi. — P.  S.] 

t  [Grotius:  pos/aim /i/t)v.',  to  suffer  piuiishment.  Heap« 
peals  to  Gen.  xxxi.  'i(i ;  .Tob  vi.  24 ;  1  Kings  i.  21,  for  this  me« 
tonyuiy  of  tho  etlect.  f<j>'  <p  he  tiikes  =  Ihrougli  whom.  Th« 
sam<'  interprctatio'i  is  more  fully  defended  by  Whitby,  an 
Arminiaii,  on  Rom.  v.  19.  -P.  S.] 

t  [Meyer  calls  this  interpretation  sheer  ungrammatical 
arbitrariness  {nur  sprachw.drige  Willlcuhr) ;  for  ^/lapTOK 
means,  lliei/  sinned,  and  uotbing  else  (p.  204).  Xeverthebss, 
it  is  defended  by  Dr.  Modge,  of  Princeton,  even  in  the  revised 
edition  of  his  Comm.  (p.  236  ff.),  with  a  degree  of  dogmatio 
positivencss,  as  if  there  could  be  no  doubt  about  it.  He  holds 
that  all  men  sinned  in  Adam  merely  in  a  nprrstntalivc  or  pn- 
talive,  not  in  any  real  sense,  and  that  r^naprov  has  the  i)assive 
meaning :  they  became  legally  guilty,  and  were  regarded  and 
Ireateil  as  sinners  on  accouut  of  Adam's  sin  by  virtue  of  a 
natur.al  and  federal  rel.ationship  between  Adam  and  hia 
posterity.  "The  only  possible  way,"  he  says,  "in  which 
all  men  can  be  said  to" have  sinned  in  Adam,  is  putatively." 
[This  is  begging  the  question.]  "His  act,  for  some  good 
and  proper  reason  [?],  was  regarded  ;is  their  act,  just  as  the 
act  of  an  agi'iit  is  regarded  as  the  act  of  his  priTicipal,  or 
the  act  of  a  representative  as  that  of  liis  con-titueits  " 
[although  in  this  case  they  never  elected  him].  "  The  act 
of  the  one  legally  binds  the  other.  It  is,  in  the  eye  of 
law  and  justice,  their  act."  But  anapravfiv  never  has  this 
meaning  of  pnlalive  sinning.  It  is  obviously  impos-sible 
in  aixaprridavTai,  ver.  14.  In  the  parallel  passag.^,  iii.  23, 
Hod.;e  himself  understands  it  of  actual  sinning  {"all  have 
sinned,  and  are  sinners,  or,  all  sinncil,"  p.  140).  The  two 
solitary  passages  which  he  quotes  from  the  Septuagint 
(Geu.  xliii.  9,  comp.  xliv.  32  :  T/^aprijicw?  ecrofxai,  and  1 
Kings  i.  "21  :  ecrop-eda  .  .  .  a^taprioAoi,  (.  e.,  in  the  view  of 
tho  reigning  prince),  arc  neither  parallel  nor  dicisive,  as 
has  often  been  shown  by  older  commentators.  When 
Ilodu'C  confidently  appeals  to  the  authority  of  "theolo- 
gians of  every  grade  and  class  of  doctrine,  Calvinists, 
Anninians,  Lutherans,  and  Rationalists,"  in  favor  of  his 
interpretation  (p.  241),  he  is  greatly  mistaken.  I  know 
of  no  recent  commentator  of  note,  "German  or  Enclish, 
who  agrees  with  him  on  this  point.  Phi  ippi  and  Words- 
worth, whom  he  quotes  oi  his  side,  hold  the  realistic  An- 
gustinian view  (which  Ilodirc  renudiates  as  nonsense.  See 
next  foot-note.)  So  does  even  Kobert  llaldane,  the  most 
rigorous  Scotch  Ualvinistic  commentator  on  the  Romans, 
who  says  (p.  211  of  the  Amer.  edition):  "Adam's  sin  was 
a«  truly  the  sin  of  every  one  of  I. is  posterity,  as  if  it  had 
been  personally  committed  by  him.  It  is  only  in  this 
way  that  all  could  bo  involved  in  its  consequence.  Be- 
sides, it  is  only  in  this  light  that  it  is  illustrativi'  of  jus- 
tifiiation  by  Christ,  llelievers  truly  ilie  with  Christ,  and 
pay  the  debt  in  Ilim  by  their  union  or  oneness  with  Him. 
It  belongs  not  to  us  to  inquire  how  these  things  can  bo. 
We  receive  tlum  on  the  testimony  of  God."  ..."  If  God 
deals  with  mi'ii  as  sinners  on  nccount  of  Adam's  sin,  then 
it  is  self-evident  th.at  they  are  sinners  on  that  account.  Tho 
just  God  could  not  deal  with  men  as  finners  on  any  account 
which  did  not  make  them  truly  sinnei  s."  The  metonymi- 
cal  interpretation  arose  from  opposition  to  the  doctrine  of 
original  sin.  Hodge  tries  to  defend  the  dogma  of  impu- 
tation on  a  Socinlan  exegesis.  But  by  njctin/  the  real- 
istic theory  of  a  participation  of  Adam's  posterity  in  hia 
fall,  he  loses  the  basis  for  a  just  imputation,  and  resolves 
it  into  a  legal  fiction.  Only  a  sinful  and  guilty  being  c«n 
be  the  subject  of  the  displeasure  of  a  righfenis  and  holy 
God.  We  do  not  object  to  tho  doctrine  of  iraputtition  iB 
itself,  but  simply  to  that  form  of  it  which  isaiores  or 
denies  the  rilol  n.iture  of  our  connocinn  with  Ad:im  and 
with  Christ,  as  plainly  taught  in  this  whole  section. 
Adam  Is  our  natural  repre-entaiivc  de  faio  as  we'.l  aa 
(/'•  jure.  He  is  the  root  of  humanity,  and  his  fall  alfoetcd 
the  .stock,  and  every  branch,  by  the  inherent  law  of  or- 
ganic ;i(c-uiilon.  ""Kot  Adam's  transgression  outwardly 
reckoned,  but  .Vilam's  sinfulness  and  morUiIity  inwardly 
communlcnted  or  imparted,"  are  the  ch'ef  points  of  com- 
iiaris')n,  and  placed  In  contrast  with  the  righteousness  .ind 
life  of  Christ,  with  whom  we  hold  ev.  n  a  mori  intimati 
lifc-uniun  by  faith,  than  with  Adam  by  sin.— i\  S.] 


CHAPTER  V.   12-21. 


179 


22  [er  Tw'^fVa/i  n^ai'Tfi;  a7roflr»/<rxoi'<Tiv]  has  been 
allege^  us  proof  of  this.* 

\^j  Tlie  expression  must  be  understood  of  the  per- 
sonaTsiiis  of  individuals  (Ileiche,  Riickert,  De  Wette, 
Tholuck    [Fritzsche,    Baur,    Vau    Hengel,    Stuart], 

•  [This  interpretation,  which  Dr.  Lange  treats  rather 
too  severely,  asrces  theoloaically  with  Augustine's  (No.  1), 
although  it  dilt'ers  from  it  grauimatically.  It  is  defended 
by  two  of  the  ablest  modern  commentators,  Philippi,  and 
lin  recent  editions)  by  Meyer.  Philippi,  whom  Dr.  Hodge 
(p.  241)  wrongly  quotes  in  favor  of  bis  purely  legal  imputation 
theory  (see  the  preceding  notel,  says,  after  criticisi.  g  other 
fiews':  "  Wir  Wirdin  ilPfhaU  mil  jVo/hiVi:n<ligKeit  zu  dir- 
jmigeR  Aiiffasxtiiig  zi<iUr/,/j,JTihri,  wdcJif,  obgliich  sie  von 
dun  ncurren  Aus'egarn  aufgiy.  b,  n  ist  {vgl.  jeducli  OI.<kausin) 
und  fe.rnliigend  erscheinl,  di:iiiir.ch  die  iidchslf,  eiiifachsle 
undna  iliiickxle  ist.  Es  ifl  vdmlch  2«  rJ/iapToi'  im  Ge- 
dankcn  :  iv  'ASiiju,  oder  itoch  prdciaer :  '  Adi'mo  peccan- 
te '  zu  ergdiizen.  '  JS'on  agitur  dc  peccalo  singulorum  pro- 
pria,' siigl  L'eiige!.  '  Ointies  pecoirunt,  Adamo  peccante,'' 
Oder,  wir  Kiippc  e.<  ausdru  k!,  '  ipsn  acu  quo  percavit  Ada- 
miis.'  D'Jiirsjirickf  aiich  der  m<jmt'naiie  Sinn  dcs  Aoristes 
^ /lap TO  I/.  IJer  Tod  is',  zu  Allen  hindiiirhgedningcn,  weil 
sii:  Alle  .•■undiglen,  ah  Adam  mndigte,  weil  m  der  SUnde 
Adam's  Hire  eigme  Siinde  milbcschiossen  war.  Sn  wiirdrn 
wir  also  dem  wi'senllichen  S  nnc  tttich,  wt'nn  mich  auf  an- 
derem  grcrinniatischem  Wrgr,  das  Augostinische  'in  auo 
OMNES  vy.cCAVt^nvTiT,'  wiedir  giwinni'n.  Passend  Idsst.  sich 
2  Cor.  Y.  \3  vergieichen :  ei  eis  vnep  vavTiav  a.n49a- 
vev,  cLpa.  oc  irafTes  aweflafoi',  wnzii  wir  hier  dtn 
enUpricJie.ndin  G'gcnsa^z :  et  cly  iinip  rtavTiav  rifiap- 
Tev,  apa.  ot  Travres  r)  fiapTov  Jiiulen.  Wir  fcrncr  Iticr 
V'ln  dim  ap.apT6.vei,v  ,  so  iit  1  Kor.  xv.  22  von  dun  anro- 
Bvrja- Keiv  Atler  iv  tw  'AS dp.  die  Rede.  D.r  Apusld 
sMltdcmnach  die  Menscheitssiinde  als  objcctiv  in  Adam  be- 
scklosien  dar,  gerade  so  wie  er  die  Menscldicilfgirichligkeii 
als  iibjecliv  in  Clirislo  beschlnssen  dfnkl,  und  die  ParaHele 
erhd't  nun  erst  die  re<!tte  Prdcision  tmd  plastische  Anschnu- 
lichkeit."  Meyer,  who  is  misrepresented  by  Dr.  Hodge  (p. 
23a)  as  charging  Paul  with  f.irgct fulness  in  stating  what  is 
not  true  in  point  of  fact,  holds  the  same  Augustinian  view, 
and  stated  it  plainly  not  only  in  the  fourth  edition  (i865,  p. 
201),  but  in  the  third  (1859,  p.  187),  and  even  in  the  t^econd 
edition  (1S.')4,  ten  years  before  the  appearance  of  Hodge's 
revision  !)  as  follows  :  "(6i|>'  cu  Travrej  fj/napToi/)  auf 
Geund  dessen  dass,  d.  h.,  weil  alle  sCndigten,  ■ndm- 
lich  {prach'e  den  momenlanen  Sinn  des  Aor.)  als  durch  den 
Einen  die  Sundc  in  die  Well  einlral.  Weil,  als  Adam  .sfln- 
diglr,  ALLE  Mnsc/ien  in  und  mil  Hun,  dem  Verlrcter  der 
giinzen  Mrnsehheil  (nicht :  '  exbmplo  .4AnH/,'  Pelag.),  ge- 
sundigl  hah'  n,  ist  der  Tad,  welcher  durch  die  in  die  Well  ge- 
kommene  SUnde  in  die  Welt  knm,  vermoge  dieses  ursdchliehen 
Zusammr nliangcs  der  durch  Adam  in''s  Vorhandrnsein  gelre- 
tenen  Sunde  und  des  Todrs  auf  alle  verhreilet  warden. 
Alle  warden  durch  Adam's  Fall  s'crb'ich,  wed  dieses  Ge- 
sund'glhaben  Adam's  ein  Gesioidig.'hahen  Aller  war,  mil- 
Jiin  Tip  ToG  ivoi  n  ap  an  Till  p.  atTL  ot  TroAAot  dffe- 
Oavov,  ver.  15.  Sa  isl  es  aUerdings  in  Adam  bcgrundel, 
dass  Alle  sirrben  {ev  Tco  'A  Si  p.  TTai'Tes  a.no6vri<r  Kov  - 
triv,  1  Kur.  XV.  22),  to?i7  ndmlich,  als  Adam  sundigle,  Alle 
sundiglen,  Alle  als  a/uapruAol  KaretTra.Sr](Ta.v  (ver. 
19),  «nd  samil  der  durch  seine  SUnde  eivg  kammene  Tod 
k'inen  versehnnen  kann."  The  siime  interpretntion  is  sub- 
stantially adopted  by  the  best  English  commei.tators  of  the 
age.  Alford  says:  "All  sinned  in  the  secil,  as  jihanted  in 
tiic  nature  by  the  sin  of  our  forefather,  and  in  the  fruil,  as 
developed  by  each  conscious  responsible  indi^■idlIal  in  his 
own  practice.  .  .  .  Observe  how  entirely  this  assertion  of 
the  Apostle  contradicts  the  Pelagian  or  individualistic  view 
of  men,  that  each  is  a  separate  creation  from  God,  existing 
solely  on  his  own  exclusive  responsibility,  and  affirms  the 
Augu.stinian  or  realistic  view,  that  all  are  evolved  by 
Goi's  appointment  from  an  oriuinal  stock,  and,  though  in- 
dividually responsible,  are  genfrically  involved  in  the  cor- 
ruption and  condrmnation  of  their  original."'  Words- 
worth :  "  Observe  the  aorist  tense,  ripapTov,  Ihey  all  sinned  ; 
that  is,  at  a  particular  time.  And  when  was  that  ?  Douht- 
le?.',  at  the  Fall.  All  men  sinned  in  Adam's  sin.  All  fell 
in  his  fall.  All  men  were  thai  one  man,  Adam  (Augustine). 
All  men  were  in  him,  as  a  river  is  in  its  source,  and  as  a 
trfi  is  in  its  root  We  are  all  by  nature  in  the  first  Adam, 
B.«  we  arc  all  hy  grace  in  the  second  Adam,  Christ."  Web- 
Bter  and  Wilkinson:  "All  sinned  virtually  when  Adam 
Binned,  because  m  him  their  nature  becume  sinful." 

This  good  orthodox  interpretation,  supported  hy  the 
most  respectable  array  of  authorities  from  Augustine  and 
the  Reformers  down  to  Philippi  and  Meyer,  Dr.  Hodge 
calls  mystic  and  p.antheistic  nonsense,  which  "does  not 
rise  even  to  the  dignity  of  a  contradiction,  and  has  no 
mcnnmg  at  all ;  "  adding  :  "  It  is  a  monstrous  evil  to 
wake  the  Bible  contiadict  the  common  sense  and  com- 


and  others).*  Meyer  calls  this  interpretation  false 
in  view  of  the  many  millions  of  children  who  have 
not  yet  sinned  \  [i.  e.,  committed  actual  traitsgres. 
sion].  Tholuck  refers  to  the  disposition  of  childrer 
to  sin  [which,  however,  is  inconsistent  with  ij/nrxQ 
■tor. — P.  S.].  But  he  who  finds  no  difficulty  in  , 
conceiving  that  children  sinned  in  Adam,  should 
find  less  difficulty  in  thinking  that  they  siuned  in 
tiie  womb  of  their  mother,  and  least  diflic:;liy  in 
sinking  tlieir  individuality  in  the  solidarity  of  their 
sinful  ancestry.  Meyer  objects  further,  that  the 
view  thjt  the  death  of  individuals  is  the  result  of 
their  personal  sins,  would  vitiate  and  even  contradict 
the  whole  parallel  between  Adam  and  Christ.  "  For 
as  the  sin  of  Adam  brought  death  to  all  (therefore 
not  their  self-committed  sin),  so  the  obedience  of 
Christ  (not  their  own  virtue)  brought  life  to  all 
(comp.  1  Cor.  xv.  22)."  :j:  Thus  an  absolute  natural 
neces.sity  prevailed  on  both  sides  !  The  proper  con- 
sideration  of  the  parallel,  on  the  contrary,  leads  to 
this  conclusion :  As  in  the  actual  appropriation  of 
the  merits  of  Christ  a  personal  ethical  appropriation 


mon  consciousness  of  men"  (p.  236).  "We  hold  that  all 
men  sinned  in  Adam,  not  indeed  personally  by  conscious 
actual  transgression  (which  Augustine  never  said  or 
meant;  see  the  passages  quoted  in  the  third  foot-note 
on  p.  178),  but  virtually  or  potentially  ;  in  other  words. 
that  Adam  fell,  not  as  an  individual  simply,  but  as  the  real 
representative  head  of  the  human  race,  and  that  his  fall 
vitiated  human  nature  itself,  and  prospectively  his  whole 
posterity,  in  the  same  manner  in  which  the  disease  of  the 
germ  and  root  will  affect  the  tree  and  branches  proceeding 
from  it.  This  may  be  vncnmmon  sense  (as  is  the  whole  fifth 
chapter  of  Romans),  but  it  is  certainly  no  »)o?jsense.  The 
human  race  is  not  a  sandheap,  but  an  organic  unity  ;  and 
only  on  the  ground  of  such  a  viial  unity,  as  distinct  from 
a  mechanical  or  merely  federal  unity,  can  we  understand 
and  defend  the  doctrine  of  original  sin,  the  imputation  of 
Adam's  sin,  and  of  Christ's  righteousness.  "Without  an 
•actual  communion  of  life,  impiitation  is  an  arbitrary'  legal 
arrangement.  We  readily  admit  that  the  Augustinian 
view  is  liable  to  objections  (see  Lange's  and  our  stiictures 
in  Doclrinal  and  Ethical,  No.  2  and  3),  but  it  is  far  prefera- 
ble 10  the  legsl  fiction  theory. — P.  S.] 

*  [So  Thcodoret  :  ov  yap  rr)v  too  irpoiraTopo^  apaprCav, 
aAAa  Tijf  olKfCav  eicao'TOS  Se'^eTat  tow  BavaTOV  Tor  opov. 
Pelngius  may  be  ranked  here,  lor  in  his  brief  comments  on 
Romans  he  explains  e<^'  <u  ndvm  rjwapTov :  "  In  eo  quod 
omnes  peccaverunt,  exnnplo  Adx  peeeard,"  or  '^per  iiiiita- 
tinnem,"  in  opposition  to  ^' per  puipngatii.nrm."  Julian  of 
Eclanum,  the  ablest  ehaminon  of  Pelagianitim,  takes  i^' 
<J  in  the  sense  of  propter  quod  {Aug.  Contra  Jul.  vi.  75; 
6p.  imperf.  ii.  06).  But  both  denied  orit;inal  sin,  which 
may  be  held  in  perfect  consistency  with  this  inlerjireta- 
tion  of  ripaprov.  Among  American  commentators  it  is  ad- 
vocated especially  by  Uamcs  and  Stuart.  We  quote  from 
Moses  Stuart :  "  Tlicre  remains,  therefore,  only  the  first 
plain  and  simple  method  of  interpretation,  viz.,  all  men 
liave  sinned  in  their  own  persons  ;  ail  men  have  them- 
selves incurred  the  guilt  of  sin,  and  so  subiected  themselves 
to  its  penalty  ;  or  at  least,  all  men  aie  themselves  sinners, 
and  so  are  liable  to  death."  Prof.  Dwight,  in  his  article 
against  Hodge,  seems  to  adopt  this  view  ;  taking,  however 
ijiaopToi'  in  a" semi-figurative  sense,  "  so  that  Paul  conceives 
of  oui-  individual,  personal  sinning,  as  summed  up  and 
centred  in  Adam,  not  because  we  sinned  either  really  or 
pntatively  when  he  did,  but  because,  when  he  sinned,  the 
whole  future  results  were  then  made  certain,  and  so,  in  a 
sen.'-e,  were  accomplished  "  (1.  c.  p.  500). — P.  S.] 

t  [The  German  original  reads  :  "  Dagrgen  sagt  Meyer, 
das  Wort  passe  nieht  auf  die  gesiindigl  hahenden  Kinder," 
children  who  have  siuned,  instead  of  "  in  Belreff  der  vielen 
Millianen  NOCH  siCHT  gesuinlie/t  habinden  K."  (see  Jleyer, 
p.  203).  Tiie  printer's  omission  of  unch  nicht,  not  yet,  makes 
sad  work  here  with  the  argument,  and  caused  some  per- 
plexity to  the  translator.  Flatt,  and  others,  raised  the 
same  oTijection  to  the  above  interpretation,  viz.,  that  it 
would  include  infants  among  actual  sinners,  wliich  is  not 
true.  Hodge,  p.  232  f.,  iu:ges  five  argmncnts  against  it.— 
P.  S.] 

I  [So  also  Hodge  :  "  It  would  make  the  Apostle  teach 
that,  as  all  men  die  because  they  personally  sin,  so  all  men 
live  because  they  are  personally  and  inherently  righteous. 
This  is  contrary  not  only  to  this  whole  passage,  but  to  aU 
Paul's  teaching,  and  to  the  whole  gospel."— P.  S.] 


180 


THE    EPISTLE    OE   PAUL    TO    THE   ROMANS. 


takes  place  by  faith,  so  in  the  actual  sharing  in  the 
guilt  of  Ailani  does  an  etliical  participation  by  un- 
J)elicf  take  place  (see  Koui.  xi.  aii).  It  i.s  a  great 
error  to  imajjine  that,  iu  order  to  avoid  the  Pelagian 
heresy,  we  must  cast  ourselves  into  the  amis  of  the 
«  Augustiiiian  liieory,  and  do  violence  to  the  plain 
text.  Tliis  is  done  by  IJeza,  Calvin,  Philippi,  and 
Me\ijj\  though  by  each  in  a  difl'erent  way. 

€i\^  The  /(/'  III  is  understood  as  causa  Jinalis : 
INTO  ii/iuh,  viz.,  ileath  or  piiiiishnicnt ;  thus  niak- 
i  >g  t'-Tt  to  mark  the  end,  or  consequence,  to  which 
B  uiiing  came.  (Venema,  Schiuid,  Glijckler,  and 
Ewaid  [formerly,  not  now]. )  *  Meyer  observes, 
that  tliis  telle  view  implies  a  uecessaiy,  tliough  not 
intended  ettect,  in  accordance  with  tiie  idea  of  fate. 

^^IL)fmann:  L'lider  whose  (death's)  dominion 
they  .Mimed.  This  view  might  l)e  belter  sup))orted 
by  tlie  thouglit  in  Hel^.  ii.  la,  than  by  the  language 
in  Ucli  ix.  15.     Yet  it  is  untt'iialde.f 

C|J)Tliomnsius  ;  Under  which  relation  (namely, 
thatsm  and  death  ciuue  into  the  world  by  one  man) 
all  sinned,  &c. 

It  is  evident  that  the  most  of  these  explanations 
are  attempts,  from  doctrinal  considerations,  to  avoid 
the  idea  of  individual  personal  guilt,  and  by  this 
means  a  relation,  clear  enough  in  itself,  is  obscured. 
The  Apostle's  assumption  is  the  priority  of  sin  in 
relation  to  death,  and  the  causal  connection  of  the 
two.  Accordingly,  the  meaning  is,  since  sin  came 
into  the  world  as  an  abnormal  ethical  jjrinciple, 
death  came  into  the  world  with  it  as  the  correspond- 
ing abnormal  physiological  priuei|)le.  Therefore  the 
propagation  of  the  abnormal  priMci|)le  of  death  pre- 
6up])0ses  the  ])reeediiig  propagation  of  tlie  principle 
of  sin  in  the  real  sinning  of  all.  It  arises  from  the 
unity  and  solidarity  of  humanity,  that  certain  cases 
— for  example,  children  born  dead,  or  dying  [and 
idiots] — do  not  here  come  into  consideration.  The 
definition  of  the  A^'  at,  uiahr  the  presitfipositiou  thul, 
is  therefore  tin;  most  natural.  In  view  of  the  death 
of  iniKJcent  children,  we  may  assume  difl'erent  degrees 
of  guilt  and  death  :  "in  proportion  as,"  or  "in  what 
measure,  they  all  sinned." 

Ver.  13.  For  until  the  law,  &c.  ["--//(< i 
ydt(»  vofiov,  —  i.  e.,  fiom  Adam  to  the  Mosaic 
legislation,  comp.  ver.  H  —  «/(«(»Tta  ;/ r  iv 
x(KT/ii».  Alford  :  "  IIow,  consistently  with  chap. 
iv.  l.T,  could  all  men  sin,  brfore  tfie  law(  This  is 
now  explained."  Hut  iv.  1.5  is  too  far  off,  and  treats 
of  7TanH{lu(Tiii,  not  of  niia(tTicc.  yu(i  connects  this 
verse  with  nrivrn;  il/ia()Tov,  ver.  12. — P.  S.]  The 
Apostle  did  not  need  to  show  first  that  the  death  of 

•  fin  his  J'lhrhwhfr  der  bibl.  Whgenschnfl,  ii.  p.  171, 
Ewnld  explniiu'il,  with  the  rejection  of  the  second  6  6ava- 
T0«  :  "  null  an  zii  allrn  Meiixclfn  diirchdnivg  dah,  woit.M'F- 
Hi»  ALLE  BrNDioTEjf,"  "and  80  pa>sed  upon  all  men  Unit 
unto  ichi'h  all  sinned."  viz.,  deatn,  which  in  Oen.  ii.  17  is 
decreed  as  tlie  puniHhment  of  Bin,  so  that  whosoever  hini«, 
fins  unto  death— i.  <•.,  must  die.  Itut  Bubspquentlv,  iu  his 
Coinm.  on  the  I'uu  ino  Kpistles  (1857,  p.  327),  Kwald  trans- 
lated ;  "soFKHN  iilli'  yUiiiliylin,"  '^  iinismiich  as  nil  ninued," 
and  remarks  (in  a  f>iot-noto  on  p.  373)  that  this  meaning  of 
i^'  ^  (;is  u  coiijunctian)  is  niiiiilar  to  the  precodinj?  ovrmi, 
sliowing  death  to  he  the  consequence  of  sin. — 1'.  S.  j 

t  [Iloriiuinn,  fkhriflbiweis,  vol.  i.  p.  529,  2d  ed.,  takes 
ivi  as  a  preposiliou  of  t  mo,  and  refers  tw  to  the  preceding 
facarot  (which  is  wanting  in  several  MJlS.)  in  the  sense: 
6'  I  it'  sum  V'lrhniid'  n^i-ni,  i.  e.,  during  llf  >■•  ign  nf  druHi  :\\\ 
uiniiol.  lie  (|notesT  in  support,  llcb.  ix.  15  :  aX  rirt  rj) 
vptvrg  Sia9i)K|7  napafiairtii.  liut  this  siuijtle  and  almiir-l 
triviiil  ide.i  cMUlrl  h:ive  lieen  exiirpsscil  mncti  mi>ro  deiirly. 
The  inter|iretati')n  uf  'riidinii-ius  (sul)  8)  resenihles  that  of 
Ilofm.inn,  except  that  he  takes  y  as  neuter:  b'lm  Vnrhnn- 
dUnM'in  wliitt'  Vcihiilini<.<if,  Hut  the  preceding  words 
pronnnnce  a  f:kct,  not  an  aUstraut  relation.  Comp.  Meyer, 
f.  200.— r.  a. J 


all  was  grounded  in  Adam's  sin  (Meyer) ;  tliis  he 
could  presuppose  from  Jewish  and  Cliristian  knowl- 
edge. 13ut  he  proves  rather  that  the  actual  exten- 
sion of  death  took  place  alwiiyti  under  the  sui)po. 
sition  of  preceding  sin  in  the  world.  Therefore  his 
first  proposition  :  Even  in  the  period  between  Adaic 
and  Moses,  sin  was  univer.sal  in  the  world.  It  was 
indeed  not  imputed,  not  placed  directly  in  the  iglit 
of  the  conscious  judgment  of  God,  because  the  law, 
as  the  rule  of  conduct  and  the  accuser,  was  not  yet 
present.  But,  indirectly,  i.s  presence  was  made  mani- 
fest  by  its  elfeet,  the  despotic  government  of  death  ; 
altiiough  a  transgression  in  such  a  definite  way  as 
that  committed  l>y  Adam  could  not  occur  in  the  pe- 
riod designated  (notwithstanding  many  analogies : 
Cain,  the  Cainites,  Ilam,  Ishmael,  Esau).  Even  the 
transgression  again  made  manifest  by  the  Mosaic  law 
does  not  remove  the  great  antagonism  ijy  whicii,  in 
principle,  sin  and  death  proceeded  from  Adam,  the 
type  of  Christ,  the  antitype,  from  whom,  iu  prin- 
ciple, righteousness  and  life  preceded.  Meyer  sup- 
poses the  Apostle  to  say  :  "  The  death  of  iudividu- 
als,  which  pa.ssed  also  U])on  those  who  have  not 
sinned,  as  Adam  did,  against  a  positive  command- 
ment, cannot  be  derived  from  sin  connnitted  before 
the  law,  because,  the  law  not  being  present,  the  im- 
putation was  wanting  [absolutely '']  ;  and  the  con- 
elu.sion  which  Paul  draws  therefrom,  is,  that  it  Ls  by 
i  Adam's  sin  (not  by  individual  sins)  that  death  has 
been  produced"  (!).  Now,  how  does  this  agree  with 
the  history  of  the  Deluge,  and  of  Sodom  and  Go- 
morrah ?  Here,  definite  death  is  everywhere  traced 
to  definite  offences.  Tholuek's  view  of  the  connec- 
tion [p.  238  ff.]  is  similar  to  Meyer's.  The  most  of 
the  later  commentjitors,  on  tlie  contrary,  properly 
regard  vers.  13  and  14  as  an  argument  for  navTn; 
i'jiia(iTov  (Riiekeit,  De  Wette,  Neander,  and  others; 
and  formerly  Diodorus,  Calvin,  and  others).  Calov. 
has  correctly  concluded  :  Since  they  were  punished 
because  of  sin,  they  must  have  had  some  law.* 

But  sin  is  not  imputed  [reckoned,  /«  Bic/i. 
intng  f/i'l>rac/it,  '..-/  n  ni>  t  i  a  o  !■  x  t  /  /.  o  j' f  Tt  « t  ]. 
(Pliilem.  ver.  18  [tcxi.  in:]  is  the  only  other  place).f 
Meyer  exjilains :  Is  brought  to  account  by  God  for 
l>unishment  [ji-ird  in  Rchming  f/cbracht,  viz.,  zur 
Bestrii/iini/].  His  citation  (chap.  iv.  15)  is  suflicicnt 
to  correct  him.  It  is  with  the  id/>oc-,  and  the  con- 
sciousness of  it,  that  the  f<./(«()T«'rt  (which  is  also 
transgression,  according  to  the  measure  of  the  natu- 
ral conscience)  first  receives  the  imi)ressed  charac- 
ter of  consciotis  transgression,  na(i(x;jniTti;,  and  there- 
with tiie  oifyi'i  is  first  finished  by  the  xctrfiiyn<>af>ai 
of  the  rd,/M»v.  Therefore  even  the  sin  of  the  gen- 
orations  before  the  Hood  was  not  yet  definitely  set- 
tle(l  by  its  overthrow  (1  Peter  iii.  20;  iv.  0);  there- 
fore the  people  of  Sodom  and  (iomorrah  were  guilty 
of  less  sin  than  the  contemiK)r;iries  of  Jesus.  The 
ii.loytiv  of  sin  constitutes  therefore  the  reverse  side 
of  the  }.oyi^nrf)ni.  f(\-  i)i.xcui>fTi'<rriv  ;  it  docs  not  de- 
note any  preliminary  attrHmtion,  (lut  the  final  impu- 
tation, or  settlement.  —  Explanations:  h  not  im- 
puted, a.  By  God  ;   (1.)  Not  in  general  (the  Deluge, 

•  |lIo<lge  makes  the  whole  doctrine  and  argument  ol 
the  Apostle  to  he,  "  that  there  are  jienal  evils  which  comt 
ujion  men  imteeedeiit  to  any  transgrossions  of  their  own; 
and  as  the  in<lieti<m  of  those  evils  implies  a  violation  01 
law,  it  follows  that  they  are  regarded  and  treated  as  sinner^ 
on  Ihr  gminiU  nj  llf  disobnii.ncr  nf  annlhrr"  (p.  2.i2).— P.  8.} 

t  [()utKi<le  of  these  two  jiasaages  in  the  New  Testament, 
the  word,  according  to  Meyer,  occurs  hut  onrc,  vi/..,  in 
Ilci'ckh,  hifciipi.  i.  p.  850,  A.  .'IS.  It  means  iv  Kiyif  7i9ivtii^ 
AoYii,'cir9at,  Iu  nckun  in,  tv  put  Iu  one's  account. — r.  8.] 


CHAPTER   V.    12-21. 


181 


Sodom  and  Gomorrah,  &c.,  were  exceptions) ;  (2.) 
Not  in  the  usual  manner  of  sin  (Bengel :  peccatuin 
v.on  notat  sceltra  insiynia  \jjualia  Sodomitw  ante 
Mosis  (empora  luertint,  sed  malum  covimune]  ) ;  (3.) 
The  Arminians  :  the  OdruToi;  was  only  natural  evil; 
(4.)  Calov.,  better  than  ail :  the  word  must  be  un- 
derstood only  hypothetically.  The  men  of  the  ante- 
Mosaic  period  also  had  a  kind  of  law.  b.  By  man 
(Ambrose,  Augustine,  Theodore  Mopsvestia,  Lu- 
ther.: "  Sin  is  not  minded,"  man,  achtet  ihrer  nicht). 
:.  Zwingli :  By  the  human  judge.  Altogether  for- 
eign to  the  context.  Hofmann:  the  proposition  laid 
down  refers  only  to  humanity  in  general,  and  not  to 
individuals.  This  is  a  modification  of  Schleiermach- 
er's  representation  of  penal  justice. — We  must  add 
the  remark,  that  the  imputing  judge  is  God,  but  that, 
in  the  imputation,  the  human  knowledge  of  the 
naitctfjam^  in  the  light  of  the  judgment  is  to  be 
taken  fully  into  consideration.  [Alford  explains 
£/./..,  "reckoned,  'se<  down  as  iraiisgression^ — 
'  put  ill  formal  account,'  bi/  God.  In  the  case  of 
those  who  had  not  the  written  law,  aiici(jTla  is  not 
formally  reckoned  as  naiJafJaat^c,  set  over  against 
the  command ;  but,  in  a  certain  sense,  as  distinctly 
proved,  chap.  ii.  9-16,  it  is  reckoned,  and  they  are 
condemned  for  it." — P.  S.] 

When  there  is  no  law  [ /;  //  o  vr  o  «,•  v 6 - 
fioi'^.  Xot :  Where  the  law  is  not.  [So  Alford, 
and  those  who  refer  voi^ioi;  to  the  Mosaic  law  exclu- 
sively.— P.  S.]  The  Apostle  appears  to  lay  down 
the  proposition  in  the  foi-m  of  a  general  maxim 
("  where  there  is  no  accuser,  there  is  no  judge  ")  in 
order  to  suggest  the  idea  of  degrees  of  legality  and 
imputation  (see  the  explanation  of  Calov.).  Here, 
too,  Meyer  would  relieve  the  death  of  the  genera- 
tions before  Moses  from  being  caused  by  individual 
sin  (see,  on  the  contrary,  Ps.  xc).  We  say,  with 
chap.  i.  18  ft'.,  tiiat  the  falling  of  those  generations 
into  sin  was,  in  general,  a  great  judgment  of  God ; 
but  an  ethical  because  [i.  19]  always  precedes. 

Ver.  14.  Nevertheless  [notwithstanding  the 
relative  non-imputation  of  sin]  death  reigned 
\^^4).'/.a  ii^aal/.ti'fj  fv ,  emphatically  put  fi;'st, 
6  flai'ttToc].  Death,  already  personified,  appears 
here  as  a  ruler,  and,  according  to  its  nature,  as  a 
tyrant.*  The  universal  reign  of  death  implies  the 
universal  reign  of  sin  as  its  cause,  in  proof  of  ver. 
12  (against  Meyer  and  Hofmann).  The  dominion  of 
death  embraces  not  only  physical  death  with  all  its 
historical  terrors,  but  also  the  consciousness  of  death, 
or  the  sting  of  death  (1  Cor.  xv.  56),  and  the  conse- 
quence of  death,  the  dreary,  wretched  existence  in 
Sheol.f  \_f'i'/(^i'  {until)  Miorff.  =  ei/^ji.  vofioi', 
ver.  13.  There  is  no  clear  difference  between  /a'/^t 
and  ci/tji,,  except  that  fiiyj>t;  from  /(ft/.j/oc,  etymo- 
logically,  denotes  primarily  extension,  or  length  of 
time  ;  a/ft,  from  a/.i>oc,  point  of  tin.e. — P.  S.] 

Even  over  those,  &c.  [/at  iniX   toi'i,-  ^7 


•  [Origen  :  "  Videtiir  Jp.  mortem  describere  vclul  lyranni 
aJwijiis  iiigressuin." — P.  S.] 

t  [Beiigol :  "  M'trti  arlscribitvr  regntjm,  id  hobtie,  Heb. 
ii.  14.  Sine  vix  ullus  rex  lot  subdilos  huh't,  quat  vel  n'ges 
mors  ab-slulit.  Immane  regiium.  Ndii  eM  Hhraisinus.  Ini- 
peral  p- C'dtum  :  impeiat  juMlia." — P.  S.J 

J  [Ba<nAev€if  'with  ini  is  a  Hebraism  (  5?  ~'^  )  ; 
conip.  Luke  i.  33;  sis.  U;  1  Sam.  viii.  9,  11;  in  classic 
Groek  it  iule.<  the  senitire  or  dative.  The  preposition  sig- 
nifies the  persons  over  whom  the  sovereignty  is  exeicised. 
Tlie  second  eiri  before  tw  6/.iotu^aT<.  expresses  the  model  to 
which  the  net  is  coiiformed  ;  comp.  cttI  tuJ  ovd^art,  Luke  i. 
Ii.    Ihe  whole  phrase  corresponds  to  the  Hebrew  n^lOTS. 


aftciQTtjfTavrai;   btt  c    r  m    o  fi  o  io)  ft  ar  t   t  >j  ^ 

n  a  (J  a  [j  d  <T  Kii  1;  '^(VaViJ.  Over  those  who,  unlike 
Adam,  were  not  guilty  of  a  definite  na(jd^'a(ji,<;,  oi 
transgression  of  a  definite  command  of  God.  The 
y.al  may  be  understood  as  antithetical  to  Adam,  oi 
better,  as  making  a  distinction  between  sinners  in 
the  general  sense,  and  the  wicked  transgressors  of 
special  laws  of  God,  who  effect,  as  it  were,  new  fsAh 
of  man,  such  as  Cain,  Han),  &c.  Athanasius  ex< 
plains  thus :  those  who  conmiitted  no  mortal  siii , 
Grotius :  no  gross  sins  ;  Crell,  and  others  :  trans- 
gressed no  law  to  which  the  threat  of  death  wa.s 
attached.  But  the  measure  ie  simply  the  na^d- 
/j'auiu-,  as  in  chap.  iv.  15.  The  elder  expositors  have 
included  here  also  the  children  [and  idiots]  sub- 
jected "  by  Adam's  sin  to  the  pcena  damni ;  " 
Brenz  makes  this  the  exclusive  reference  [against 
which  Calvin  correctly  protests.  Children  are  in- 
cluded, but  not  specially  intended. — P.  S.]  Indi- 
rectly, this  verse  refers  definitely  to  the  connection 
between  sin  and  death  in  the  period  from  Adam  to 
Moses,  as  has  been  also  perceived  by  De  Wette, 
Fritzsche,  and  Baur,  but  is  opposed  in  vain  by 
Meyer. 

Who  is  a  t3rpe  of  the  coming  one  [i.  e.,  the 
second  Adam,  6s  tari,v  rvnoi;  tou  /.ti/./.ov' 
TO!,].  Koppe  comes  in  positive  conflict  with  the 
context,  when  he  takes  fii/./.ovroi;  as  neuter :  of  that 
which  should  come.  The  first  Adam  is  the  type  of 
the  second  (1  Cor.  xv.  45),  and  is  the  principle  of 
the  first  eon,  as  Christ  is  the  principle  of  the  second, 
but  according  to  the  antagonism  between  the  first 
and  second  eons.  See  Meyer,  for  similar  expressions 
of  the  Rabbis  \  e.  g  ,  Adum^ts  j)ostremu^  est  Jlessias. 
According  to  Tholuck,  tiie  deduction  of  tlie  miti- 
tiietical  side  should  now  have  followed,  but  Paul  was 
contented  witli  the  oc  fcrrt,  &c.,  in  order  to  indicate 
the  other  half  But  in  our  view  the  antithesis  has 
already  preceded  (vers.  9-11),  and  is  fully  elaborated 
in  chap,  vi.-viii.,  after  the  transitional  individual  an- 
titheses that  now  follow. 

[This  important  clause  points  back  to  ver.  12, 
and  indicates  the  apodosis,  the  other  member  of  tlie 
comparison.  Ti'Tioq,  from  TvnTio,  to  strike,  to 
wound,  has  a  variety  of  significations  which  are 
closely  related,  and  yet  may  seem  in  some  cases  con- 
tradictory (comp.  the  German  A  bblkl,  Uvbild,  Vor- 
bild).  It  means  (1.)  a  blow;  (2.)  a  print,  or  Im- 
pression, made  by  a  blow  (John  xx.  25,  rov  rinov 
TMV  rjhov);  (3.)  a  form,  image,  figure  {Bi/d,  Ab- 
bild  ;  so  often  in  the  classics,  and  in  Acts  vii.  43, 
Toi's  rvnoiQ,  ore  cTToi/jfrarf  nfioa/.vvclv  avroii;); 
(4.)  a  pattern,  model  (J/«s;'(r,  jl/o(/e//,  Urblld  ;  Rom. 
vi.  17,  Tvnov  ()i,<)a/7ii; ;  Acts  vii.  44;  Heb.  viii.  5; 
an  the  two  last  passages,  however,  ti'/toc  is  t;iken  by 
some  in  the  sense  of  copy;  comp.  Bleek  on  Heb. 
viii.  5,  vol.  iii.  p.  439  f.) ;  (5.)  a  moral  model  or 
example  for  imitation  {Vorbild ;  2  Thess.  iii.  9, 
ira  iaiToi%  Tvnov  i)i'uitv  r/iiv  hq  to  /n/atfTf)at 
i,iidq  ;  1  Tim.  iv.  12  ;  Tit.  ii.  7 ;  Phil.  iii.  17  ;  1  Pet. 
V.  3) ;  (6.)  a  historical  prefiguration  (  Vorbild),  or 
type  in  the  usual  theological  seiise — i.  e.,  a  person  or 
tiling  designed  to  foreshadow  or  symbolize  a  future 
person  or  thing  which  is  the  drrirvnoi;  {Urbild)\ 
so  1  Cor.  X.  6,  11,  and  here.  Generally  the  New 
Testament  antitype  is  related  to  the  Old  Testament 
type,  as   the   substance    is  to  the    shadow,    or  the 


and  is  eixuivalcnt  to  6/xoi'(of  ri)  jropa/Bacrci.  It  must  not  be 
connected  with  e/Sao-i'Aeucref  (('hryso.-^tom  and  Bmgel),  but, 
as  is  usually  done,  with  ftij  aixaprfiaavTm. — P.  S.] 


182 


THE   EPISTLE    OF    PAUL    TO    THE    ROMANS. 


original  to  the  cojjy.*  But  Christ  corresjjonda  to 
Adam  iu  tlie  aiitilhL-iical  souse  :  Adahi  being  tiie 
author  of  death  lor  all,  Clirit^t  the  author  of  life  for 
a!L  Tlie  preliguralivu  leature  in  Adam  was  his  een- 
tral  and  uiiivtMvsal  signifieauee  for  tiie  whole  raie, 
which  was  fiillilled  iu  a  much  higher  sense  and  with 
opposite  cHect  in  Christ,  tlie  absolute  and  perfect 
Uiui.  Ill  1  C»)r.  XV.  45,  Paul  likewise  contrasts  o 
ff^Jiros'  '--/r)a.it  and  6  iff/aroi;  '^-Iddfi,  with  refer- 
ence, no  doubt,  to  tiie  Rabbinical  theology,  in  which 
the  Messiah  is  called  l'i"'nNn  CTsn,  Adainus  pos- 
tremus^'m  opposition  to  "llX-Pi  c~xn  .j-  To  this 
pereonal  contrast  corresponds  the  contrast  of  two 
epoclis  and  orders  of  things,  6  aiiov  ocToi,-  and  6  uliitv 
fii).).ii>v.  The  cniniiiit  one  (ror  /i  t /. /. o  i'Toc  )  is 
not  to  be  referred  to  the  second  coming  of  Christ 
(Fritzsche,  De  Wette),  but  to  the  first.  Paul  speaks 
from  the  historical  stiUidpoiut  of  the  first  Adam. — 
P.  S.] 

SECOtir  Paraobaph  (vers.  15-19). 

Tholuck  remarks  on  the  train  of  thouglit  to  ver, 
19 :  In  the  explanations  of  the  elder  expositors 
there  is  no  attemitt  to  trace  the  connection  and  prog- 
ress of  thought  to  ver.  19 ;  many  of  the  later  ones 
doubt  altogetlier  the  possiiiility  of  such  a  proof. 
Morus  says :  "  I)e  hac  dlsiiinilUudine  af/'dur  jam  per 
quinqui:  versus  ila,  ut  gui'iquifn  idem  ilbid  rcpetatur, 
V'triaiis  quldem  lurltis^  at  re  mnnente  xcmper  eadem" 
KiiUner  and  Riickert  similarly  ;  against  whom,  see 
Rothe.  According  to  Tholuck,  the  train  of  thouglit 
is  a.s  follows :  In  ver.  1  .">,  the  (pianHtalive  "  more " 
on  the  side  of  the  operation  proceeding  from  Christ; 
in  vers.  16,  17,  the  f/ua/ltniv  "more;"  in  wrs. 
18,  19,  resumption  of  the  parallel,  including  the  dif- 
ferences pointed  out.  Our  construction  is  given 
above. 

[Vers.  15-17  occupy  an  intermediate  position 
between  ver.  12  and  vers.  18  and  19  ;  and  as  vers. 
i:{  an<l  14  are  explanatory  of  the  reign  of  death  in 
connection  with  sin,  asserted  in  ver.  12,  so  vers. 
15-17  are  f|Malifying,  by  stating  as  briefly  and  teise- 
ly  as  jjossilile  the  disparity  in  the  pai'allel  between 
Adam  and  Christ,  in  favor  of  the  superahonnding 
grace  of  Christ.  Tlie  admirable  symmetrical  adjust- 
ment of  parts  will  apjiear  from  tlie  following  ar- 
rangement of  the  text  in  literal  translation  : 


15. 


SBut  not  ns  the  fall  (wapanruiiia) 
so  also  (i)  the  grarv  (xapia-fia)  : 


'for  if  by  the  fall 

of  the  one  mm  (tou  iv6i) 
tlip  many  died  ; 
much  morn 
did  the  pmcc  of  Ood  nnd  th'-  gift  by  the  grace 
of  tlio  one  m  in  .lesii.s  ClirLjt 
abound  unto  the  many. 


•  I' XvriTvirof,  avrirvnov  (literally,  muntfrhlnw),  is,  how- 
erer,  munetimes  tquivalent  to  riiirot  in  the  RcntMJ  of  c-pij 
iAlhiUI ),  ii.s  Heb.  ix.  24,  avrirvna  tiav  akifOiviav  ;  1  I'et.  lii. 
21;  nnd  Ap'»l.  Const,  iv.  II,  where  the  Haciiim.nt:il  bread 
»i'd  wine  arc  culled  the  un'//;//'"'  of  the  body  :oul  blood  of 
Christ.  Comp.  lllcek  on  the  Hebrews  vol',  iii.  p.  501.— 
P.  8.1 

t  JTholuck.  p.  2iri,  (luoteN  a  rcm^irknblopnssafro  from  the 
book,  A''P<  Sh'flnm  If.  Ahniri'ini  B' n  /x-fir  (illed  LIO"?), 
whic  1  .ihowN  jKirhapH  the  reHcx  inlliienco  of  I'aul  upon  the 
Babtpiiii(  ul  theoIoKy  :  '•  'Hie  lawt  Adam  in  the  Messiiih  ;  lie 
will  bi'  liiRhor  th:in  Mo<e<i,  hli/her  than  the  npfrolx  who 
•erve  Him,  and  the  <dd  sin  bv  whirh  death  h:i«  been  intn)- 
duced  will  !.<•  rtboli^<hed  bj,-  llim,  for  in  His  days  the  dead 
will  li-e.  ThiH  wn«  the  l»ivine  intention  at  the  creation  of 
man,  that  he  nhould  U'  eternal  ;  but  sin  oceaHinned  deiith  : 
nmr  Ih.  Diruir  hi'rni,,,,,  m  /„in'U,l  by  tltf  ttroinl  A'lnm,  wh» 
M  the  iintity/K  of  the  Jir$l."—l\  ».] 


,f,  \  And  not  as  by  one  guilty  trans^cssiou  (anapnoiJiaTot)' 
^o-     (      («.  hIbo  ..)  the  gift  (to  Ltpniia) : 

for  the  judgment  (twufd  in,  ur,  cume) 
from  one  (i"'') 

unto  condemnation  (xaToxpt/ia), 
but  the  grace  ('»""i'i  iu,  cum. ) 
from  mauy  falls 
imto  a  righteous  act  (juccuwfia)  : 

Tor  if  by  the  fall  of  the  one  t 
Lleatli  leiguod 
through  the  one  ; 
much  mor'j 
will  they  who  receive  the  abundance 
of  the  grace  and  the  gift  of  righteousness 
reigu  iu  life 
through  the  one  Jesus  Christ. — P.  S.] 

A.  TJie  contrast  in  the  effects  of  the  principle* 
made  manifest.  1.  The  natural  consequences  in  re- 
lation to  persons  (ver.  15) ;  2.  The  positive  conse- 
quences in  relation  to  the  intensity,  the  essential 
gradation  of  the  effects  (ver.  Itj).  Ver.  15  refei's  to 
the  opposition  of  Christian  salvation  to  the  ruin  in 
the  non-legal  period  and  sphere  ;  ver.  IG,  to  its  op- 
position to  the  ruin  in  the  legal  world. 

Ver.  15.  But  not  as  the  faU  (transgres- 
sion), so  also  is  the  gift  of  grace :{;  [',-//./.' 
0  1'/  (>'*(,•  TO  7C  n  (J  a  m  0)  /I  a  ,  o  ii  t  (»  i;  y.  ai  to 
/dffKTfia].  We  hold  that  the  Apostle,  in  his 
brief  and  pregnant  expressions  in  vers.  15  and  16, 
lays  down  axioms  in  negative  construction.  Meyer 
translates  ver.  15:  "Not  as  the  trespass,  so  also  the 
gift  of  grace;"  and  quite  unintelligibly  ver.  IC  : 
"  And  not  as  by  one  who  sinned  is  the  gift."  The 
niiiiunriitfict  is  eroc,  the  /d(tt(T/(a  fvoi;.  As  prin- 
ciples which  enter  humanity  and  permeate  it,  Adam 
and  Christ  are  alike ;  ■  but  in  the  nature  of  their 
effects  they  constitute  contrasts. — Rosenmiiller,  and 
others,  would  neutralize  the  negation  by  regarding 
orz  as  interrogative  ;  but  this,  as  Meyer  remarks,  is 
forbidden  by  the  contrasting  character  of  the  con- 
tents. We  .see  no  reason  for  taking  the  7Tu(>d7rTii)/ict, 
contrary  to  its  most  natural  signification,  as  "  offence ;" 
it  denotes,  with  sin,  a  fall,  an  ethical  defeat ;  yea,  the 
fall  as  a  medium  of  the  fall,  just  as  the  /d(iKrfia  of 
Christ  is  not  merely  /«('is,  hot  a  meilium  of  the 
•/diii^.  [I iHodnTittna,  from  7raoanirtrt<t,  to  fall, 
is  not  a  sinful  state  or  condition,  but  a  concrete 
actual  sin,  the  transgression  of  the  law  {7Tcn>djhi(n<;\ 
the  act  of  disobedience  (/T«oaxo/;)  by  which  Adam 
fell ;  comp.  vers.  16,  18,  19,  and  Book  of  Wisdom 
X.  1,  where  it  is  likewise  used  of  the  fall,     to  /«• 

SI.  a  II  a.  and  ii  ydfiK;  mean  nearly  the  same  as  ij 
iitotd  in  this  verse,  to  itio(tiiiia,  ver.  lt'>,  (Viza/iiifTn 
Liiitj.;,  ver.  18,  but  they  emphasize  the  idea  that  sal. 
vation  is  of  free  grace.  Forbes  ingeniously  refers 
TO  /rt<H«T/(«,  the  Grace  which  pardons  the  sinner, 
antithetically  to  Death,  the  penalty  of  transgression, 
and  TO  ()(.'»(>/;/i«,  the  Gift  of  righteousness,  anti- 
thetically to  Sin,  which  it  removes  and  supersedes ; 
the  one  is  mainly  the  grace  that  justifies,  the  other 
the  grace  that  smirlifie.i.  See  his  noi(>,  p.  248  f. — 
P.  S.]  Tholuek  thiliks  that  we  shouhi  exjieet  Ai- 
xaioi/ia  [i  rrnxotj  would  correspond  better. — P.  S.] 

•  (Or,  "  bv  the  one  that  sinni-d,"  if  we  road  inapn^aav- 
TO*.     See  T'Tu.il  y„l,-  *,  and  Erg.  A'-l<  Ix-low.— 1'.  S.) 

t  (Tui  row  it^i  napavTuifiaTi,  the  reading  of  Cod.  Sin., 
I^uchmann,  Alford,  ami  tlie  lix'.  irr.  Lange  prefers,  with 
Meyer,  the  reading:  iv  iv'i  napawTutnari.,  "  liv  one  fall." 
•See  Tixwi!  Xmr  ',  and  Ernj.  .\o, .«  Iielow.— P.  S.] 

J  [According  t<i  Lange's  translation  :  Aher  ii.cht  I'rliPt 

(in   .S'."»   Jfr  (./.irA...u<'«tiyl.i/  .-l.'aixi   icii   (  iri'<(i)    |ri>  ml'/  O  JWI    S6n- 

tlrnfiill  iil.«i  mit  ilnii  Giinilrnfjiil  (v,r^..r»...»iV*.n  (.■».,;..„,-/.- 
iJl' .(".■).  Alfonl  Irnnslaten  :  Iliil  ntti  (in  uU  joint-^)  "*  tbt 
act  qf  Irantffittiioii,  ut  also  it  Uie  gifl  <j/"  gracf. — P.  S.J 


CHAPTER  V.    12-21. 


183 


instead  of  /a^^o-./ia.  But  the  question  here  is  con- 
cerning the  natural  or  historical  eft'ects  of  botli  prin- 
ciples, while  in  ver.  16  they  are  presented  in  their 
relation  to  law  and  right. 

For  if  thiough  the  fall  of  the  one  the 
many  died  ['ir-i.  yuQ  tiJi  tot  (mark  the  definite 
article,  which  is  overlooked  in  the  E.  V.)  k  v  6  s' 
Tt  a  (J  a  n  T  0)  fc  ar  !■  ol  no).'/.oi  {the  many,  i.  c, 
the  immense  multitude  of  all  the  descendants  of 
the  one  Adam)  ani&avov. — P.  S.].  The  ti  is 
not  hypothetical.  There  is  an  oxymoron  in  the  ex- 
pression :  one  fell,  many  died  (not  only  the  one). 
Why  oi  noU.oi,  and  not  ndvifq,  as  in  vers.  12  and 
18  ?  Meyer :  "  The  antithesis  to  the  tli;  is  made 
more  sensible  and  stronger  by  marking  the  totality 
as  multitude  \  for  '■possunt  aliqna  esae  omnia,  qnce 
noil  guilt  niulta^  Axigmime.  Grotius  wrongly  :  '/ere 
omnes,  excepto  £noclio,^  wiiich  is  contradicted  by 
Ters.  12  and  18."  \^ani&avov  must  be  taken  in 
the  same  coniprehenaive  sense  as  Odvaroi;  in  ver. 
12;  see  p.  17(3.  It  is  parallel  to  ////a^roi',  ver,  12, 
and  must  be  explained  accordingly ;  see  p.  177. — 
P.  S.] 

Much  more.  Is  no ).).('>  nak'/.ov  the  ex- 
pression of  a  logical  plus,  that  is,  of  an  inference 
(  [Chrysostoro,  no).).m  ya^  roTro  fi/.oyn'iTfiJini^ 
Theodoret,  Philippi  [Fritzsche,  Hodge,  Stuart],  and 
others),  or  of  a  real  plus,  a  comparison  (Calvin 
[Bengel*],  Rothe  [Alford  :  much  more  abundant], 
&c.).  [In^other  words,  does  no'u.iii  nuu.ov  express 
a  stronger  degree  of  evidence,  as  an  arffumeuium  a 
minorc  ad  inajns  (here  a  pejori  ad  melius),  as  it  cer- 
tainly does  vers.  9  and  10,  or  a  higher  degree  of 
efficacy? — P.  S.]  Meyer:  TJtiis  latter  is  contrary  to 
ver.  17.  This  is  so  far  right  as  death,  viewed  abso- 
lutely, is  an  absolute  negation,  and  a  real  plus  [a 
higher  degree  of  abundance]  is  comprised  already 
in  nf^i(j(Tfrii,v.  But  the  logical  pliis  involves  also 
a  real  pAus.  [So  also  Tholuck.]  It  rests  on  the 
following  antitheses:  1.  The  fit;  introduced  here 
without  name,  and  opposite  to  him,  6  5  tot;  and  6 
fl^  avd^ioTTOc  J ijaoi'i;  X^iaroq;  2.  na(jd7Trii)/ta, 
and  the  opposite  fj  y,cnii,c  y.ai  rj  dt»(ifci  iv  /a^^T^ ; 
3.  i7Tf(ii(Tan(Tfv,  in  opposition  to  the  simple  fact, 
ani&avov.  The  /a ()(.(;  Tor  Ofor  is  the  source  and 
spirit  of  the  universal  and  personal  charisma,  which 
is  Christ  himself ;  the  ()(i)^fa  iv  /ct^tTt,  &c.,  is 
its  form  and  appearance,  tlie  positive  gilt  of  Divine 
adoption,  with  the  Divine  inheritance,  in  the  pardon 
of  sin.  Both  must  not  be  resolved  into  an  'iv  did 
dVoti'  (Rosenmiiller,  and  others).  According  to 
Rothe,  Tholuck,  and  others,  iv  •/d()i.ri,  must  be 
connected  with  d<i)Q(d;  according  to  De  Wette 
and  Meyer,  ()i<)Qfd  stands  absolutely,  and  iv  yd- 
Qi'Tu,  &e.,  belongs  to  infQiaan'atv,  on  account 
of  the  antithesis  to  na^aTTTinjuaTt,.  But  in  that  case 
the  article  should  be  expected  before  yd^ni,. 
Besides,  rfw(<fa  iv  /a^trt  forms  the  idea  of  ()(«')(> //,« a. 
The  aorist  indicates  an  event  which  had  already 
taken  place. 

Ver.  16.  And  not  as  by  one  transgression 
I  Kal  01'/  (')(;  fVt  eroi;  «,«  a(*T;//(  arot;,  which 
Lange  renders  Verschuldung,  transgression  accom- 
panied fvith  guilt. — P.  S.].  We  must  first  of  all 
eubstltu '.e  the  reading  duaQx  tiu  aroi;  oftheCodd. 
D.  E.  F.  G.,  and  of  the  Itala  [Vulg. :  Et  non  sicut 
per  unu/n  peccatum']  for  dina()Tt';(TavT0^  [by  one 
that  transffressed],  although  the   latter  has   better 

*  ["  Adamus  et  Chn'sliis,  secundum  rationes  cuntrarias, 
tonveniunt,  in  posiUvo  ;  differunt,  in  comparalivo." — P.  S.] 


authority.*  The  reason  lies  in  the  text ;  ver.  If 
contains  only  definitions  of  things,  not  persons. 
The  opposite  of  diid(jTtjfia  is  nafjaTtro'ifiara  ;  be- 
sides, we  have  do'i(jijfia,  x^lfia,  xcitdy.()i,i.<a,  ydpiir- 
na,  and  dr/.aioi/ia.  Tholuck  observes:  "Those 
Ct)dd.  present  i'requently  a  corrupted  text,  one  con- 
ibrmed  to  the  Latin  translation  ;  and  as  «/(c<jjt/;,h«- 
Toc  is  not  even  sufliciently  attested  by  external 
authorities,  it  must  give  way  to  the  more  difficult 
reading."  But,  at  first  appearance,  d^  troi;  «/(a(JT//- 
aavro(;  was  the  easier  reading,  for  it  was  supposed 
that  in  every  antithesis  Adam  himself  must  have 
been  mentioned  again.  Meyer  explains  :  "  And  not 
by  one  that  sinned  {d/ia(irt](Tavroi;)  so  is  the  f,ift ; 
that  is,  it  is  not  so  as  if  it  would  be  caused  di!  ivo^ 
dfiafJTi'jaavToq."  f  Tholuck  :  "  The  gift  has  an- 
other  character  than  that  which  came  by  the  one 
who  sinned."  These  explanations  are  no  recom- 
mendation to  the  reading  a,((a^TAy(7«rT0<,-.  For,  first, 
the  thought  that  the  dioiJtj/ia  may  have  come  by  one 
that  sinned  liimself,  is  far-fetched  and  unnatural. 
Second,  the  antithesis  between  the  effects  of  the  two 
principles  is  obliterated.  Those  who  adopt  the  read- 
ing diiaiiT>](javtoc.,  propose  diflferent  supplements  : 
Grotius,  and  others,  Odvaroq  ftcT:).f>fv  [after  d/ia^' 
Ti'jfj  ]  ;  Bengel  [Webster  and  Wilkinson,  Stuart, 
Hodge],  and  others,  to  y.^l/iu  ;  Reiche,  after  Theo- 
pliylact,  TO  y.ardy.^i,/ia  ;  Fritzsche,  and  others,  na- 
(idnroifia ;  Beza,  and  others  [after  wo],  to  (De 
Vv'ette  :  and  not  like  that  uhich  resulted  from  one 
who  sinned,  is  the  gilt).;}:  Rothe,  Tholuck,  and 
Meyer,  supply  merely  igtI  [after  ?)(.)(/;;/(«]  ;  Phi- 
lippi, iyivtro  [after  d/ia^Ti'ia.,  and  iarl  after  rJoi- 
()ijfic<. — P.  S.].  This  [which?  iari,  or  iyiv^ro'i — 
P.  S.]  is  sufficient  with  ufidfjrrj/ia,  which  means 
more  than  duaftrla,  and  expresses  the  idea  of  guilt 
(  Verschulduiiq)  in  connection  with  sin  (see  Maik  iii. 
28;  Luke  iv.'lS,  &c.). 

For  the  judgment  (passes)  from  one  (trans- 
gression) to  condemnation  [to  /(ir  }'«(;  y.i>l- 
f<  a  ii  iv 6g  ttq  xardy-^L/ia.  Lange  supplies, 
from  the  preceding  clause,  d /t  « ^ t vJ  /i  aro y  aftet 
ti  n'Oi,-,  and  translates  it,  in  both  cases,  Verschid- 
dunft. — P.  S.]  Here,  too,  the  verb  is  wanting. 
Meyer  supplies  iyivtro,  or  resulted;  De  Wette, 
turned  out.  But  the  verb  is  indicated  by  the  ti<; ; 
Hi;  requires  the  idea  of  progress,  development.  (For 
the  antithesis,  Rothe  has  attempted  to  substitute  an 
untenable  division,  to  fiev,  rb  (ii).  The  y.fitfta 
might  mean  judgment  in  general  (Meyer),§  if  it  did 
not  refer  to  diid(irrj/ia,  by  which  it  becomes  judg- 
ment to  punishment.     Explanations  :  reatus  (Beza, 


♦  [The  Codex  Sinaiticus,  in  the  octavo  edition  of  Tisch- 
endoif  (186;),  reads  aij.apTriua.vroi,  but  this  is  a  cuiTCftion 
by  a  socoh'I  or  third  h:ind.  In  the  original  MS.  and  the 
hirpre  uncial  cditio;i  V.  e  word  is  broken  by  the  line,  and 
readf,  AMAPTH-T02,  which  may  be  a  mistake  for  anapT^- 
/uaTos,  as  well  as  for  i/u-apT^o-ai/Tos.  The  absence  f  the 
article  before  evd?  is  in  favor  of  Ijance's  preference  for 
a/uopT7)fiaTos,  for  Paul  always  uses  the  article  when  evds 
refers  to  a  person,  except  in  ver.  12,  where  it  is  first  intro- 
duced :ind  connected  with  avOpujTrov. — P.  S.] 

t  [ileyer  :  "£.-■  i^t  damU  nvht  so,  al.i  wtnn  ex  Si.'  ivhs 
ajx.apTri<T.  (wie  der  Tml  'lurch  Adam)  veiinsacht  ware  (isiil 
X-  eliiiehr  ix  iroWiov  irapairTiafiaTiov  ziim  SiKaiui/xa  grwor- 
d<'»)."  ^^eyer  emphasizes  the  om:  and  many,  and  supplies 
simply  iari  after  SuipTqua.  Similar  is  the  explanalion  oi 
Pothe,  Ewald,  Van  Hcnael.— P.  S.]  _ 

J  [.So  also  AlJord,  who  supplits  to  yevoiievov  :  "And  iirri 
ax  (that  which  took  place)  by  one  that  sinned,  so  is  iki  gift." 
-P.  y.l 

§  [Meyer:  "to  xpt/oia  gnm  aUgemein:  das  Urlk'il, 
welches  GfiV  aJs  RicliVr  f dill.  Venn  zu  was  fur  eivem  Ur- 
Iheil  diise.<  in  emirr'-'n  t)!  g  schh<gin  ist,  sagl  crsl  das /ol' 
gcnde  eis  Karaxptfia." — P.  S.] 


181 


THE   EPISTLE    OF    PAUL   TO    THE   ROMANS. 


Cocceius);  the  tlireati'ued  punishment,  Gen.  ii.  17 
(Kritzsclif,  Tholuck);  the  sentence  of  punishment 
pronounceil  on  Adam  and  liis  posterity,  (Jen.  iii.  19 
(Keiche,  liaunif,'aiten-Crusius  [Kiickeit,  De  Wette], 
and  others). — From  one  (tran.sgression).  We 
simply  supply  the  foregoing  u/((<(/r/,(Kt,  and  trans- 
hue  the  incun-iiig  of  yui/t,  because  the  deed  is  con- 
nected with  its  couseiiueuce,  and  tiie  word  is  con- 
nected with  the  idea  of  guilt,  ti  /rd,-  is  taken  by 
Meyer  ius  masculine. — To  condemnation  [ft*; 
Kft  T«x  <'(./(  a].  Explanations  of  the  antithesis  to 
xjjiiia,  ri>  /.nTct/.ouia :  1.  Frilzsche :  The  threat 
of  punishment,  (ien.  ii.,  and  the  sentence  of  punish- 
ment, Cien.  iii.  ;  similarly  Tholuck.  Reiche :  the 
senteuee  of  [)unishmeut  pronounced  on  Adam,  and 
that  on  ills  posterity.  2.  Riickert :  the  Divine  sen- 
tence and  its  result,  death,  was  declared  against  the 
one  who  had  sinned  ;  but  from  him  the  sentence  has 
extended  to  all.  Plainly,  tlie  y.ijtiia,  as  the  princi- 
ple of  judgment,  proceeds  from  the  one  «/(«oT;y/(« 
of  Adam,  and  pa.-jses  through  gratlations  of  judg- 
ment to  the  •AUTa.t'.i^ii-Kct,  which  is  conii)loted  ideally 
as  the  sentence  of  fitness  for  condemnation  by  tlie 
appearance  of  the  gosi)el,  and  will  be  actually  com- 
pleted as  real  judgment  to  condemnation  at  the  end 
of  the  worhl.  Yet  the  antithesis  here  does  not  pa.ss 
beyond  the  ideal  judgment  to  condenmation.  The 
antithe.-is  of  tlie  one  Adam  and  of  the  whole  race, 
whieli  IJaumgarten-Criisius  finds  here,  is  only  pre- 
sumed ;  the  numerical  antitht'sis,  rather,  in  this  pas- 
sage is  e'l'  ctticiitTt^tia,  7io)J.a  natiamoiiiaTa.  It 
must  be  borne  in  minil  that  the  expression  nai>a- 
TTTif'iiiaTa  is  mucii  stronger  than  aiiaiiTtjiia.Ta,  and 
denotes  the  gradations  of  the  one  fall  by  numy  new 
apostasies  (see  the  Second  Connuandment). 

But  the  gift  of  grace  (passes)  from  many 
falls  (lapses)  unto  the  good  of  justification 
[  r  o  i)  i  y  a  i>  i(T  II  a  i /.  no  /.  >.  '»  v  n h  o  «.  m  in  n  d - 
Tiiiv  (t,-  dixaiiiifta,  which  Lange  translates :  lUui 
Onadeuijut  aber  gekf  von  vielen  Sundcn/dl/en  aus 
fort  bin  zuin  Rcchff'ertii/unffsi/iit ;  or,  in  the  Exeg. 
Notc'iy  'Rechtfertitiniifixiiiittid. — P.  S.].  The  personal 
charisma  is  Christ  himself  (see  ver.  15),  the  source 
of  all  s|)i'cial  gd'ts  of  grace  (see  Titus  ii.  11). — From 
many  falls,  or  lapses  {Siiudeii/dllni).  Caused  by 
ihem.  As  the  -/.(Ji/ia  of  Adam  has  become  the  uni- 
versiil  xrirdx^niia  of  humanity^so  has  the  •/({(ti.rriiu 
of  Christ  grown  to  be  the  univer.sal  and  ab.solute 
i)i,xniMiia.  As  Christ,  as  the  Jiisen  One,  has  come 
forth  I/.  vfA^imv,  80  has  He,  as  the  Just  One,  the 
])er.sonal  ()ix«((')i<«,  come  forth  from  the  place  of 
the  nunanrmfiara.  It  was  thus  with  the  advent 
of  Christ  on  CJirth  ;  btit  the  finished  nciiinTTTiDiin 
was  the  same  crucifixion  by  which  He  was  perfected 
as  (hxaiiDiia.  The  usual  ex[)lanations  rest  mostly  on 
u  misconception.  Meyer :  Since  God  declared  .sin- 
ners righteous.  Augustine:  Quia  non  xoluin  illnd 
tiiitim  Hiilvit,  ijuod  nriginaliter  trah  (ur,  sed  iliam 
i^iice  ill  lino  qunqne.  /lominr.  molu  propriir  voluntntiii 
addnnlur.  Better  He  Wette  [and  Alford]  :  "  The 
gift  of  grace  became,  by  occasi(m  of  many  trans- 
gression-, justiticaiion."  Philipiii :  "  From  out  of 
many  lapses."  The  (hxaim/ia  is  neither  the  con- 
dition of  righteousne.ss  (that  would  be  i)txai.ufTri'ij  ; 
Luther,  Tholuck,  anil  others),  nor  the  dechinition  of 
(ii)d  by  which  He  executes  the  i)ixali>i(n<;  (.Meyer), 
but,  according  to  Riickert  and  |  .Vdeliiert]  Maier, 
the  ineuns  or  medium  of  justification  [h'ri:/d/irtig- 
uugxinitt'l),  which  is  in  harmony  with  the  form  of 
the  word.  Meyer  iisks  for  the  empirical  proof;  it 
Ilea  riglit  before  us:  Were  Jixtttoi/ia  the  real  justi- 


fication of  mankind,  xardx()iu(i  would  be  its  rea. 
condemnation,  and  that  would  be  a  contradiction. 
Comp.  also  ver.  18,  where  the  dixuiM/ia  is  the  pre* 
supjjosition  of  the,  liixaiioai^.  (The  explanation  of 
Rothe,  after  Calvin  :  legal  compensation  in  the  sense 
of  satinfactio  is  partly  too  general,  and  jiartly  im- 
pinges very  much  on  dtxaiuxrit;).  An  elaborate  dis- 
cussion see  in  Tholuck,  p.  258. 

[.-/tz«((.)/(«,  in  Hellenistic  usage,  means  usually 
xiatutuin,  ordinance,  a  righteous  decree,  or  rigfUtoua 
jiidifincnt  {J\ec/i/s<jtrucfi,  liechtxbestiininung);  comp. 
i.  a2;  ii.  2()  ;  viii.  4;  Luke  i.  G;  Ileb.  ix.  1,  10; 
-\poc.  XV.  4  ;  or  also  (as  in  classical  usage)  a  right- 
eous  act,  a  just  deed,  as  Rev.  xix.  8  (ret  dtxain'tfiaTa 
T(7jc  dyioiv);  Baruch  ii.  19  (Joiaocfri.  f)6ictv  xui 
ihxai(it/ia  n't  xvqIi;))  ;  comp.  the  Hebrew  3i3;?^ 
as  distinct  from  nj^T:!  in  Pro  v.  viii.  20,  where  both 
are  translated  fikxcaoirivt]  in  the  Septuagint,  while 
the  Vulgate  distinguishes  them  as  judicium  and 
justitia.  I  see  no  good  reason  for  departing  from 
this  meaning.  It  is  either,  in  opposition  to  xard- 
xoiiia,  the  righteous  decree  which  God  declared  on 
account  of  the  perfect  obedience  of  Christ ;  or  it 
is,  as  ver.  18,  in  0[)position  to  nafidnrmiia,  the 
righteous  act  of  CInist  as  the  olyective  basis  (or, 
as  Lange  has  it,  the  means)  of  our  dixctiuxTn;.  Tho- 
luck, after  a  full  discussion  of  the  various  inter- 
pretations, favors  (p.  2(51)  the  translation,  Jiecht- 
fertigungnthat,  actio  justijicatica,  which  would  dif- 
er  from  dixaintnn;,  justificatio,  as  the  accomplished 
fact  differs  from  the  process.  Wordsworth  explains 
it  here,  and  in  ver.  18,  to  mean  a  state  of  accept- 
ance as  righteous  by  God,  a  recognized  conAtion  of 
approval ;  but  this  is  without  any  authority.  The 
Latin  Vulgate  {justificatio,  ver.  16,  but  justitia,  ver. 
18),  the  E.  v.,  and  even  Dc  Wette,  Olsliau.scn,  Robin- 
son (sub  (\i.xnliitiia,  No.  K),  Stuart,  Alford,  and  Hodge, 
take  (Hixaiifiiia  in  ver.  16  as  ecjuivalent  to  (Vi-xa/offK,-. 
(Alford  :  "  As  xctrdxiiuia  is  a  sentence  of  condem- 
nation, so  di.xcii«>/ici  will  be  a  sentence  of  acquittal. 
This,  in  fact,  amounts  tojuslijication."  Hodge  :  "  It 
means  justification,  which  is  a  righteous  judgment, 
or  decision  of  a  judge,  pronomicing  one  to  l>e  just.") 
Rothe  (p.  103)  calls  this  interpretation  a  piece  of 
"  exegetical  levity;"  and  it  is  evident  that,  in  ver. 
18,  (>(Xrt((.)//a  is  distinguished  from  dr/.ttlftiru.  He 
goes  back  (with  Parens,  J.  Gerhard,  Calov,  Wolf,  B. 
Carpzov)  to  classical  usage,  quoting  a  passage  from 
.\ristotle  {Eth.  Xi.com.  v.  1(>),  who  defines  dtxaici/ia 
to  be  TO  t7Tcir6(jO Ill/in  tot  difixtjiiftro^,  the  amend- 
ment of  att  evil  deed*  Rothe  consecpiently  trans- 
lates it,  fu//  sittiiifaclion  of  justice,  legal  adjustment 
{Reclitxerfii/lfing,  Rechtsgutmachimg,  Rechtsuuxgleich- 
ung).     This   meaning  suits  admirably   here,  and  in 


•  (Tliin  passnpo  iiirords  a  sfriUin(»  parallel,  anil  hn»  some 
licai-inc  on  tlio  (lucstlon  whetlior  Paul  wan  aojiuuintcd  with 
the  works  of  the  pi-e;it  Stii'jirito  (which,  from  a  ninofe  rc- 
Fcmlilimce  of  style,  the  raoile  of  close,  diiilectic  reasoninfr, 
from  Paul's  eihicationil  advantages  in  TnrsUH,  from  his 
ii<;<iualntance  witli  the  spirit  anil  working  of  the  Hellenio 
philosiiphy,  and  even  with  inferioi-  Oreek  autlioi-s,  as  Ai-i- 
tiis  and  Cieantlies,  Acts  xvii.  28,  Men:inder,  1  Cor.  xv.  3:i, 
and  Kpiiuenides,  Tit.  i.  2.  socms  to  nie  hitflily  prolmhlc). 
I  irivo  it,  therefore,  in  full.  In  his  Air'iiiiiiri,.iiii  Ehir.i, 
Hook  v.  chap,  in  (areoiiliiip  to  Uekker's  ed.,  ii.  1135;  or 
chap.  7,  in  Didnt's  iind  other  t^litioiisl,  Aiislot  e  says* 
**  ^laiftipd  6i  TJ>  aSiKTjfxa  xai  rb  aiiKOv  fcat  rb  StKaiutfxa  koX 
t6  6i«aio»' •  aiiKOf  flit'  yap  i<TTi  Tn  tj)V<Tti  rf  Td(ti  '  to  aifrb 
ii  toOto,  oTai"  irpttvft/),  aSiitrind  »<rTi,  Trpii'  6i  Trpa;^S^rai, 
outrw,  aAA'  aiiKOV.  Onoiutf  Si  Koi  SiKaiaifia.  KoAciTai  Si 
fxaWov  SiKaionaayrjua  to  KOtvov,  SiKaiio^JLO.  Si  to  cn'a- 
v6p0<iina  Tov  (i  A  i(f  t/fioTot .  "All  uiijusl  :irt  ditTora 
from  the  unjust  (Injustice  in  the  nhh-fnut).  iiiiil  so  does  n 
jasl  act  from  tho  (ulwtraot)  just ;  for  a  thing  is  unjust  eithei 


CHAPTER   V,    12-21. 


185 


ver.  IS  (where,  however,  the  word  is  opposed  to  na- 
()a.7ixi<>iia,  not,  as  ill  ver.  16,  to  x.ard/.iJt,fia),  and  does 
not  mateiiallj  differ  from  the  explanation  of  Lauge. 
In  ver.  18,  (St,/.aiMna,  being  the  opposite  of  na(id- 
nTO)fia,  and  essentially  equivalent  to  tiTtuxot},  in  ver. 
19,  must  denote  tlie  ri  hteous  deed.,  i.  e.,  the  perfect 
obedien.e  of  Christ,  and  is  so  understood  by  Calvin, 
Este,  Grotius,  and  Bengel.  As  it  is  not  likely  that 
the  same  word  should  be  used  in  one  brcatli  in  two 
diSereut  senses,  it  is  safe  to  explain  diy.alaifia  in 
ver.  IG  from  its  more  obvious  meaning  in  ver.  IS. 
I  prefer  this  (with  Lange)  to  the  other  alternative 
chosen  by  Meyer  {liechtferticfwu/ssprudi),  Ewald 
{Gerech/sspruch),  Van  Hengel,  Umbreit,  who  give 
it  in  both  verses  the  meaning,  righteous  decree.  I 
quote,  in  addition,  the  excellent  note  of  Bengel  on 


di-y.aliofia  in  ver.  18,  which  throws  light  on  its  mean 
ing  in  ver.  16:  "  z/ty.  a((»;/<  a  est  quasi  materia 
dixai,(!)(jit,  {jusliJiratio7ii)  aiibstrtita,  obcdientla^ 
justitia  prcestita.  Justikicamkjjtum  liceat  ajipellare, 
ut  id(i  alot n  a  denoted Jirmamenfum,  evdv/iia  ves^ 
t/menium,  i  tz  1(1  krj /i  cc  addiiaitieiitum,  fiiaa/ia 
hiquinanientum.,  6 / 1' (>  w  /<  a  munimentum,  tt  f  ^  «. - 
y.dO  a  (J  /t  a  purgamentum.,  nffJiri'rj  jn  a  rainerdum, 
ay.inaa/ia  tcgicmttdum,  cr  r  t  ^  i  o) /i  a  Jirmamen- 
tiiin,  vTToi^tj/ia  calceamcrdum,  qfjovij/ta  ScntU 
ijiciduiJi,  Gall,  sentij/ient.  Aridot.  I.  v.  J£th.  c.  10 
opposita  utatnit  ci(ll/.ijfia  et  di^xauo/ia,  atgue 
hoc  describit  to  inavd^  0-o)fi  a  tov  ddi.y.7'i  f<  a- 
Toi;,  id  quod  tantundem  est  atque  satisfactio,  vo- 
cabidum  tSocinianis  immerito  invi.suyn.  Exquisitam 
verborum  proprietatem  schematistnus  exhibei : 


A. 

B. 

C. 

D. 

Ver.  16, 

y.^Tfta, 

xaTd/.Qi,f(a' 

/a(H(T/(a, 

6i-xal(i)iiia. 

A. 

B. 

C. 

D. 

Ver.  18. 

na^dm 

oi/ta, 

xardy.^i,fia' 

Sixaiittfta, 

6i,y.aio)ai,i;  tw^? 

In  utroque  versu  A  et  B  avaTot/fi,  itemque  C 
et  D,  sed  A  et  0,  dvTiaroi,yi:l,  itemque  B  et  D. 
Versu  16  dexcribitur  uegotinm  ex  parte  Dei :  ver. 
18  describitur  ex  parte  Adami  et  Chrinti :  idqiie  in 
ceconomia  peccati  minore  verborum,  varietate,  quam 
in  oeeonomi  I.  gratke.  d  i,y.aio>(n,q  toiTjq  est  clecla- 
ratio  divina  ilia.,  qua  peccator,  mortis  reus.,  vitce  ad- 
Judicaiur,  idque  jure." — P.  S.] 

B.      The  contrast  of  potential,  prospective  effects. 

1.  The  contrast  between  the  enslavement  and 
negation  of  all  personal  life  by  personified  death, 
and  of  the  future  glory  of  pardoned  j:)ersons  in  the 
new  life  (ver.  17). 

2.  The  contrast  in  all  its  ideal  magnitude:  owing 
to  the  power  of  the  fall  of  one,  judgment  and  con- 
demnation came  upon  all  men ;  all  men  can  attain 
to  justification  of  life  (that  is,  not  merely  of  faith) 
by  the  Justifying  righteousness  of  one  (ver.  18). 

Ver.  17.  For  if  by  one  man's  fall,  &c.  ['£(• 
ydq  Tw  rov  iroq  na()  a  n  no /i  ar  i-,  x.t./.]. 
This  verse  (which  Rotlie  has  improperly  treated  as  a 
parenthesis,*  and  which  Er.  Sclimid  has  even  con- 
ceived to  be  the  contradiction  of  an  opponent)  is,  in 
form,  first  of  all  a  proof  of  the  <)y/.cii(i)/ia  and  /.ard- 
x(jt,/ia  in  ver.  16  ;  but  it  develops  the  consequence 
of  the  (hy.auofia,  as  of  the  zardx'n/fa,  to  a  new 
and  glorious  contrast.  Here,  now,  the  personal  ele- 
ment in  ver.  15  is  united  with  the  material  one  in 
ver.  16  ;  yet  the  personal  predominates.     From  one 

by  nature  or  by  order  (ordinance).  But  -the  very  same 
thmg  wliich,  when  done,  is  an  unjust  act,  is  not  t-o  befure 
it  is  done,  but  it  is  unjust.  The  same  may  be  said  of  a  jii.'it 
ad.  Kut  the  common  term  is  ratbcr  o  ilcml  justly  done 
(S<.KaiOTrpa.yriiJ.a)  ;  but  the  correction  of  an  unjust  act  is  a 
jus(  <i<l  (Si.Kaiiofia)." — P.  S] 

*  [Tliis  is  a  sliiibt  mietiike,  occasioned  by  a  stMtement  of 
Tholuck  (p.  261  f.).  Dr.  Rotbn  regards  not  ver.  17,  but  ver. 
16.  as  a  parentbesis  (1.  c.  p.  132),  and  ver.  17  as  a  corrobo- 
rative and  explan:itory  reassumption  of  ver.  15,  to  which 
it  corresponds  in  ah  its  parts  as  follows  : 

Ver.  15. 
<i  Tip  ToO  evb?  TrapajTTul/naTi  ol  ttoWoC  airiOavov, 

TToAAcp  }xaKKov 
7)  \a.pi<:  ToO  ©eofl  /cal  r)  Sutpea  ev  xapiTl 
rjj  ToO  evo?  ai'9p<t)iT0v  'Iijcr.  Xp.  «is  t.  tt.  €7repiVo  evcrev. 

Ver.  17. 
et  T<f>  rov  ivo^  TrapaTTTui^iaTt  6  flavaros  e/3a(T., 

TToAAoJ  iJiaWoy 
oi  rriv  n-cpurcreiav  Tr)5  x.dpLTO';  K.  Tij?  £u)pea9  Trjs  5iKaiO(7uVr)« 
5(d  TOU    ivOi   'hjU.    XpMTToO,   /C.T.A.  — P.  S  J 


proceeded,  through  one  offence,  the  tendency  toward 
destruction  ;  death  tyrannized  over  and  defaced  the 
personal  life,  and  threatened  to  extinguish  it ;  but 
much  more  shall  believers  become  by  the  one  Christ, 
on  the  ground  of  the  di/.ai-oavri],  the  [Saavhiovrn;, 
the  ruling,  royal  personalities  in  eternal  life.  The 
point  of  the  antithesis  is  therefore  i[Iaai).fva(v 
and  paai,Xf  vaovcrw.  The  no). km  /laAAov 
is  also  here  a  logical  conclusion,  which  involves  the 
higlier  degree  of  real  powder,  as  brought  out  in  the 
antitheses :  iv  na^dnroi/ia,  and  the  opposite  vy 
7it(}L(j(jna  r~,c  ya(ji,7oq,  y.al  rTjc  <)owfdc  tT^i;  i^kxai- 
oai'Vfji; ;  to  which  is  yet  added  the  /.a/i/JdvorTtt;  in 
contrast  with  the  bondage  of  the  former  slaves  of 
death  (Heb.  ii.  14) ;  then  again,  the  nameless  ft? 
and  the  one  Jesus  Christ ;  and  finally,  to  a  certain 
extent,  6  Odraroc,  and  //  uu?/.  Meyer  well  remarks: 
"  Bear  in  mind  tliat  Paul  does  not  say  in  the  parado- 
sis,  in  conformity  with  the  protasis :  ?/  uoij  [JuaUfv- 
(Tfv  tnl  Tore  .  .  .  /.a/ifidrovTaq,  but,  in  harmony  with 
the  matter  in  question,  and  corresponding  to  the 
active  nature  of  the  relation,  he  places  the  subjects 
in  the  active  first."  This  is  the  chief  point  just 
here.  (Menochius  :  "  SKOvius  et  glorio.sus  sovat.") 
Tholuck  :  "  To  be  ruled,  is  a  bound  and  passive  con- 
dition, while,  on  the  other  hand,  the  quality  of  free 
movement  lies  in  life.  The  escliatological  idea  of  a 
ruling  in  the  finished  kingdom  of  God,  was  brought 
over  by  Christ  in  a  more  profound  sense  from  Juda- 
ism (Matt.  xix.  28  ;  Luke  xxii.  29).  Paul  has  espe- 
cially appropriated  it  (1  Cor.  iv.  8  ;  vi.  2  ;  2  Tim. 
ii.  12)."  Tholuck  questions  the  right  to  make  promi- 
nent, according  to  Thomas  Aquinas,  Grotius,  Stier, 
and  others,  the  element  of  subjective  spontaneous- 
ness,  here,  "  where  the  whole  weight  falls  on  the 
Divine  work  of  grace."  But  the  Apostle  speaks  of 
the  self-active  appropriation  of  the  work  of  grace  in 
the  life  of  believers. 

Ver.  18.  Therefore,  as  through  the  fall  of  one, 
&c.  [Better :  through  one  fall  {trot;  in  the  neu- 
ter),"u4(ja  ovv  oii;  ()t>  tvbi;  nafjanTo')// aroi 
fii;  ndvraQ  dv  S(jiii  ttoik;  fli;  xarciy.(}i/u  a, 
oi'Tw  xal  (Vi.'  trot;  (ii,xai,(>')/n  aroc;  ni;  ndv- 
raq   dvd(>ii)nov(;    ti<;   Sixctioiaw    t,w^i,].* 

*  [The  Greek  is  here,  like  an  exclamation,  as  brief  and 
concise  as  possible,  and  cannot  be  ii.telligibly  rendered 
without  supplying  some  words.     The  E.  V.  supplies,  be* 


180 


THE   EPISTLE   OF   PAUL   TO    THE   ROMANS. 


Tliis  verse  is,  as  Meyer  and  others  remark,  a  re- 
Bumptiou  of  the  prccuding  contrasts  compressed  in 
one  senti-nce  ((rr/./.oj'<'l'*ra<.  tvTuTOa  to  Tiav,  Theo- 
dore of  Mupsvcstiii).  lint  we  must  not  overlook  the 
new  contrast  brought  out  here.  (On  the  use  of  a^a 
oin;  see  Meyer.)*  As  far  as  the  verb  that  is  want- 
ing is  concerned,  De  Wette  remarks :  It  is  usuid  to 
supply  here  (likewise  llUekert  and  Fritzsche),  in  the 
first  niember,  to  x(tiiia  iytimu,  and  in  the  second, 
TO  ■/c't(i'.ait(x  iytvtro  ;  but  bettor,  something  indeli- 
uite,  as  iyiitro  (thus  Meyer  and  Tholuck) ;  Winer, 
oL/iifjf;  We  Vail  up  the  pregnant  expressions  in 
chap.  ii.  28,  29,  and  repeat  accordingly  natid- 
nxt'iiia  after  7icn>anru>iiaTo<;,  and  di/.uio)/(a  after 
dixato'ifiaroi;.  ani[hj  is  sufficiently  contained  in  *«<;. 
The  contrast  in  that  ease  is  simply  this  :  The  fall 
of  one  mail  came  ideally  and  dynamically  as  a  fall 
upo7i  all  )/un  unto  comkmnation  ;  that  is,  by  the 
common  fall,  all  men  would,  withoui  redemption,  be 
subject  to  condemnation  ;  on  the  other  hand,  the 
dt/.aimna  of  one  came  ideally  and  dynamically  as 
di/.uiiitfia  upon  all  men  unto  justification  of  life 
in  the  last  judgment ;  that  is,  the  dixaiiofia  of  Christ 
is  sutBciently  powerful  to  justify  and  perfect  all  men. 
Meyer  [with  Uotiie,  Ewald,  Alford,  Wordsworth. — P. 
S.]  construes  ()(.'  ti-os'  here  both  times  as  neuter  (one 
tresp;iss,  one  sentence  of  justification),  which  Tholuck 
has  pro[)erly  rejected.  The  Greek  writers,  Tlieodo- 
ret  and  Theoi)hylaet  [as  also  Erasmus,  Luther,  Cal- 
vin, E.  v.,  Bengel,  Fritzsehe,  Philippi,  Hodge. — 
P.  S.],  have  taken  it  as  masculine,  f     Ilere,  as  in 

■ides  the  verb  came,  two  nouns,  viz.,  judgment  (xpliia)  and 
free  gift  (xopi<r/uia),  from  ver.  IG.  Laiigc  supplits  TrapoTr- 
rutfia  and  ftxatu/ia  from  ver.  18,  and  tr;inslates  :  "  Dcm- 
nach  also:  wie  iliinh  den  Sumli-nfaU  des  Eimn  (ein  Sundcn- 
fall)  auf  olle  Ml  iischen  {hmiiiil)  zur  Vfidammiiins,  so  audi 
(komml)  dnrrh  Eine.<  Recliifcrligu/ig-f/iil  {ei-n  Rcrh(firlig- 
ung<ffu')  auf  alle  M'tischen  hin  zar  (wirhlichrn)  Rrclilfirtig- 
ung  den  L'bens  {icelrhe.  L>hen  isl)."  Rothc  t:\lies  iv6<;  in 
both  clauses  not  in  the  m:isculine,  but  in  the  neuter  ven- 
dor, and  supjilios  only  tlic  verb  cmw :  "  W'ie.  is  durch  Eiiie 
U' biriri lung  fiir  allc  Minschen  znr  Virdnvimnlss  (hmiml), 
in  ebe.n  de.rsclb'n  We.ise  (knmmt  »•.«)  nitrh  diinh  Eine  Ji'Chfs- 
genuglhuuiig  fur  alle,  Menscheu  zur  R'llU/i  rligung  d's  Lc- 
bin.i."  Jfeyor  :  "  Wir  e.s  (il.<ii  durch  Em  Viygr/im  fur  nlle 
Ifnschen  ziim  Verdiimminig.iiirtheil  (giknmmeii  ist);  so  isl  es 
audi  diiT'  h  Ein  R'Ch'/ertiginigsurtheil  fur  alle  Menscheu 
zur  Rerhl/erliguiig  lies  Leii' »■'  (g:  hiVivun)."  Alford  in  tlie 
eamc  way  (fXi'e])t  th:it  he  gives  fixaiui/xa  a  ditiorcnt  mi:in- 
inp)  :  "  Therefore  ns  by  mnini  of  one  Irr.tposs  it  cnrno  (fytvero 
beinif  su))plied)  upon  all  men  uiilo  cmtd'  mnalion,  so  also  b>/ 
vieans  of  one  righlious  act  it  cnmo  upon  all  men  unto  juslifi- 
calioii  of  life."  Wordsworth  like\vi.se  takes  tpos  liere  na 
neuter,  nnd  trinKlutuS  :  "  Therefore,  as  Ihrnugh  one  trans- 
gression the  sentence  was  un/o  all  men  to  cond'  innntion,  so 
through  one  stale  if  acceptance  with  (iod  (so  he  interprets 
{ucouufia),  the  sentence  now  is  unto  all  men  to  juslifiaition 
or  life."  Ewald  mont  litrniUy  :  "Also  denn—wie  durch 
ilinen  F'hllrill  f&r  alle.  if.jiAcA'/i  zitr  VerurtheHung,  so  luu  h 
durch  Einen  O-rcch'spruih  fUr  alle  M' n^chen  znr  Rich'- 
ferlignng  von  Lihen."  Dr.  Ilodpo  adopts  the  translation 
of  the  K.  v.,  from  which  he  vei-y  sildora  departn.  The  now 
version  of  the  Amcr.  Bible  Union  likewise  niirecs  with  the 
K.  V.  in  supplying  /"'///mc/ii  r(ini<',  and  free  gift,  but  more 
correctly  renders  ii  ivo^  iropajrr.,  through  one  trespass,  uml 
iC  ivh^  £i>caiw/xaTOf,  through  one  righlenns  ac'. — P.  S.] 

•  [Meyer  siiys :  ^' apa  ouf  is  oonclusivo  :  drmnnrh  rtnn 
(iirrordinghj  then,  so  then,  Iherifore  now) ;  it  is  of  friMiueiit 
oconiTpnce  in  i'nul  (vii,  H,  25  ;  viii.  12;  ix.  l(i,  18;  xiv.  1  ', 
It;  O.il.  vi  10;  Kph.  ii.  1!)  at.),  and,  contniry  to  clasHical 
UBaore  (Hci-m.  od  Anilg.  CW,  ad  Vig.r.  p.  HiS),  at  the  be- 
pinninK  of  the  Hcntencc."  Klotz  distiniruishes  l)etween 
•pa  !ind  oSk,  in  that  the  former  '^  ad  inlernam  jm'insransnni 
tpec'n', "  tYi'-  latter  "  mngis  ad  exUrnam."  The  ratiocliin- 
tlve  force  of  apa.  is  wenkcT.  and  is  supported  by  tlu)  collec- 
tive power  cf  ovv.     See  Kllicott  on  (liil.  vi.  10. — I'.  8.1 

1  [The  antithesis  tit  irdiTaf,  and  the  analopy  of  vers. 
12,  1.^,  17,  10,  where  toC  ivoi  is  miusuuline,  arc  in  favor  of 
Irfinze's  view,  wliich  is  also  that  of  the  traimlntors  of  the 
E.  V.  ;  but  the  absence  of  the  article  bcfori'  ivoi  is  almost 
conclusive  aijrniiist  it ;  for  in  all  the  eittht  eases  of  this  sec- 
lion,  where  it  is  indisputably  masculine,  it  lias  uniformly 


ver.  16,  Meyer  makes  the  dmaiuifiu  to  mean  judg« 
nient  of  justification  {liechlfirt  gungssfrmch),  and 
rejects  the  translations:  fulfiliuenl  of  the  right 
i^licchtscrfiillung,  Ilothe  and  Philippi);  dted  of  jus- 
tification (Kec/iifirtigungsfhut,  Tholuck) ;  virtuouS' 
7ies8  {Tugendha/tigkiit,  Haumgarten-Crusius) ;  obe- 
dience (Gehorxatit,  De  Wette) ;  the  recte  factum  of 
Christ  (Fritzsehe).  It  is  simply  the  same  every- 
where. If  it  be  said  that  Christ  is  our  righteous- 
ness,  it  is  the  same  as  saying  that  Christ  is  the  per- 
sonal  medium  of  our  justification.  [Comp.  the  remarks 
on  p.  184  f — P.  S.]  The  future  anofJijatrai  sii|)pliod 
by  Winer  and  Philippi  in  the  apodosis,  is  sulliciently 
implied  in  «'(,•  dLxaimaiv  ^id^s.  W'e  hold  that  the 
Apostle  here  means  the  final  diy.aiii>an;,  jiustification, 
which,  in  the  general  judgment,  constitutes  the  an- 
tithesis of  the  Kardy.(ji/ia,  condemiuition.  The  dtxai- 
(iiiia  is  ofl'ered  to  all  men,  and  the  {Jizai'diatc;  'C«iTj(; 
is  its  purpose  ;  but  the  realization  of  the  pur[)ose 
takes  place  merely  according  to  the  measure  of  faitlu 
The  Roman  Catholic  expositors  assert  that  justifica- 
tion of  faith  itself  is  denoted  here  as  justification 
of  life  [i.  e.,  progressive  justification  =  sanetifiea- 
tion. — P.  S.]  According  to  Calvin,  and  others,  it  ia 
the  justification  whose  result  is  life.  Tholuck  :  The 
()i,y.aiiiiaii;  with  the  effect  of  the  future  completion 
of  life.  Augustine  likewise.  Thomas  Aquinas  de- 
scribes correctly  the  ideal  universality  of  the  dixai- 
(iifta  :  "  Quainvis  ponsit  did,  quod  justificntio  Christi 
transit  in  justificaiionem  omniuw,  ad  slfficien- 
TiAM,  licet  quantum  ad  efficikntiam  procedU  in  so- 
los fidcles.^' 

[lldvrn;  avd(io)noi  are,  in  both  clauses,  all  men 
without  exception,  as  in  ver.  12 ;  but  this  does 
not  justify  a  Uiiiversalist  inference,  for  Paul  speaks 
of  the  objective  sufficiency  and  intention  of  Chi'ist's 
tUt-xaioiiia,  not  of  its  subjective  application  to  individ- 
uals, which  depends  upon  the  Mi/ifkirnv  of  faith, 
as  intimated  in  ver.  17.  The  distinction  drawn 
by  Ilofniann  and  Lechler  between  ndi'Tf^  dvO(>io- 
TToi,  all  men  without  distinction,  and  ndi'Tf^  o»  «>■- 
Oliionoi,,  all,  without  exception,  lacks  proof  (Meyer 
calls  it,  rein  erdichtet).  More  of  tiiis  in  ver.  19.— 
P.  S.] 

C.      The  Contrast  of  the  Final  Ejects. 

Yer.  19.  For  as  through  the  disobedience 
of  the  one  man,  &c.  ["J  la  it  to  ■/(((>  i),n  r/"? 
7r«^j  «  X  o /"c,-  Tor  ti'Os  ct  y  f)^  (I  o>  TT  o  r  c'iiia(iT(ii- 
).oi  xm  t  a  T  (t  (y  >;a  uv  o  i  tt  o'/.'/.oi ,  o  i'  t  «» ^  xni , 
x.t./..  According  to  Meyer,  ver.  19  furnishes  only 
a  grand  and  conclusive  elucidation  of  ver.  18  (j'ci^i). 
Tholuck  likewise,  in  harmony  witli  Calvin.  Rut  this 
contrast  denote:*  the  final  antitiiesis  of  the  jiulgment 
and  of  ju.-!tification  as  made  untnifcxt  by  the  gospel 
(.see  chaji.  ii.  Iti).  The  sense  is  :  As,  in  consetiuence 
of  the  disoljedii'iice  of  the  one  man  Adam,  the  many 
(ns  many  a.s  there  are)  have  been  presented  in  the 
light  of  the  gospel  as  sinners  suliject  to  condeinna- 
lion,  HO,  in  consequence  of  the  oliedienee  of  the  one 
man  Christ,  shall  the  many  (as  many  as  believe)  bo 

the  article  (ver.  Mi,  Tip  toO  ivht  irapairrufiaTi  .  .  .  t^  toO 
ivhf  av6pu>nov  ;  ver.  17,  three  tiuK"*  ;  \rr.  lit,  twice),  exceul 
In  ver.  I'J,  wliere  it  is  connected  with  a  noun  (Si  «»4f 
avBputnov),  and  therefore  uniii'ce.ssiiry  ;  while  in  vir.  Irt, 
when'  if  «i'(K  must  be  neuter,  in  opposition  to  noKkuv 
napairTiofiaTiov,  it  is,  as  here,  without  the  article.  The 
Apostle  Is  thrri'fore  quite  CJiieful  nnd  c*)nsislent.  The  ol>- 
jection  that  the  cnniparisoii  is  between  Adam  and  Christ, 
rather  than  between  tin- fall  i>f  one  and  the  riarhtcousnoM 
of  another,  ilors  not  hold,  for  it  is  clearly  a  comparison  of 
liotli  persons  and  etVeets.  The  K.  V.  has  much  ohst  ured 
the  force  of  thiv  sciton  by  oniittini;  the  article  throughout 
before  tU,  as  also  before  iroAAot. — P.  S.] 


CHAPTER  V.   12-21. 


187 


presented  in  the  same  light  as  just.  It  is  self-evi- 
dent that  the  effect  of  the  gospel  is  included  in  the 
second  clause ;  but  from  vers.  20  and  21  we  must 
infer  that  it  is  presumed  also  in  the  first  clause.  It 
is  only  through  the  gospel  that  this  ideal  general 
judgment  is  brought  to  pass,  by  which  all  men  are 
piesented  and  exposed  as  condemned  sinners  in  con- 
sequence of  their  connection  with  the  sin  of  Adam 
(see  John  xvi.  8,  9  ;  comp.  Ps.  li.  5,  6).  We  are 
authorized  by  the  language  in  maintaining  that  xa- 
diGTOivm  possesses  here  the  full  idea  of  setting  down, 
exhibiting,  making  to  appear  as  what  one  is.  [See 
below.] 

[Through  the  disobedience  of  the  one  man, 
(li,n  Ttji;  n  a(i  a/.oTjt;  rov  ivhi;  av  f)  (j  lonov . 
The  trespass,  or  fall,  of  Adam,  to  na^jdnnofia,  is 
here  definitely  described  as  an  act  of  disobdieuce, 
which  is  the  mother  of  sin,  as  obedience  to  the  Di- 
vine will  is  the  mother  of  virtue ;  for  disobedience 
is  essentially  selfishness  in  actual  exercise,  the  re- 
bellion of  the  human  will  against  the  Divine,  the  false 
self-iissertion  or  independence  in  opposition  to  God, 
to  whom  we  owe  life  and  all,  and  whose  service  is 
true  freedom. — P.  S.]* 

The  many  were  constituted  sinners  [  a  |t  a  ^  - 
twXoi  xarKTidOrjciavW  Meyer:  "Accord- 
ing to  ver.  12,  they  were,  through  Adam's  disobe- 
dience, actually  placed  in  the  category  of  sinners, 
because  they  sinned  in  and  with  Adam's  fall."  This 
is  Augustinian  dogmatics,  but  no  exegesis  warranted 
by  the  context.  [  ?  see  below. — P.  S.]  Tholuck  : 
Were  made,  bccaine.  In  this  sense,  according  to  his 
account,  certain  commentators  have  found  the  impu- 
tutio  forensis  expressed  ;  others,  a  real  becoming,  in 
which  the  element  of  spontaneity  is  included.  On 
the  further  complications  which  have  arisen  between 
Romish  and  Protestant  commentators  on  the  suppo- 
sition of  realltj  becoming,  see  Tholuck,  p.  268.  The 
nafyay.ori  of  Adam  himself  has  certainly  set  forth 
the  many  as  sinners,  hut  only  because  it  has  come 
into  the  light  of  the  law,  and  finally  of  the  gospel, 
and  so  far  as  it  has  now  become  clear:  1.  As  an 
ethico-physical  causality,  but  not  as  a  purely  ph3si- 
cal  fatality ;  2.  So  far  as  the  offence  of  Adam  has 
becbme  the  clear  type  of  the  sinfulness  and  sin 
of  every  man ;  3.  So  far  as  the  judgment  of  the 
finished  revelation  comprehends  the  many  as  in 
one. 

So  by  the  obedience  of  one  shall  the  many 
be  made  (constituted)  righteous  [  o  i'  t  oi  t;  y.a.1 
()(.«  T^t;  V  7T  a  y.  o  7j  i;  rov  kvoi;  diY.avoi,  y.a- 
raaxad- riaovrai,  oi  TToAAot].  That  is,  not 
merely  by  the  death  [the  passive  obedience]  of 
Christ,  but  also  by  the  [active]  obedience  of   His 


*  [Tholuck  quotes  here  the  quaint  and  pointed  remark 
of  Luther  :  '•  WuhJ  xe'zt  Akim  seiiien  Znhii  in  eiiien  Ap/el, 
aher  in  Wahrheit  si  tzt  er  ihii,  in  ei.nen  Slachel,  lorlcJier  ist  <las 
goftlichi:  Gibot."  Bengel  says  that  wapa,  in  napaKO^,  very 
appositely  points  out  the  principle  of  the  initial  step,  which 
ended  In  Adam's  fall,  namely,  the  carelessni'ss  of  his  un- 
derstanding and  will,  -which  simultaneously  gave  way  ;  as 
the  fii'st  step  towards  the  capture  of  a  city  is  remissnesti  on 
the  part  of  the  guards  on  watch. — P.  S.] 

t  [Vulgate  :  pi-ccatorcs  constitnU.  sunt.  So  also  Calvin. 
E.  V.  :  wre  mode  sinners.  Lange  translates  :  ah  Sundrr 
heraiifgi'sti'llt  wnrdcn  sind,  sef  f'lii.h,  rnaile  In  appi-trr  {in  Iheir 
real  charac'er)  os  sinners.  So  also  Ewald  :  als  Sunder  dnr- 
pesfeVt  wurden.  Mej'or  and  Phiiippi  :  "ah  Sundir  hin- 
gesleVl,  in  die  Katii/nrie  von  Sundern  vi rsetzt  ivurden"  set 
down  in  Ike  ranic,  or  cahgnry,  of  sinners.  Alford  (with  De 
Wette)  :  "  w."!-«  rtuidK  actual  sinners  by  practice  not,  'wore 
accounted  as'  (Gx-otiu.-",  o/.)  ;  nor  'became  by  imputation  ' 
(Beza,  Bencel) ;  nor  'were  proved  to  be'  (Kojipe,  Reiche, 
Fi-itzsche)."— P.  S,] 


whole  life,  which  was  finished  in  His  death.*  But 
why  the  future  ?  Meyer  :  "  It  relates  (corresponds 
ing  to  ^aaikniaonai')  to  the  future  revelation  o.* 
glory  after  the  resurrection  (Reiche,  Fritzsche,  Hof- 
mann)."  Tholuck  also,  together  with  Abelard,  Coc- 
ceius,  and  others,  refers  the  future  to  the  fiuul  judg- 
ment. But  the  setting  forth  of  believers  as  right- 
eous extends  from  the  begiiming  of  the  preaching 
of  the  gospel  through  all  subsequent  time.  Beza 
properly  observes,  that  the  future  denotes  the  co?i' 
iinua  vis  justijicandi  ;  and  Grotius,  Calov.,  Riick- 
ert,  De  Wette,  and  Philippi,  regard  it  similarly  as  a 
prcEscns  futuribile.  Tholuck  objects :  Is  not  ob- 
jective justification  a  single  act  ?  Certainly,  but 
only  for  individuals ;  but  in  the  kingdom  of  God 
these  acts  are  repeated  through  all  the  future  to  the 
end  of  the  world. 

[The  interpretation  of  a;(aoTO)>lot  xarfard&?j' 
atxv  (passive  Aor.  I.)  and  di/.ai,oi,  naraatax)  ?}• 
(TovTui,  has  been  much  embarrassed  and  obscured  by 
preconceived  dogmatic  theories.  KaOiaTijfn  (also 
y.adi^ardo)  and  y.a&i.<jrdvu>)  means  :  (1.)  to  sef  down, 
to  place  (this  would  give  good  sense  here  :  to  be  set 
down  in  the  rank  of  sinners  ;  but  see  below) ;  (2.) 
to  appoint,  to  elect  (this  is  inapplicable  here,  as  it 
would  make  God  directly  the  author  of  sin) ;  (3.)  to 
ciin.stitute,  to  cau.ie  to  be,  to  make  (rcddere  aliqueni 
aliquid) ;  hence  the  passive :  to  be  rendere  I,  to  be- 
come ;  (4.)  to  comlnct,  to  accompany  on  a  journey 
(only  once  in  the  New  Testament).  Reiche  has 
spent  much  learning  to  establish  a  fifth  meaning : 
/()  shou',  to  exhibit ;  but  this  is  somewhat  doubtlul. 
The  verb  occurs  twenty-two  times  in  the  New  Testa- 
ment, three  times  only  in  Paul  (twice  here,  and  once 
in  Titus  i.  5).  In  sixteen  of  these  cases  (including 
Titus  i.  5)  it  clearly  refers  to  oflicial  appointment , 
in  one  it  means,  to  accompany  (Acts  xvii.  15)  ;  in 
the  remaining  five,  viz.,  Rom.  v.  19  (twice);  James 
iii.  6  ;  iv.  4  ;  2  Peter  i.  8,  it  is,  to  constitute,  to  ren- 
der. So  it  is  taken  in  this  verse  by  nearly  all  the 
recent  commentators.f  But  in  what  sense  ?  Figu- 
ratively, or  really  ?  Chrysostom,  and  the  Greek 
comnjentators  who  did  not  believe  in  original  sin, 
started  the  figurative  or  metonymic  interpretation, 
which  was  subsequently  more  fully  developed  by  the 
Arminians  and  Socinians  (Grotius,  Limborch,  Wet- 
stein,  Sociims,  Crell),  and  advocated  also  by  Storr 
and  Flatt,  of  the  school  of  the  older  German  super- 
naturalism,  namely,  that  y-artardDrjaav  d/ia^roiXoi 
means :  they  were  only  apparently  made  sinners,  or 
iicconnted,  regnrded,  and  treated  as  sinners — i.  e.,  ex- 
posed  to  the  punishment  of  sin,  without  actually 
being  sinners.\     The  same  view  has  been  strenu- 


*  [Meyer  refers  vnajeoTJ,  as  the  opposite  of  Adam's  wa- 
pa-Kori,  specifically  to  the  expiatory  death  of  Christ,  which 
was  KttT  i^oxw^  His  obedience  to  the  will  of  God  ;  Phil.  ii. 
8.  But  Lcchler,  Hofmann,  Stuart,  Barnes,  and  others, 
agree  n-ith  Lnnge. — P.  S.] 

t  [Philippi  doubts  the  meaning  reddere,  facere,  in  the 
N.  T.,  and  Insists  upon  the  fundamental  meaning  (1.)  lo 
si'l  down,  sislere,  cunslitw.rr,  hinsl'Hen,  eiiise'zin,  and  tr:ins- 
laies:  in  die  Kutignrie  von  Sundirn  gesilzt  werden.  But 
also  in  this  ease  the  setting  ddwn  or  the  imputation  must 
be  basfd  on  the  fact  that  they  really  are  sinners,  and  so  it 
is  taken  by  Philippi.— P  S.] 

t  [Chrysostom  is  generally  set  down  as  the  first  advo- 
cate of  this  interpretation,  but  it  should  be  remembered 
that  he  puts  the  metonymy  not  in  the  verb  KaTiaraOyfuav 
but  in  the  noun  o.\j.apru>Koi,  which  he  makes  to  mean  ob« 
noxious  to  punishment  and  condetnr.cj  to  death,  Kara- 
Se&LKaa-ixevoi,  davdrw.  lie  says  that  the  Apostle  designed 
merely  to  state  the  fact,  that  all  bec:imc  mortal  through 
Adam,  but  not  the  why  and  wherefore.  {Hoin.  x.  'J"om. 
ix.,  p.  523,  ed.  Bened.)     It  is  unneeossary  to  prove  thaj 


188 


THE   EPISTLE    OF   PAUL   TO    THE   ROMANS. 


ously  advocated  even  by  so  sound  and  orthodox  a 
commentator  as  Dr.  Hodge,  but  from  the  very  oppo- 
site Joctriiial  btaudpoint,  and  in  the  interest  of  im- 
mediate forensic  inipiitatiouism.  He  takes  zcct*- 
aTaOiirrai;  like  )\iiui^7uv,  ver.  12,  in  a  purelj^  legal 
and  forensic  sense:  they  were  regarded  as  sinners 
independently  of,  and  antecedently  to,  tiieir  being 
sinnei-s,  simply  on  the  ground  of  the  sin  of  Adam, 
their  federal  representative ;  as,  on  the  other  hand, 
Uiey  are  regarded  iis  righteous  solely  on  the  ground 
of  Cbri.-t's  righteousness,  without  any  personal  right- 
eousness of  tlicii-  own.*  Tliis  interpretation,  though 
less  artificial  than  the  corresponding  passive  render- 
ing of  'I'lfiaiiTov,  ver.  12,  is  not  supported  by  a  sin- 
gle passage  of  the  New  Testament  where  /.abimrjiii, 
occurs,  and  conflicts  with  the  connection  For  ver. 
19  gives  tile  reason  (;'«^)  for  the  statement  in  ver. 
18,  why  "judgment  came  upon  all  men  to  condem- 
nation," and  it  would  be  sheer  tautology  to  say  : 
they  were  condemned  because  "  they  were  regard- 
ed and  tretited  as  sinners."  The  phrase,  then,  can 
be  taken  only  in  the  real  sense,  like  ///(w^Tor  in  ver. 


aiiapriaKoi,  in  the  N.  T.,  means  a  real  sinner,  and  nothing 
else.  Urotius  oxphiins  Rom.  v.  19  :  "  Here  again  is  a  me- 
tonymy. Tlicy  were  no  treated  as  though  they  had  actu- 
ally sinned;  that  i-;,  they  were  subjcel  to  death.  So  the 
Word  's  nnor'  is  used  in  1  Kings  i.  21,  and  elsewhere."  So 
al«i>  Whitby,  one  of  the  best  English  commentatoi-s  of  tlie 
Arminiau  school. — P.  S.] 

♦  [Dr.  Hedge,  thouu'h  otherwise  a  strict  Cnlvinist,  re- 
jects the  realistic  Angnstinian  view  of  a  fall  of  the  whole 
race  in  Adam,  and  yet  mikes  all  the  disceiidants  of  Adum 
legally  responsible  f;)r  hio  mil.  To  mainlain  this  ground 
of  an  excla-^iv(^ly  forensic  imputation,  he  must  rcFoi-t  to 
this  forced  interpretation  of  ruiapTov  :ind  KaTeo-rdSrjcroi'. 
"  Kaeiarriixi.,"  he  s.-iys  (p.  271),  "never  [!]  in  the  N.  T. 
means  to  ninlci;  in  the  sense  of  effecting  or  causing  a  per- 
son or  thing  lo  ]>c  in  its  cliaractcr  or  n  iturc  other  than  it 
was  before.  KaSurToi/ot  tlvo.  a^apTwAdf  does  net  meat,  lO 
make  one  sinful,  but  to  set  him  down  as  such,  to  regard  or 
appoint  him  to  lie  of  that  class."  [T'l  regard,  and  ti>  np- 
p,>,n'  arc  two  vcr\-  different  things. — P.  S.]  "  Thus,  when 
Christ  is  said  to  Lave  been  '  constituted  the  Son  of  God,' 
He  was  not  made  Son,  hut  declared  to  be  such."  (But  in 
this  passage,  Rom.  i.  4,  opiafle'n-os  is  u-ed,  not  KaraarTo.- 
0«Kro9,  and  even  that  means  more  than  d'cUirid;  see  7' 2.'- 
uitl  No'e  •  on  p.  56.]  "  '  Who  eonntituted  thee  a  ruler  or 
judge?' — I.  c.  Who  appulnied  thee  to  that  olJRce?  So, 
'  Whom  his  lord  made  ruler.'  "  fThe^c  two  passaiics,  Matt. 
xxiv.  43  ;  Acts  vii  35,  imjily  that  ncillior  was  a  ruler  beforo 
being  '77<o>i<.rf,  and  thi'y  would  lo.-!0  their  force,  were  we 
to  substitute  regard' d  for  C'lnylitiilid  ]  "  When,  therefore, 
the  Apostle  says  that  the  many  were  constituted  (KareoTa- 
8r]<rav)  sinners  by  the  disolicdience  of  A'lam,  it  cannot 
mean  that  thi>  many  thereby  were  rendered  sinful,  but 
that  his  disobedience  w:is  the  ground  of  their  being  placed 
in  the  category  of  sinners.  It  constituted  a  good  and  sulli- 
cienl  ri-a.son  for  so  regarding  and  treating  them.  The  same 
remark  applie*!,  of  course,  to  the  other  clause  of  tliis  verse  : 
tiVaioi  (caTa(rTa#>j(7oiTai  ot  iroWoi.  This  cannot  mean,  that 
by  tlie  obedienee  of  one  the  many  .shall  be  made  holy.  It 
can  only  mean,  that  the  obodii'uce  of  ('hrist  was  the  ground 
on  which  the  ina^y  are  to  lie  placed  in  the  category  of  the 
righteoiLS — i.  e.,  shall  be  so  regarded  and  treated.  It  is  not 
o\ir  per-onal  righteousness  which  makes  us  rigliteous,  but 
the  imputation  of  the  obedienee  of  Christ.  And  the  sen.se 
in  wh'ch  we  are  here  declared  to  he  sinners,  is  '  ot  that  we 
are  such  personally  (which  indeed  is  true),  but  by  the  im- 
putation of  Adam's  disobedience."  With  the  same  assur- 
nnco,  as  in  ver.  12  (see  p.  178),  Dr.  Hodge  claims  that  this 
dogmatic*' <<egesi8  is  the  obvious  gramin;iticiil  meaning 
of  tlie  pa.tsagc,  "adopted  by  commciit.'itorH  of  every  chi.<w, 
as  lo  theologicjil  opinion."  Of  all  rcspecta'olc  modern  com- 
montntors,  Pliilip]>i  (a  high-church  Lutheran)  is  the  only 
one  who  npjrn-inily  favors  It  by  pros.s  iig  the  nicaixing,  tn 
nl  down,  as  distinct  fc-om  rrd^lerc,  fuce.rf.,  but  he  does  so  in 
the  rriili^ir  Auprustinian  sense,  which  ho  expressly  vindi- 
cates in  the  interprnlation  of  i\ixaLprov  (•<ee  p.  178).  Do 
Wi'ltc  c-ills  tlio  Sociniaii  interpretation  of  KaTta^a9r\<rav 
f'llse,  nu<i  Meyer  insists  that  tho  verb  means,  "(//.•  wrlc- 
liche  Enxlziing  m  <len  S&ndrrxlnnd,  wodiirrh  nit.  tii  Sfin- 
dfrn  TnATsArni.rrn  OKWoiinrri  siNn,  jfrraiorrt  cnMituJi 
tiiiit :"  niid  he  quotes  .Tatnes  iv.  4  ;  2  I'ffer  i.  S  ;  Ileli.  v.  1  ; 
viii.  3;  where  the  mctonjinlc  sense  is  impossible.— 1'.  S.) 


12.  It  means :  they  were  made  sinners  either  by 
virtual  participation  in  the  fall  of  Adam,  or  by  aetua.' 
practice,  by  repeating,  as  it  were,  the  fall  of  Adam 
m  their  siniul  conduct.  Both  interpretations  are 
jierfectly  grammatical,  and  do  not  exclude  each 
tither.  Even  if  the  verb  under  consideration,  in 
the  passive,  could  be  made  out  to  mean :  to  be 
cu-hib<((<J,  to  appear  {/.aTtarafit^rtav  =  i<tavn>i!y- 
Ofjooiv,  see  Wetstein,  Keielie,  Fritzsclie),  it  alwayi 
presupposes  actual  being:  they  were  made  to  ap. 
pear  in  their  true  character  as  sinners,  or  what 
they  really  wore.*  Comp.  Lange  above. f  This  is 
very  different  from  :  they  were  regarded  and  treated 
as  sinners,  without  being  such.  The  metonymic  in- 
terpretation confounds  the  effect  with  the  cau-^c,  or 
reverses  tiie  proper  order  that  death  follows  sin. 
We  are  regarded  and  treated  as  sinners  bectiuse  wo 
are  sinners  in  fact  and  by  practice.  So,  on  the  other 
liJiml,  di/.ai,oi  /.aTanTaO^t-rsovTcu  is  more  than  the 
declaratory  i)iy.caiiiO i]fsovTai.,  and  meai.s,  that  by 
Christ's  merits  we  shall  be  actually  made  righteous, 
and  appear  as  such  before  His  judgment  seat.  It 
denotes  the  righteousness  of  Uj\\  as  a  consequence 
of  justification  by  faith  (comp.  tlii  (J'txa/r.iffn'  i^w^e, 
ver.  18).  Luther  saj's:  '■^  W'ie  Adatii's  Sumle  uimere 
EiGEXK  fjewordcn  id^  also  auch  Cliristi  Gcrt.c/Uiff' 
k(  it ;  "  as  Adam's  sin  has  become  our  oim^  so  also 
Christ's  righteousness.  Calvin  correctly  translates : 
'''' peccatores  con stituti  sunt,  .  .  .  jimii  cotisiitucntur" 
and  remarks  in  loc. :  "  Uude  sequitur,  jusiitice  qua  i- 
f litem  esse  in  Christo :  sed  nobis  acceptum  fen'i, 
quod  illi  propriiaii  est."  David  l^areus,  one  of  the 
ablest  among  the  older  Reformed  commentators,  ex- 
plains fii'xrtiot  xaTciiTT. :  "  multo  plus  est,  quani 
jiislificahaidnr.  Nam  justiticari  est  a  coiideinuO' 
tione  absohi  justi/ia  iniputala  ;  juslmn  coustitui  est 
etlam  jiistilia  habituali  saiictificari ,  hoc  est,  simul 
juslificatlonis  et  sanctijicationis  benefieium  complec' 
titnr."  Bengel  in  loc. :  "  Apostolus  taleui  juste- 
rum  cossTiruTiONEM  videtur  prcedicare,  quee  jus- 
tiji.riilionis  nctinn  subscqiiatur,  et  verbo  iNVK.Nilll 
i'ne/u'/l'nr  (Phil.  iii.  9;  cnlJ.  Gal.  ii.  17);"  i.  e.,  the 
Apostle  sei.'ins  to  set  forth  such  a  condituiiiig  of 
men  as  rigliteous,  as  may  follow  upon  the  act  of 
justification,  and  as  is  includeil  in  the  expressibn, 
bihifi  fiiund.  Alford  :  '■^  be  niade  rig/iteous,  not  by 
imputation  merely,  anymore  than  in  the  other  case; 
but,  '  shall  be  made  really  and  actually  righteous,  as 
completely  so  as  the  others  were  made  really  and 
actually  sinners.'  When  we  say  that  man  has  110 
righteousness  0/  his  own,  we  speak  of  him  as  out  of 
Christ:  but  in  Christ,  and  united  to  Him,  he  is 
made  righteous,  not  by  a  fiction  or  imputalion  onti/ 
of  Christ's  righteousness,  but  liy  a  real  and  living 
spiritual  union  with  a  righteous  head,  as  a  righteous 
member,  righteous  bi/  tmans  of,  as  an  elVect  of,  the 
righteousness  of  thtit  head,  but  not  merely  right 
eons  Ity  transference  of  the  righteousness  of  that 
head  ;  just  a.s,  in  his  natural  state,  he  is  united  to  a 
sinful  head  as  a  sinful  member,  sinful  by  means  of, 


•  [TlioliicU,  p.  207  :  "  St)  npicbf  tirh  denn  fUr  d-i»  Pii.ig 
nirht  die  BedriUun// :  'dirff'S'rlH  werd'ti'  I'lii  S'lme  rf>n 
*  Bitscni'lNKN  AIB  ETWAs,  loiis  limn  nichl  isl,'  ioiulern  *  OB- 

MACIIT   WKUDKM,    Wl-.Kni'..S."  — T.  S.J 

.  t  [Tho  latest  couunentiitor  of  Rom.  v.,  Ad.  Stilltlng 
in'ilrdg'-  tiir  Exgrse  d-r  r<iuh,iigihr,ii  Bri'fr,  Ofitf iuiten, 
1869,  p.  40),  nonjiy  agrees  with  Ijange  in  giv  ng  the  verb  a 
H)M'eL'il  reference  to  tho  judgment.  "  KoT«rTo^<roi',"  ho 
says,  "  A/T/  hire  die  a'lhnne  H  dent  n  tig  d's  Il.iis'cll'ns  voB 
IiKN  RlcilTF.n,  we  j'l  die  nchl'  rhrhe  TfidJigkeil  Ooll't  ai(f 
Ad  imilifrher  Seitf.  im  Vnrtt-igehnid'  11  Jurch  xpl/xa  U-id 
KOLToKpnui  till/  dii3  klirs'e  bizeiclf.'.t  int." — 1'.  S.) 


CHAPTER   V.    12-21. 


189 


as  an  effect  of,  the  sinfulness  of  that  head,  but  not 
merely  by  transference  of  the  sinfulness  of  that 
head."— P.  S.] 

On  the  question  raised  by  Tholuck,  and  others, 
whether  this  passage  does  not  lead  to  the  doctrine  of 
the  ano/MTdaraai-ii,  see  Dod.  and  Ethical.,  No.  12. 

[The  iiilerenue  of  a  universal  salvation  from  tills 
verse,  as  also  from  ver.  15  (ftt;  rovi;  noXXoix; 
irrf()i(T(TfV(J(v)  and  18  {fli;  ncivxai;  av&fjomovq  i-li; 
d'vy.ai(i)ai.v  tMtji;),  is  very  plausible  on  the  surface, 
and  might  be  made  quite  strong  if  this  section  could 
be  isolated  from  tlie  rest  of  Paul's  teaching  on  the 
terms  of  salvation.  The  same  difficulty  is  presented 
in  1  Cor.  xv.  22 :  "  As  in  Adam  all  die  {ndvTK; 
nnoOvtj(T/.ov(ji,v\  so  in  Christ  shall  all  be  made  alive 
{navrni  t(t)onoi,fj>9ij<rovrai.)."  It  has  been  urged  by 
Bonie  that  the  apocatastasis  is  implied  partly  in  the 
indicative  future,  y.aTafjraOtjaovTat,  and  LMnoitjO ij- 
covTai,  but  especially  in  the  fact  that,  as  navTn;,  all, 
and  01  TTol/.ot,  the  vmny,*  are  confessedly  unlimited 
in  the  first  clause,  we  have  no  right  to  limit  them  in 
the  second  clause.  (The  advocates  of  eternal  pun- 
ishment forcibly  derive  the  same  argument  for  their 
doctrine  from  the  double  atwi'to?.  Matt.  xxv.  46). 
The  popular  explanation  that  ndvrfq  and  ol  no/./.ol 
means,  in  one  case,  Adam's  natural  seed  (oi  a/ia^- 
To)Xoi),  in  tlie  other,  Christ's  spirittud  seed  («.  f.,  ol 
martvovrfc),  though  true  as  to  practical  result,  fails 
to  do  justice  to  the  superabundance  of  God's  grace 
over  nian's  sin.  Paul  unquestionably  teaches  em- 
phatically the  universal  sufficiency  of  tiie  gospel  sal- 
vation, without  any  restrictions  which  migiit  break 
the  force  of  the  parallel  between  Adam  and  Christ. -f- 
All  men  are  capable  of  salvation,  or  salvable  {crlos- 
b(ir\  which  must  by  all  means  be  maintained  against 
Manichaeism  and  fatalism.  If  any  are  ultimately  lost, 
it  is  not  from  metaphysical  or  constitutional  inability, 
nor  from  any  defect  in  Christ's  atonement,  which  is 
of  infinite  value  in  itself,  and  was  made  for  the  sins 
of  the  xvhole  world  (1  John  ii.2),  nor  from  any  un- 
willingness on  the  part  of  God,  who,  according  to 
His  benevolent  purpose,  will  have  all  men  to  be  saved, 
and  to  come  unto  the  knowledge  of  the  truth  (1  Tim. 
ii.  4 ;  comp.  iv.  10 ;  2  Peter  iii.  9).  But  we  must 
make  a  distinction  between  the  objective  svfficiencji 
and  the  subjective  efficacy  of  Christ's  atonement,  be- 
tween the  possibility  and  the  actuality  of  a  universal 
salvation.  All  men  may  be  saved,  since  abundant 
provision  has  been  made  to  that  end,  and  under  this 
view  we  must  approach  even  the  worst  sinner ;  but 
which,  and  how  many,  will  be  saved,  is  a  question 
of  the  future  which  God  only  knows.  From  the 
great  stress  which  Paul  lays  in  this  passage  on  the 
superabundance  of  grace  which  greatly  exceeds  the 

*  [The  E.  V.  has  much  obscurerl  the  menninp  by  omit- 
ting the  article  before  many,  as  if  it  were  antithetical  to 
somf,  while  Ihp.  many  are  opposed  to  Ike  one,  6  els. — P.  S.] 

t  [According  to  Eothe,  1.  c.  p.  155,  Paul  meant  to  sug- 
gest the  idea  of  the  possibility  of  the  ultimate  salvfitiou  of 
all  men,  but  no  more.  "  Vollio  bestimmt  und  unzwei- 
DF.UTIG  WILL  d4!r  ApiisM  NTin  die  7-eale  Mogliclikeit  dei-  Bc- 
Sicligu'ng  Aller  durch  Christi.  ii.Kaiioix.aonssag(n;  allein  dn- 
hfi  WILL  cr  dnch  zugleirh  MIT  vollig  bewussteb  Absicht 
[tind  er  erreicht  diese  AbsicM  dnrch  das  yap  einerseils  iind 
dnrch  das  zweimatige  oi  vo\KoC  aii/lrcrseils),  in  dem  L'S'-r 
die  BESTIMMTE  Vermcthcng  friTgi'n,  dass  ouch  die  ge- 
gchichl I iclie  Verwirkliclning  je.ner  renlcn  Afoglirhkeil.  vnn  ijnn 
niitgem.einl  sein  mdge  ;  aber  auch  eben  ncr  als  Vermuth- 
trna,  die  er  durchaus  nirld  soil  aiis  dem  Gi  biet  der  blosscn 
Wahrsrheinlichkeit  in  das  der  Evidenz  hinuberziehen  ko»- 
nni.  Gewiss,  die  meisterliche  Kunst  in  der  Durclifukriing 
iiner  go  fein  nUancirten  Intention  ist  vxM  zu  bewundern.'''' 
—v.  S.l 


evils  of  the  fall,  we  have  a  right  to  infer  that  by  fai 
the  greater  part  of  the  race  will  ultimately  be  saved, 
especially  if  we  take  into  consideration  that  the  half 
of  mankind  die  in  infancy  before  liaving  committed 
actual  transgression,  and  that,  in  the  days  of  millen- 
nial glory,  the  knowledge  of  Christ  will  cover  the 
earth.  It  is  a  truly  liberal  and  nol)le  sentiment  of 
Dr.  Hodge  when  he  says  (p.  2*79):  "We  have  reason 
to  believe  that  the  lost  shall  bear  to  the  saved  no 
greater  proportion  than  the  inmates  of  a  prison  do 
to  the  mass  of  the  community."  But  from  all  oui 
present  observation,  as  well  as  from  the  word  of  God 
(comp.  Matt.  vii.  13,  14),  we  know  that  many,  very 
many — yea,  the  vast  majority  of  adults  even  in  Chris- 
tian lands — walk  on  the  broad  path  to  perdition,  al- 
tliough  they  may  yet  be  rescued  in  the  last  moment. 
Paul  himself  speaks  of  the  everlasting  punishrnerd  of 
those  who  obey  not  the  gospel  of  Christ  (2  Thess.  i. 
9),  and  teaches  a  resurrection  of  the  unjust  as  well  aa 
of  tlie  just  (Acts  xxiv.  15).  We  know,  moreover,  that 
none  can  be  saved  except  by  faitli,  which  is  God's 
own  express  condition.  For  salvation  is  a  moral, 
not  a  mechanical  process,  and  requires  the  free  as- 
sent of  our  will.  Now  Paul  everywhere  presents 
faith  as  the  subjective  condition  of  justification  ; 
and  in  ver.  17  he  expressly  says,  that  those  who 
receive  {XafifidvovriQ)  the  abundance  of  the  grace 
and  of  the  gift  of  righteousness,  shall  reign  in  life 
by  the  one,  Jesus  Christ.  He  contrasts  the  wliole 
generation  of  Adam  and  the  whole  generation  of 
Christ,  fmd,  as  the  one  die  in  consequence  of  their 
participation  in  Adam's  sin,  so  the  other  shall  be 
made  alive  by  virtue  and  on  condition  of  their  union 
with  Christ's  righteousness.  In  Gal.  iii.  22  he  states 
the  case  beyond  the  possibility  of  mistake  :  "  The 
Scripture  hath  concluded  all  (ra  navra)  under  sin, 
that  the  promise  by  faith  of  Jesus  Christ  might  be 
given  to  them  that  believe  (toTi;  7naTn''oi'at,v)." — 
Universalism  nmst  assume  a  second  probation  after 
death  even  for  those  who  lived  in  Christian  lands, 
with  every  opportunity  of  saving  their  soul.  But 
such  an  assumption  is  contrary  to  Gal.  vi.  V,  8,  and 
the  whole  practical  tenor  of  the  Bible,  and  is  in 
itself  untenable  and  illusive.  A  new  trial,  instead 
of  improving,  would  greatly  lessen  the  chance  of 
building  up  a  good  character.  For  as  it  is  impossi- 
ble, without  a  new  creation,  to  return  to  the  moth- 
er's womb  and  live  the  old  life  over  again,  the  sec- 
ond trial  would  have  to  commence  where  the  first 
left  off — that  is,  with  a  dismal  outfit  of  neglected 
opportunities,  broken  vows,  sad  reminiscences,  abused 
faculties,  bad  habits,  and  in  the  corrupting  company 
of  moral  bankrupts,  with  every  prospect  of  a  worse 
failure  and  a  more  certain  ruin.  God  wisely  and 
mercifully  gave  to  men  but  one  state  of  probation, 
and  those  who  improved  it  best,  would  shrink  most 
from  running  the  risk  of  a  second. — P.  S.] 


Third  Paragraph  (vers.  20,  21). 

Ifow  the  law  is  designed  to  bring  about  directly  thi* 
process  of  the  development  of  sin,  in  order  alsf 
to  bring  about  iyidirecily  the  revelation  of  grace. 

Ver.  20.  But  the  law.  {Nofioc.  Si,  x.T.l 
The  Mosaic  law  is  meant,  though  the  article  is  want 
ing,  as  is  often  the  case  where  there  can  be  no  mis- 
take.— P.  S.]  The  Apostle  now  cannot  avoid  to 
state  the  relation  of  the  law  or  of  Moses  to  this  am 
tithesis — Adam  and  Christ — especially  since  he  had 


190 


TKE    EPISTLE    OF    PAUL   TO    THE   ROMANS. 


already  inlininted  this  relation  in  ver.  13.  Grotius 
thought  the  Tullowhig  disou-'sion  induced  by  an  ob- 
jection. But  chaps,  vi.  and  vii.  show  that  Paul  could 
not  avoid  to  aa^wer  this  question. — Came  in  be- 
tween [zwischencin,  parenlheticalli/,  a.s  it  were] 
TT  «  « f  KT  iy  A  i>  f  v .  Xot  be^dex,  •  thereto  (Meyer)  ;  * 
nor  ituljintrai'it  (Vulg.)  ;  f  nor  iiic><lenta/li/,  subordi- 
nate!!/ {iiebensiielili,-h,  Uotlie,:j;  Tholuck  [Reiehe,  Piii- 
lippi],  and  others  [contrary  to  the  pedagogic  mission 
of  the  law ;  iii.  2U ;  Gal.  iv.  24]  ).  The  comimj  to, 
in  addition  to,  lies  in  the  Trance ;  the  coming  into,  in 
the  fi'v  Therefore,  properly  to  enter  between,  to 
c»me  befwren  [Adam  and  Ciirist]  (Theodoret,  Calvin, 
Luther  [Estius,^  Grotius,  Usteri,  Ewald],  &c.),  wliicii 
Meyer  opposes  without  warrant.  The  reference  to 
tlifc  position  of  Moses  between  Adam  and  Christ  may, 
indeed,  be  only  an  intinmtion  ;  but  to  say  that  sin 
merely  supervened  in  addition  to  sin  (Beza,  De 
Wette,  &c.),  is  not  satisfactory,  because  the  question 
in  the  foregoing  is  not  concerning  sin  alone,  but  the 
antithesis  of  sin  and  grace.  Tholuck  concludes  in- 
correctly from  this  consideration,  tliat  the  law  is 
characterized  as  an  incidental  factor.  The  law  inci- 
dental ?  (Ghrysostom  [Theoi)hylact,  Cornelius  a 
Lapide,  without  any  foumiation],  have  understood 
Tzatici  as  denoting  obiter,  ad  fcm/ius).  The  Apostle 
has  evidently  tiie  idea  of  an  ethico-chemical  process. 
The  law  had  to  enter  into  the  process  of  the  devel- 
oi)n»ent  of  sin,  in  order  to  force  it  to  a  crisis.  [Ols- 
hausen  :  "  Paul  regards  the  law  as  a  salutary  medi- 
cine, which  forces  the  disease  that  rages  in  the  in- 
ward, nobler  parts,  to  the  surface."  So  also  De 
Wctte  and  Rotlie.— P.  S.] 

That  the  fall  might  multiply  [i'r«  7i?.fo- 
vdrf  11  TO  TzartccTTx III  II  a \  Laiige  :  damit  der  Siin- 
deii/idl  voUiger  werde  (erxch-'ine) ;  Alford  :  in  order 
ikitt  the.  trespisH  might  vinJtip'ii.  The  Apostle  uses 
TTaudfiTiiiiia  here  (not  naoairTi'inciTa,  nor  nuao- 
Tia),  Ijecausc  the  law  does  not  aim  to  multiply  sin 
as  such,  but  to  naake  it  appear  and  to  reveal  it  to 
the  conscience  as  a  TrrtfidnTi'iiia — i.  e.,  a  transgres- 
sion of  the  positive  will  ot  God;  comp.  iii.  20;  iv. 
15 ;  vii.  7 ;  and  Kothc,  p.  107.— P.  S.].  The  bold- 
ness of  this  thought  has  troubled  the  commentators. 
It  is  indeed  not  satisfactory  to  alleviate  it  by  su[)- 
posing  that  the  law  is  intended  merely  to  enhance 
the  knowledge  of  sin  ((irotius,  Haur,  and  others) ; 
but  this  is  one  importmt  element  of  its  mission  (see 
chap,  vii.),  and  must  not  be  rejected,  with  Meyer,  as 
fal.se.     To  exi)lain  IVa  of  the  consequence  or  result 

*  [As  irpotereffij,  Oal.  iti.  IS.  Beza:  prmterr.a  inlrniil, 
cup'-rveneil,  uamc  in  tho  wiy  of  addition.  Meyer  :  m  knm 
•  ink  (lnn'bi'.ii  ''in,  viz.,  in  mldilion  to  sin,  which"  had  :ilrendy 
•■nlorrd  into  the  wond,  ver.  \1.  Siinihirly  Alford:  "cimr 
,  ■•  U  ililtx  tlio  f:ict  of  the  many  bolni;  made  sinner-,  and  ns 
It  trinsition-poinl  to  the  other  n-Hiilt."  Itod(fo'  The  law 
v'.n  superindiiwd  on  a  plan  already  laid,  and  lor  a  subordi- 
nate (?)  althoii»rh  neccsHary  purpose.— P.  .S.] 

t  [  I'ho  idea  of  nrrnay,  or  surriplilinnx  entriinro,  is  not 
n(!C08i<arf<y  implied  in  iropd  (oomp.  naptKrayio,  irap<i<rjuu, 
irif>ei<ri^<p<i>),  iind  must  bo  either  derived  from  the  c  mtcxt, 
as  in  Oiil.  11.  4  (the  oily  p.issaso  in  the  New  Textainent 
wli'M'C  tho  verb  occurs  t>esides  our  own),  or  be  expressed  by 
Katpa.  In  our  passage  such  an  ideri  would  be  ineon'<i.stent 
witli'tlic  h'lly  cnaractcr  of  tho  law,  the  solemn  man'ier  of 
ll-  pi'oiiiulgittion,  and  tbe  Apostlo's  reverence  for  it  (Rom. 
vii.  12  ff).     From  .Meyer.— 1'.  S.) 

}  [Ilothe,  p.  1J8,  Iran'datc^  :  nrb-nb'i  zw'.'rlien'-in  if- 
k'tmmf.ii,  it  came  in  inciilenl'iUi/  b'lw  '>i.  He  thus  comtdnes 
tho  idea  of  the  incidentul  coming  in  of  the  law  with  that  of 
It*  mo<lial  position  between  .Vdam  and  Christ.  Si  Ols- 
haUson  :  "In  dfm  irapti<rifK0tv  iti  fixo  ilil  iln.i  mit'm  iiiur 
'J'l-'l-ii,  all  aiirh  <lii  U  'id'ijiff,  nichl  nbxoliU  Aalhtonidip': 
d'iflbni  nn(fi-'leiti>-l."—V.  S.) 

§[lv4tius:  "  fj  T,  firolfln-ns  peerii/um,  mrilio  tanpore 
intfr  AiUim  cl  C7i/"i«  uin  tubinjrusa  ett," — P.  8. J 


(merely  tr.flari.xun;,  with  Chrysostom  [orx  atrtoAo* 
)'(«(,•,  cti.a  tA[]dani)i; ;  Estius  :  "  non  Jinalcm  causaiit 
denotat,  sed  eventum." — P.  S.],  Koppe,  Reiche  [Stu. 
art,  Barnes]),  is  likewise  unsatisfactory;  yet  the 
Apostle  has  certainly  inferred  from  the  result  the 
design  and  intention  in  the  Ira.*  Gal.  iii.  19  does 
not  serve  as  an  elucidation  of  this  passage,  as  Meyei 
would  have  it ;  and  Ron),  vii.  14  proves  that,  by  tho 
law,  the  knowledge  of  sin  comes  ;  while  1  Tim.  i.  9 
shows  that  the  law  constitutes  a  weapon  against  tho 
ungodly.  Reiche  has  called  the  telic  cotistructioi: 
blasphemous;  in  reply  to  which,  comp.  Meyer  [p 
224J.  He  properly  remarks,  that  sin  had  to  reach 
its  culminating  point,  where  it  will  be  outdone  by 
grace,  (hdy  liiis  culminating  point  should  not  bo 
merely  objective,  but  subjective  also,  in  accordance 
with  the  sentence  quoted  from  Augustine,  on  Ps. 
cii.  :  "  JVon  crude/iler  hoc  fecit  Deus,  sed  consilio 
inedicince  /  .  .  .  augetur  morbus,  crcscit  tnalitia, 
qnceriiur  medieus  et  tofiim  sanattir."  It  is  a  fact 
both  that  the  misunderstood  law,  according  to  God's 
decree,  induced  the  crucifixion  of  Christ — the  clima.x 
of  the  world's  guilt — and  that  the  same  law,  well 
understood,  prepared  the  way  for  the  saving  faith 
of  the  New  Testament.  For  this  reason  there  is 
truth  in  Rothe's  explanation :  All  sin  should  ever 
stand  out  more  complete  under  the  form  of  the 
naiidTTTioiia.  Tholuck  also  takes  ground  with  Ols- 
hausen,  De  Wette,  and  Neander,  in  favor  of  the 
telic  rendering.  Reasons:  1.  Nitinnir  in  vetitutn ; 
2.  Thomas:  "When  the  passions  dare  not  manifest 
themselves,  they  become  more  intense."  Does  this 
apply  here  ?  Sin,  even  in  the  form  of  anti-Chris- 
tianity, undoubtedly  becomes  more  intense  in  oppo- 
sition to  the  gospel,  but  still  this  is  mostly  ecbatic 
conse(|uence ;  3.  Luther :  The  accusing  and  con- 
dcmning  law  awakens  cmnity  to  God.  For  this  rea- 
son, Judaism,  like  all  fanaticism,  is  angrg  at  (iod. 
It  is  a  prime  consideration  that  here  the  law  is  s|)e- 
cifically  understood  as  the  law  of  the  letter,  as  de- 
signed to  finish,  both  objectively  and  subjectively, 
the  sinful  process  of  the  old  world.  Therefore  the 
second  iV«  in  ver.  21,  as  Tholuck  well  remarks, 
takes  the  sting  from  the  first.  [In  other  words,  the 
first  (V«  indicates  the  mediate,  tiie  second  (V«  the 
ultimate  end  and  purpose. — P.  S.]  Philippi  under- 
stands by  TTHjjdTTTifiiia  merely  the  ;T«oct/Tr.  of 
Adam  inhering  in  sinners.  But  it  denotes  here 
rather  the  completi<ui  of  the  fall  of  humanity  itself. 
But  where  sin  multiplied  [ov  di  ini.to- 
vaatv  !j  Mil  a  (IT  I  n].  Where  it  was  completed, 
came  to  full  revelation.  It  is  very  strange  that 
Rotlie  regards  the  head  of  the  whole  deduction  from 
or  r)f  to  /'(Cot,-  as  parenthi'tical.  Of  is  not  tempo- 
ral ((Jrotius  [De  Wette,  Frit/>che,  St.'dting]  ),  hut 
spacial  (Meyer,  Tholuck} — iH'rliai)s  botli ;  tiiue  bi'iiig 
considered  as  an  expansion  — [Q-race  exceedingly 
abounded  (not,  much  more,  E.  V.),  Inttitnt- 

0  I  IT  IT  f  r  T  f  V      ij      /f<(/ls'].  !■  n  f  (I  f  7r  t  (I  iTIT  fV  nv 

[supra  modiiin  redmid  irit]  is  superlative  [not  com* 
parative ;  comp.  !'nn):T/.nird'Sio,  iinnin/.dKi,  Irrtii- 
I'iroi'i,  i'';rf(i/.«V<r)  ;   (2  ("or.  vii.  4   [the  same  verb]; 

1  Tim.  i.  14  ;   Mark  vii.  :i7  ;  2  Tlie<s.  i.  3). 

Ver.  21.    That,  as  sin  reigfned  in  [not  unto, 
E.  v.;   liange,  vittdt,  bg  means  o/]  death  [Iva, 


*  (Meyer,  who  is  a  philolopicnl  purist  even  to  occ;isional 
pedantij,  liiki'S  \va  here,  iin<l  everywliens  T«Aiicii«,  and  tliut 
seem*  to  jiiKlify  ivcii  the  supnilapsariim  theory  of  xni. 
Alford  lilt^'wixe  ir.sists  on  the  unilVuni  telic  meaninir  of  iva. 
It  undoubtedly  dt-notcs  the  desiaii  lieie,  but  the  nie'liaUi, 
not  tho  uUittuiif  iXotiga,  us  in  ver.  21. — 1'.  d.l 


CHAPTER  V.    12-21. 


101 


&avdr(o.  The  second  iVw  indicates  the  more  re- 
mote and  ultimate  purpose  of  the  coming  in  of  the 
law,  as  the  first  iva,  ver.  20,  denotes  its  nearer  and 
mediate  aim  and  eft'ect ;  the  increase  of  sin  served 
merely  as  a  means  for  the  triumphant  and  eternal 
reign  of  grace.  Hodge  :  "  The  design  of  God  in 
permitting  sin,  and  in  allowing  it  to  abound,  was  to 
bring  good  out  of  evil ;  to  make  it  the  occasion  of 
the  most  wonderful  display  of  His  glory  and  grace, 
80  that  the  benefits  of  redemption  should  infinitely 
transcend  the  evils  of  the  apostasy." — P.  S.]  As 
sin  wrought  death,  so  again  did  death  work  sin  (see 
Heb.  ii.  14).  But  here  the  priority  in  the  (ictfrUtla 
is  ascribed  to  sin.  It  reigned  [aor.,  the  historic 
past].  It  reigns  no  more,  iv  before  Oavdrm  is 
not  a  substitute  for  tlq  (Beza,  and  others).  Meyer 
opposes  also  the  explanation ;  by  death  (Tholuck, 
Philippi).  Death  denotes  the  sphere  of  the  domin- 
ion of  sin.  But  deatli  is  also  the  medium  of  the 
reign  of  sin  ;    see  the  antithesis,  rftdt  diy-aioavvtic. 

So  also  grace  may  reign,  &c.  [ovxmi;  xac 
T]  yu(jt,(;  [laa t.kf vai],  z.t./..]  The  law  would 
thus  bring  to  pass  the  dominion  of  grace  ;  and  it 
now  reigns  in  reality.  The  material  medium  is 
righteousness  unto  (leading  to)  life  eternal ;  the 
personal  medium  is  Jesus  Christ  our  Lord ;  and 
both  are  identical.  The  ()tz.,  and  not  the  tou],  is 
named  as  the  medium  of  the  dominion  of  grace,  be- 
cause the  L.mti  ato')vi,oi;  is  the  goal.  The  righteous- 
ness of  faith  and  the  righteousness  of  life  are  com- 
prised here  in  the  idea  of  the  di/..  {[)a(nhv(Tt]  is 
aorist,  not  future.  Meyer  against  Reiche,  see  Col. 
iil4.) 

[The  last  word  in  this  section  is,  Jesus  Christ 
our  Lord,  the  one  glorious  solution  of  the  Adamic 
fall  and  the  dark  problem  of  sin.  Adam  disappears, 
and  Christ  alone  remains  master  of  the  field  of  bat- 
tle, having  slain  the  tyrants.  Sin  and  Death.  Forbes 
concludes  his  notes  on  Rom.  v.  12-21  with  the  ex- 
clamation (p.  257) :  "  Who  can  rise  from  the  study 
and  contemplation  of  this  wondrous  passage,  full  of 
such  profound  views  and  pregnant  meanings,  with 
all  its  variously  complicated  yet  beautifully  discrimi- 
nated relations  and  interlacements  of  members  and 
thoughts,  witliout  an  overpowering  admiration  and 
irresistible  conviction  of  the  superhuman  wisdom 
that  must  have  dictated  its  minutest  details  ! " — 
P.  S.] 

DOCTRINAL  A^sT)  ETHICAI* 

[T/ITEEATTTEE   ON   THE    DOCTRINAL   QUESTIONS    INVOLVED 

IN  Rom.  v.  12-21. — The  authoritative  Creed  dutemrnts  on 
anthropology  and  hamsiitiologv  from  the  Synod  of  Orange, 
A.  D.  529  (comp.  my  Church  Hist.,  vol.  ii'i.  pp.  866  ff.)  to 
the  Westminster  Assembly,  1(543.  To  these  may  be  added 
two  quasi-creeds  of  sectional  and  temporary  authority, 
drawn  up  in  the  interest  of  immediate  iinputationism,  viz., 
tiie  decree  of  the  French  Reformed  Synod  of  Chaienton, 
1B45  ("  D'Cnlum  Syixidi  iKrlinnalis  EccUsiarHin  Rifurmalo- 
rum  GaUiit  A.  D.  1615  Or  impuladone primi  peccnli  omnibus 
Adami  posleris,  cum  ecclesiarum  et  ducinrum  protcslantitiin 
cnusriisu,  ex  scripiis  enriini  oh  Andrea  Rtveto  coilecln,"  in 
the  Opira  Thfol.  of  A.  Rivet,  Roterod.  1660,  torn.  lit.  pp. 
798-8-7) ;  and  the  Formula  cnii.tenyus  ffclvelicn.  1675  (in 
Niemeyfh's  Colli  Clio  Confess.  Reform.,  pp.  720-739).  Comp., 
in  part,  Winer's  Compara'ive,  Sijmhohk,  pp.  53  ff.,  where 
the  piincipal  passages  from  the  symbolical  books  are  col- 
lected. —The  numerous  works  of  Augvstine  against  Pelagius 
and  Julian  of  Eclanum.  Anselm,  Dr.  conoptu.  virginali  et 
errig.  pnecnlo.  Rivet,  Htcses  Ihcologiat  de  pncitlo  originis 
(Opi  ra,  tom.  iii.  pp.  801  sqq.)  President  Edwards,  On 
Original  Sin  ()ro/fo,  vol.  ii.  3U3-.=83.)  Jul.  Miller,  The 
Christian  Doctrine  of  Sin  (the  most  exhau.?tive  work  on  the 
subject,  now  accessible  aiso  to  the  English  reancr  in  an 
intellit'ible  translation,  from  the.  5f.h  German  edition,  by 


Rev.  W.  Urwick,  Edinb.,  1868).  Edrard,  Cliristl.  Dogma- 
lih-  (1851),  i.  pp.  511  If.;  Kirchen-  und  Dogmen-Gisc/uchle 
(ISOb),  ii.  504  tf.,  538  tf.  IIeppe,  D.igmalik  der  evang.  re- 
form. Kirchc  ausdeii  Qiiellen  (ISCl),  pp.  204  ff.  Cns.  Hodgb 
(Princeton),  Thcol.  Essays,  New  York,  1816,  Nos.  vi.-viii., 
on  Imputation,  pp.  128  ft'.  ;  in  Frincdon  Mi  v.  for  April,  1860, 
pp.  335  If.,  and  revised  edition  of  Unmans  (1864),  pp.  279-281 
Archibald  Alex.  Hodge  (Alleghany),  Outlines  of  The<ilogy, 
New  York,  1860,  chap,  xvi.,  pp.  230-246.  R.  W.  Landis,  sev- 
eral aitioles  in  the  Danville  Review,  tiom  Sept  1861  to  Dec. 
1862.  Shedd,  History  of  Christian  Doeirine  (18G3),  ii.  152  Ii'. 
(and  essay  on  Original  Sin,  in  his  "  Discourses  and  Essays,' 
pp.  21S-27I).  Sam.  J.  Baird,  The  First  Adam  and  Ihe  Stamd. 
The  Eiohiin  Revealed  in  Ihe  Creation  and  Redemption  of  Man, 
Philad.,  1860,  pp.  U-50,  305  ff.,  410  ff.,  174  tf.  (i.  P.  Eisheb, 
The  Augustinian  and  the  Federal  Theories  of  Original  bin 
compared,  in  the  JVew  Englander  for  1868,  pp.  468  n. — P.  S.J 

1.  On  the  internal  connection  of  the  section,  aa 
well  as  its  organic  relations  to  what  precedes  and 
follows,  compare  the  inscription  and  the  introductory 
foundation  of  the  Exe:t.  Noten. 

[2.  Historical  Statemekts  on  the  differeki  i 
TiiKURiES  OF  Original  JSjn  and  Imputation. — The 
Apostle  clearly  teaches,  and  our  religious  experience  | 
daily  confirms,  the  fact  of  the  universal  dominion  of 
sin  and  death  over  the  human  race,  which  dominion 
goes  back  in  unbroken  line  to  our  first  parents ; 
as,  on  the  other  hand,  the  power  and  principle  of 
righteousness  and  life  go  back  to  Jesus  Christ,  the 
.second  Adam.  Sin  existed  before  Christianity,  as 
disease  existed  before  the  science  and  art  of  heal- 
ing ;  and,  however  explained,  the  stubborn,  terrible 
fact  remains.  It  is  all-important,  as  we  stated  in  the 
introductory  remarks,  to  distinguish  clearly  between 
the  fact  itself  and  the  dift'erent  modes  of  explana- 
tion, or  between  the  primitive  truths  of  the  Bible 
and  the  after-thoughts  of  human  philosophy  and  the- 
ology. Here  lies  the  reason  why  Christian  men, 
holding  very  divergent  views  on  the  why  and  where- 
fore, or  tlie  rationale  of  Scripture  truths,  may  yet 
in  their  inmost  heart  and  religious  experience  be 
agreed.  The  commentators  have  so  far  dwelt  main- 
ly on  the  7icgative  clause  of  Paul's  parallelism,  viz., 
the  propagation  of  sin  and  death  from  Adam;  but  he 
lays  the  chief  stress  upon  the  positive  clause,  the 
antitype,  and  the  life-union  of  the  justified  believer 
with  Christ,  which  prepares  the  way  for  chap.  vi. 

Tlie  following  are  the  principal  theories  on  this 
sul3J^rt«Y_ 

C(l.)/rhe  PA.yTHi^T'iTTr  ^v<^  Ki-^rFssTTARTAN  thcoty 
regards  sin  as  an  essential  attribute  (alTnTilatiun)  t>f 
the  finite,  and  a  necessary  stage  in  the  development 
of  character ;  it  consequently  destroys  the  radical 
antagonism  between  good  and  evil,  and  places  itself 
outside  of  the  Christian  system.  ItYJiere  there  is  no 
^^1  ''",  fiber"  i=iH£!.^om  for  redemption. 

(2.)  The  .P^lag7a>;  heresy  denies  original  sin, 
and  resolves  tlie^^felTof  Adam  into  an  isolated  and 
comparatively  trivial  childish  act  of  disobedience, 
which  indeed  set  a  bad  example,  but  left  his  charac- 
ter and  moral  faculties  essentially  unimpaired,  so 
that  every  child  is  born  into  the  world  as  innocent 
and  perfect,  though  as  fallible,  as  Adam  was  created. 
It  offers  no  explanation  of  the  undeniable  fact  of 
the  nniversid  dominion  of  sin,  which  embraces  every 
human  being  with  the  one  solitary  exception  of  Jesua 
of  Xazareth.  It  rests  on  an  atomistic  anthropology 
and  hamartiology,  and  is  as  anti-scripturul  as  the  op- 
posite extreme  of  pantheism.  Sociiiianism.  Unita- 
.uanisnLajidRatJ0jialidi^^  sin 

atid  guiTTintTTeproper  sense"  of  the  teiinr~' 

(3.)  The  assumption  of  a  jrk-Aivamic  fall  of 
.all  men,  either  in  time — i.  e.,  in  astatlTol  individual 
preexIstence~arTlre-8«ul  prior  to  its  connection  with 


192 


THE   EPISTLE   OF   PAUL   TO   THE   ROMANS. 


the  body  (as  Origen  held  it),  or  timeless  and  tran- 
Bcende.ital  (so  Dr.  Jul.  Miiller :  ein  ansscrzeitlic/ter 
Urzustand  und  b'rfalJ).  Tliis  is  a  mere  hypothesis, 
without  support  in  human  consciousness,  and  incon- 
sistent with  the  plain  sense  of  Rom.  v.  12,  which,  in 
barnioiiy  witii  Gen.  iii.,  derives  sin  from  the  one  his- 
torirp4^Aiiani. 

/fT^riio  AcGUSTixiAX  or  HEAMSTic  theory  of  a 
reiff'iinTu^li  impcisonal  and  UllUUnsuiuiiy  |jai'iiL'ii)a- 
tion  of  the  whole  human  race  in  the  fall  of  Adam, 
as  their  natural  head,  wlio  by  his  individual  trans- 
gression sitialed  the  generic  human  nature,  and 
transmitted  it  in  tliis  corrupt  and  guilty  state  to  his 
descendants  hy  physical  generation.  As  an  individ- 
ual act,  Adam's  sin  and  guilt  was  his  own  exclusive- 
ly, and  is  not  transferable  to  any  otiier  individual ; 
but  as  the  act  of  mankind  in  their  collective,  undis- 
tributed, and  unindividualized  form  of  existence,  it 
was,  virtually  or  potentially,  the  act  of  all  who  were 
gerniiually  or  seminally  contained  in  their  first  pa- 
rent, us  Levi  was  in  the  loins  of  Abraham  (ilcb.  vii. 
9,  10).  Persona  corrumjtit  naturain,  natura  cor- 
riimpit  personam.  Li  other  words :  Adam's  indi- 
Tidual  transgression  residted  in  a  sinful  nature ; 
while,  in  the  case  of  his  descendants,  the  sinful  na- 
ture or  depraved  will  results  in  individual  transgres- 
Bions.  See  tlie  passages  from  Augustine  quoted  on 
p.  178,  third  foot-note.  His  view  rests  on  his  deep 
religious  experience  and  his  interpretation  of  Rom. 
v.,  but  it  presupposes,  as  a  necessary  prerequisite, 
the  original  organic  unity  of  the  human  race,  a  dis- 
tinction between  person  and  nature  (which  must  be 
njade  also  in  the  doctrine  of  the  Trinity  and  the  In- 
carmition),  and  may  be  philosophically  supported  by 
the  Platonico-Aristotelian  realism  concerning  the 
doctrine  of  the  general  conceptions,  as  the  original 
types  of  individual  things. 

TMjis  realistic  view  uf  the  fall  of  the  race  in  Adam 
bccaine  tlic  ortlioilox  aoctrme  ot  tiicLaim't.'liuit'ft. 

chODlmeii,  Anselm, 
iiina 


IL   W!bi  dL'feijileil   l)y  the^ 
I'e t er  ilie  Lomnard,  xUuuiaZ! 


a  material  modification  of  Augustine's  conception  of 
original  sin  and  guilt,  which  scholastic  theology  made 
to  consist  only  in  the  loss  of  original  righteousness ; 
■viewing  it  more  as  a  wgatiie  state  of  j)rivation  than 
as  positive  corruption).  It  was  even  more  earnestly 
and  vigorously  maintained  by  the  Reformers,  botli 
Lutheran  and  Calvinistic  (who  advocated  afresh  the 
Augustinian  view  of  hereditary  sin  and  guilt  in  all 
its  severity).  The  various  writings  of  Luther,  Me- 
lanchthon,  Calvin,  and  tlie  symbolical  books  of  the 
sixteenth  century,  abound  with  quotations  and  remi- 
niscences from  Augustine  on  the  doctrines  of  Sin 
and  Grace. 

P"t    ffi*'""     *'■? Aajyistinian     aystqm    different 

views  of  iiitpntdtin'i  were  developed,   especially  \\\ 

\S<i.)yiiajtii(">'-"",  i,;"'"fJia/e  and  mrduttc*  con- 
joincd  and  insejiarable.  Tins  makesJ  llni  JJirtlt  of 
Adam's  first  sin  imputed,  an<l  the  guilt  of  inherent 
depraviry  inseparable  and  conditional  to  one  another. 
Both  kinds  of  imi)utation  are  held  in  fact  ;  but  tiie 
distinction  was  not  made  before  the  seventeenth 
eentury.      Participation  is  assumed  as  the   ground 

•  [The  terminology  immediate  or  nnlrci-rleni,  nnd  »n<(/i- 
aU  or  cntifcquriii  irapufntlon,  is  tmccl  l>y  Turrotiii  (Instil., 
Pars  I.  p.  556,  Ix)cuh  IX.  do  pcooato,  Qii.  X.)  to  Joshua  de 
la  riac"!,  of  .Sauiiiure  nSM-lfiS')),  who  was  charj^rd  with  in- 
voDlinc  it  to  ov:\do  the  fnrcc  of  the  Hj-nodical  decision  of 
Charci  ton,  1015.  Aumistino  and  the  "Reformers  did  not 
tiKe  it,  and  benco  there  lia«  been  8omu  diHputo  as  to  the  iide 
on  which  to  place  them.] 


of  imputation.  Native  corruption  is  itself  sin,  and 
likewise  punishmeiit  for  guilt  incurred  in  Adara'e 
sin.  Hereditary  guilt  coexists  with  hereditary  sin: 
man  is  condemned,  both  on  account  of  the  act  of 
disobedience  which  he  connnitted  in  the  loins  of 
Adam,  and  for  hereditary  depravity. 

Here  we  must  distinguish  again  a  minor  differ- 
ence relating  to  the  order  of  the  two  kinds  of  im 
putation : 

{aa.)  Some  put  immediate  imputation  bifore  m» 
diate  in  the  order  of  things.  So  Augustine  and 
his  strict  followers  in  the  Catholic  Cinn-ch,  and 
the  Calvinists  of  the  Montauban  school,  David  Pa- 
rens, Andrew  Rivet,*  the  elder  Turretin,f  and  Hei- 
degger;  ^ — with  this  difference,  that  the  Dutch  and 
French  Calvinists  of  the  seventeenth  century  com- 
bined, with  the  Augustinian  theory  of  participation, 
the  federal  theory  of  representation  (see  below,  No. 
5) ;  and,  while  still  holding  to  both  kinds  of  impu- 
tation, t.'icy  laid  the  chief  stress  upon  immediate  im- 
putation— thus  preparing  the  way  lor  exclusive  im- 
mediate imputationism. 

(66.)  Others  give  mediate  imputation,  or  the  im- 
putation of  inherent  depravity,  the  logical  priority, 
so  that  Adam's  sin  is  imputed  to  us  only  because  it 
becomes  our  own  by  propagation  (to  which  some 
add,  by  actual  transgression).  Here  belong,  in  ^11 
probability,  Anselm  among  the  schoolmen, g  Calvin,| 

*  ■[In  opposition  to  Placseus,  and  in  vindicntion  of  the 
decree  of  the  Synod  of  Ch:irenton,  the  diytinKuishcd  Pro- 
fessor Kivct,  of  Lcydcn,  made  a  collpction  of  piussajies  on 
im))ut:ition  from  the  Reformed  and  Luthuian  Confessions, 
and  prominent  divines,  as  Cidvin,  Beza,  liullin;;er,  Wolf- 
eans  Musculus,  Viret,  Bucanus,  Peter  Martyr,  Wolleb, 
Whittaker,  Davenant,  Zanchius,  Olevianus,  Ursinus,  Pa- 
rous, I'lswtor,  L.  Crocius,  Melanchthon,  Chemnitz,  iluTl- 
nius,  and  many  others  (including;  also  Roman  Catholics). 
But  these  testimonies  arc  to  a  preat  extent  pcneral,  and 
make  no  distinction  bctv»-een  immediate  and  mediate  impu- 
tation. The  collection  of  Kivct  is  translated  in  part  in  the 
Pri melon  Riview,  vol.  xi.  (183!t>,  pp.  55:i-o79.] 

f  ['I'uiTetin  (1.  c.  Pars  1.  p.  557)  defines  imi)utation  thus: 
"  Tiiipiialio  vii  est  HEs  auknx,  vel  pkopuije.  AHquando 
inipiitaliir  nnbis  ill  quod  tios'rum  est  prrsonulili  r,  qun  xensu 
Dtus  impufiil  picciila  piccaloiibun,  quos  pruptir  propria 
criminii  puiiit,  ft  in  bonis  dicilur  ziilui  Phmcir  illi  impula- 
Itis  ad  jit.ili'iam  (Ps.  cvi.  3l)  ;  aliquando  impnlatiir  id  quod 
est  EXTKA  xo.s,  ni'c  a  niibis  -st  prm.-'Hliim,  quomodo  Justilia 
Christi  dicilur  nobis  impulari,  et  pecaila  tioftnt  ipsi  impu- 
laulur,  licet  nee  ipse  pcccatum  in  se  Jiab<at,  tiec  nos  justi- 
tiam."] 

*  [The  Formula  consfnaus  ITrlvelicn,  a  stl'onely  partisan 
theolofrical  Confession,  drawn  up  in  1675  l>y  MeidisTRCr  ol 
Zurich,  at  the  solicitation  of  TurVetin  of  Geneva,  and  Gem* 
ler  of  Ilascl,  in  opposition  partly  to  the  mediate  imputa- 
tionism of  La  Place,  asserts  that  the  impulnlio  culpm  is  not 
the  consequence,  but  the  cause  of  the  ix-opng.dio  vitiosiUi' 
lis,  or  the  corrtipHo  hmdHaria,  and  cotidemns  the  doctrine 
of  those  who  "sub  iinpulaliouis  nicdialie  ft  consequenlil 
vomiiif,  von  iiiiputatioiicin  duntaxal  primi  prrcali  tollunt, 
Sfd  hereditariir  rliain  corrupt ionis  assrrlionrm  ffrovi pi'riculo 
obiiciunt."  Arts.  x.-xii.  (in  Xiemeyer's  C'llfc'.,  p.  733). 
The  same  Confffsion  teaches  also  a  limited  atonement,  and 
verbal,  even  punetual  inspiration;  but  it  soon  Install  an- 
thnrity.  Ebrard  {Kirch' ti-  utul  D'ffnirni/f.'rh.clilr-,  iii.  p. 
55ti)  calls  it,  rather  too  severely,  the  "  ridiculous  aftcr-birOx 
of  a  symbolical  book."] 

§  [.\nselm  (De  cone,  virg.,  c.  7)  says  wo  ore  not  con- 
demned because  "we  ourselves  sinned  iti  Adam,  as  we  did 
not  yet  exim,  but  because  we  were  to  descend  from  him 
(.>■«(/  quia  lie  illo  fuhiri  (ramtis)."] 

n  iCalvin,  on  Itoni.  v.  17  :  "  We  are  condemned  for  the 
sin  of  Adam  not  bv  imputation  alone,  as  if  tl.e  ]iuni.'<hment 
of  the  sin  of  another  were  exacted  of  uw  (piccato  Ailm  iion 
p<r  solum  impo.'aliioinn  dnmnonmr,  ac^i  olieni  p-rcnti  ex- 
igrreliir  n  nobi.i  pa:n-i\  but  we  bear  its  punishment  because 
wo  arc  Kuilty  of  the  sin  also  {qiiin  et  culpit  sumus  rei),  in  so 
far  as  our  nature,  vitiated  in  him,  is  held  bound  with  the 
(fuilt  of  iniijuity  before  God  {quulfiius  sriliret  et  nilura 
nostra  i^H  into  vitialii  iniquilatis  rratu  obstriiujiiur  apnd 
Deiim)."  lie  then  ifoen  on  to  say,  that  we  an-  In  a  dinei^ 
ent  manner  rentored  to  salvation  by  the  ritrhtennsness  of 
Clirist,  vis.,  not  bucauso  it  is  in  ua,  but  it  ia  freely  giveu  t» 


CHAPTER   V.    12-21. 


193 


aiid  Bullinger  among  the  iieformers ;  *  and,  more 
clearly  and  expressly,  Stapfer  and  President  Ed- 
wards,! who  are  often  inaccurately  quoted  as  medi- 
ate imputationists ;  also  the  orthodox  Lutherans  of 
the  seventeenth  century. |  It  is  certain  that  we 
have  all  to  bear  the  con>iequevces  of  Aiiani's  sin, 
and  this  sin  is  therefore  the  cause  of  our  native  cor- 
ruption ;  but  it  is  not  our  personal  gidlt  independ- 
ently of  this  corruption,  and  our  assent  to  it. 

(b.)  Mi'iiafe  or  consequent  imputation  makes  in- 
herent depravity  derived  from  Adam,  and  this  alone, 
the  ground  of  condemnation.  "  Viiiositas  prcecedit 
imputaiionem."  So  the  Reformed  school  of  Saumur, 
in  France,  especially  Joshua  Placaeus  (La  Place),  who 
denied  that  the  imputation  of  Adam's  sin  was  prior 
to,  and  independent  of,  inherent  depravity,  but  who 
claimed  to  be  in  full  harmony  with  the  teaching  of 
Calvin  on  tliis  subject.  This  view,  "  so  far  as  it  re- 
Btricts  the  nature  of  original  sin  to  the  mere  heredi- 
tary corruption  of  Adam's  posterity,  excluding  the 
imputation  of  the  first  sin  by  which  he  fell,"  was 
condemned  by  the  French  Reformed  Synod  at  Cha- 
renton,  near  Paris,  in  1045,  yet  without  mentioning 
the  name  of  Placajus,  who  contended  that  he  was 
not  touched  by  this  decree,  since  he  admitted  a  me- 
diate imputation  of  Adam's  sin,  consequent  and  de- 
pendent on  corruption. 

(c.)  Immediate  or  antecedent  imputation  as  op- 
posed to  mediate  imputation,  makes,  on  purely  legal 
grounds,  the  sin  of  Adam,  as  the  sin  of  the  federal 

us  by  gTat;utnus  imputation  {gratuitam  jus/ilia  imputa- 
tinnem).  Ebrard  (Dogmalik,  i.,  p.  512  f.)  and  Hodge  (on 
Romans,  p.  L';)4)  represent  Calvin  as  a.  mediate  imputntion- 
ist ;  the  former  assenting,  the  latter  disscntii  g.  Calvin 
and  the  Reforrafid  Confessions  draw  no  line  of  demarcation 
between  original  sin  impiited  and  originiil  sii  inherent. 
Calvin  always  guards  against  the  supposition  that  we  aie 
condemned  by  an  arbitrary  imputation  of  a  foreign  act 
personal  to  Adam.] 

♦  [Ebrard  says,  1.  c.  i.  p.  513  :  "  Bullinger  knows  of  such 
a  reatitf  only  which  takes  place  in  consequence  of  the  cor- 
ruptio  or  v.liostia!:,  but  not  of  a  ?•(■<!/«.-;  which  is  the  canxc 
of  the  innate  viliosilas.  This  would  be  likewise  mediate 
imputation  only.  But  compare  the  passages  of  Bullinger 
quoted  by  Rivet,  1.  c] 

t  [The  aim  of  Edwards,  in  his  treatise  on  Original  Sin, 
written  against  the  Arminian,  Dr.  John  Taylor,  of  Nor- 
wich, was  to  show  that  it  is  no  absiu-d  or  impossible  thing 
for  "the  race  of  mankind  iriily  to  partake  of  thi-  ain  of  the 
first  apostasy,  so  that  this,  in  reality  and  propriety,  shall 
become  iftc.ir  sin ;  and  therefore  the  sin  of  the  apostasy  is 
not  theirs  merely  because  God  imputes  it  to  them,  but  it  is 
truly  and  properly  theirs  (by  virtue  of  a  real  union  between 
the  root  and  the  branches  of  mankind,  established  by  the 
Author  of  the  universe),  and  on  that  ground  God  imputes 
it  to  them"  (Workx,  ii.  p.  559).  He  says,  moreover,  that 
the  artruments  which  prove  the  depravity  of  nature,  estab- 
lish also  the  imputation  of  A4am's  first  sin,  and  that  both 
are  included  in  the  usual  conception  of  original  sin,  '_'  The 
first  depravity  of  heart,  and  the  imputation  of  that  sin  [of 
Adam],  are  both  the  consequences  of  that  established  union 
[between  .Adam  and  his  posterityl ;  but  yet  in  such  order, 
that  the  evil  disposition  is  Jiml,  and  the  charge  of  guilt  <:on- 
siquint,  as  it  was  in  the  case  of  Adam  himself"  (p.  544). 
Then,  ii  a  foot-note,  he  quotes  with  approbation  a  long 
extract  from  Stapfer's  TlvnlogUi  Po'cmira,  to  the  effect  that 
the  mediate  and  the  immediate  imputation  are  inseparable, 
and  that  one  should  never  be  considered  without  the  other. 
Dr.  Shedd,  His'ory  of  CJin'stion  Doctrine,  ii.  p.  163,  seems 
to  hold  the  same  view.  Edwards  spe:iks,  however,  of  im- 
putation only  incidentally  ;  his  main  object  was  to  defend 
the  doctrine  of  native  depravity  by  the  theoiy  of  identity; 
J.  c,  a  divinely  constituted  oneness  of  Adam  and  his  r:ice, 
by  which  his  posterity  should  be  bom  in  his  moral  image, 
Whether  good  or  bad,  according  to  the  law  that  like  begets 
like.] 

X  [The  Lutherans  held  that  the  imputatio  is  immediata  : 
in  quantum  exstilimus  adhuc  in  Adamo  (quia  Adam  rrprx- 
•  seniativc  fait  totum  ginus  liumauunt) ;  mediata  :  mediantc 
pfccalo  originali  inhmrenle,  in  quanlum  in  propriis  prrsn- 
nis  (t  individualiter  coiisidcramur.  The  first  is  mediated 
through  the  second,  ("omp.  Luthardt,  Compendium  der 
Dogmatik,  p.  114  (2d  ei.  1866).] 
18 


head  of  the  race,  the  only  and  exclusive  gropnd  of 
condemnation  inde[)endently  of,  and  prior  to,  nativa 
depravity  and  personal  transgression  ;  so  that  he- 
reditary guilt  precedes  hereditary  sin,  and  not  vic^ 
versd.  This  exclusive  immediate  imputationism  is 
held  by  Calvinists  of  the  supralapsarian  and  federal 
school,  and  gives  up  the  Augustinian  ground  of  par- 
ticipation. See  below,  No.  (5.)  (6).  In  antagonism 
to  this  view,  the  New  School  theology  of  New  Eug. 
land  has  departed  to  the  opposite  extreme  of  reject- 
in^jiii^utation  under  any  form.     (See  No.  6.) 

77.nJ^Tlip  fiilfirr^t  thcorv  of  a  vicarjous  represen- 
tatumol'  maiikind  bv  Adam,  in  virtue  Gt  a  C'»^^eiui  n  t 
made  with  hnn.  It  arose  in  Holland  in  the  seven- 
teenth century,  simultaneously  with  the  development 
of  representative  federal  government,  and  gained 
advocates  among  Calvinistic  or  Presbyterian  divines 
in  France,  England,  Scotland,  and  the  United  States. 
It  supposes  a  (one-sided,  f>ov67Tliv()ov)  contract  or 
covenant  of  the  sovereign  Creator  with  the  first 
man,  called  the  covenant  of  works  (foediis  operum, 
fcedus  naturcB),  as  distinct  from  the  covenant  of 
grace  {foedus  c/ratiee),  to  the  effect  that  Adam  should 
stand  a  moral  probation  on  behalf  of  all  his  de- 
scendants, so  that  his  act  of  obedience  or  disobedi- 
ence, with  all  its  consequences,  should  be  jtidicially 
imputed  to  them,  or  accounted  theirs  in  law.  Adam's 
position  is  compared  to  the  I'elation  of  a  representa- 
tive to  ]iis_constituents,  or  rather  of  a  guardian  to 
his  wards,»3ince  in  this  case  the  wards  were  not  con- 
sulted, and  did  not  even  exist  at  tlie  time  of  his 
appointment^.-  The  transaction  must  be  resolved  at 
last  into  the  sovereign  pleasure  of  God.* 

Here  again  we  must  .distinguish  two  schools  : 
(rt.)  Tlie  AuguHlino-federal  school  is  a  combina- 
tion, and  superadds  the  federal  scheme  on  the  real- 
istic basis  of  participation,  so  that  imputation  is 
made  to  rest  on  moral  as  well  as  legal  grounds. 
This  was  the  view  of  the  founders  and  chief  advo- 
cates of  the  federal  theory,  Cocceius  (originally  John 
Koch,  or  Cook,  born  at  Bremen,  1603,  died  as  pro- 
fessor at  Leyden,  1G69),  Burmann,  "Witsius,  and  is 
taught  by  the  Westminster  standards,!  and  even  in 
the  Consensus  Helveticus,  although  in  this  the  Au- 
gustinian idea  of  participation  is  almost  absorbed  by 
the  idea  of  the  covenant. | 

(&.)  The  pure!)/  federal  school  (from  nominal- 
istic  premises,  according  to  which  the  general  con- 
ceptions are  mere  names,  not  things,  subjective  ab- 
stractions, not  objective  realities)  denies  the  Adamic 
unity  of  the  race  in  the  realistic  sense,  consequently 
also  all  participation  of  Adam's  descendants  in  the 

*  [See  the  different  definitions  of  this  foedus  npn-itm 
from  the  writings  of  Cocceius,  'Witsius,  Heidegger,  &c.,  in 
Heppc's  Dogmalik,  pp.  204  ff.  It  is  called /«-/»«  /xovo- 
jrAeupov,  quia  uiiii'S  tantum  partis  dii^pnsiHone  et  pro- 
missiour  constat,  as  distinct  from  a,  foedus  muluiim  or  Si- 
Trkevpov.  There  is  no  Scripture  proof  whatever  for  such 
a  primal  covenant.  The  solitary  passage  quoted,  Hosea  vi. 
7:  "For  they"  (Ephraim  and  Judah)  "like  men"  (not, 
"  like  Adam")  "  have  transcrressed  the  covenant,"  refers  to 
the  Mosaic  covenant.  Even  Turretin  (lusl.  thcol.  ilen'ltlicie. 
Pars  I.  p.  519,  of  the  Edinb.  and  N.  Y.  ed.,  1S47)  admits 
that  it  is  inconclu.sive,  and  may  be  explained  of  the  incon- 
stancy of  men,  "  ut  dicantur  trausgressi  foedus  sicul  homi- 
lies facere  soJent,  qui  sua  natura  vani,  levi'sque  sunt  et 
Mein  siepc  fallunt."]  „.,„.,.      „ 

t  [On  the  Westminster  divines,  see  Baird,  Etohim  Rn- 
veajrd,  pp.  39  ff.,  and  especially  the  learned  articles  of  Dr. 
Landis  in  the  Da7willr  R-vinv  for  18G1-6C.] 

t  [Art.  X. ;  "  Sicut  Dens  foedu^typerum  cum  Adamo  inivil 
non  tantum  pro  ipso,  sed  ctiam  in  ipso,  ut  capitb  I't  stirfe, 
cum  toto  genrre  humnnn,  .  .  .  Ha  Adamus  Iristi  prolopsu, 
non  s-if>i  duntaxat  srd  loli  eliam  humano  generi,  .  .  .  bona 
in  fccleri'  )iromissa  prrdidi>."  Comp.  also  the  passage* 
quoted  by  Heppe,  1.  c.  pp.  228  f.l 


194 


TEE   EPISTLE   OF   PAUL   TO   THE   ROMANS. 


»ct  of  the  primal  apostasy ;  yet  it  holds  that,  by 
virtue  of  his  federal  headship  on  tiie  ground  of  a 
sovereign  arrangement,  his  sin  and  guilt  are  justly, 
direetly,  and  immediately  imputed  to  them.  The 
impuiJiiion  of  Adam's  sin,  anil  in  tl>e  same  way  also 
the  imputation  of  Christ's  righteousness  or  justifica- 
tion, is  thus  made  a  |)urely  forensic  process,  which 
affects  our  legal  relation,  but  by  no  means  our  moral 
character. 

This  forensic  theory  of  imputation,  which  ex- 
eludes  participation  in  Adam's  sin,  dates  from  the 
time  of  Turretin,  in  the  latter  part  of  the  seven- 
teenth century,*  and  is  upheld  by  a  number  of  Cal- 
vinisiic  divines  in  England  and  America,  but  has  no 
advocate  of  note,  as  far  as  I  know,  among  modern 
Continental  divines.f 

Legal  rejiresentation  seemed  to  offer  an  easier 
vindication  of  Divine  justice  tlian  the  Augustinian 


♦  [Turretin,  Uke  IIcidoKfror,  holds  indeed  to  a  double  unity 
of  tlie  racf  with  Adam,  a  natural  or  real,  and  a  feileral  or 
forena  c,  but  he  evidently  liivi*  the  chief  stress  upon  the 
latter,  and  prepares  tlie  way  for  fjiviiii?  up  the  former.  He 
Bays  (in  his  Iiwlilu'es,  first  published  in  16S8,  Pars  1.  p.  537, 
Qu.  XI.):  "  A' lam  us  duplici  vincuOi  nobiscum  jundux  <«'.• 
(1.)  Natural!,  qiuilenn.i  pnter  is',  el  nos  ijiis  Jilii ;  {'!.)  Po- 
litico «c  FOEESSI,  qiMlcnux  /tiit  priiwps  cl  caput  re//rese»- 
Uilivum  liitius  generis  hwnaiii.  t'unilumenluin  ergo  iiiijni- 
taliimis  non  est  tnnlum  comntutiio  nnturtilix,  qme  nobis  cum 
Adiimo  intircedit — nlins  omnin  ijisius  p''rnilit  drb'.reiit  nobis 
impu'ari — sed  prjecipuk  .mobalis  el  fceoeralis,  per  quttm 
fitclum  est,  tU  Deus  cum  illo,  u'  cum  noslro  capid ,  foetus 
pepifjfril.     UmU  Adamus  se  hnbiiil  in  illo  picctlo,  tion  ut 

FEBSONA  PRIVATA,  Sed  ut  PVBMCA  el  EEPRESENT.VTIV.^  quiB 
OTKwe?  SUO.<  posleron  in  uelinite  ill'  rejirrrspnliuiil,  cujus  pra- 
inde  demerilum  ad  nmnrs  pertiiic'."  In  Qu.  XII.  he  quotes 
with  approbation  from  Auijustine,  "  in  illi>  uno  mu'ti  unus 
hom'ieranl,"  adding,  by  wayofe.xplamtion,  "  iinilat"  non  spr- 
eiji/'dvel  numerica,  sra  parlim  unitate  orioinis,  quia  ojnuex 
ex  uno  sunt  sanguine,  partim  cxiTArE  REPBiESEXTATiONirt, 

?ui»i  iinus  omnium  personam  repiie<entab'it,  ex  iii<lini;  D  i." 
nQu.  XVI.,  pp.  558  f.,  he  establishes  bis  view  from  Horn.  v. 
12-14.  He  savs  "f  irdvrei  rnxaprov  coiTectly,  that  it  cannot 
mean  the  habit  of  sin,  nor  inherent  corruption,  bal  actual 
sin  committed  in  the  i>:i.At  { pec  at um  utiqwKl  actuate,  iilque 
jirm'erilum),  which  can  bo  ni  other  than  the  sin  of  Adam 
nie\({qu'd  n'lu  p'ifesi  aliwt  e<se,  quitm  ip<um  Alami  pecra- 
ium);  but  then  he  turns  it  into  the  mcaninp  of  representative 
sinning:  ^^  Ergo  eo  /icccunle  crnsentcr  el  ipsi  pec-asse." 
He  proves  this  from  the  analojry  of  Christ  :  "In  Chrisln 
jwili  const ituimur  per  justiliir  impittatinnem  :  ergo  el  /ler- 
talores  in  Adumo  per  prcciti  ipsiu<  impu'a'iimeiu."  This 
is  precisely  th"  exe;{e.sis  of  Dr.  Hod?e,  except  that  Turre- 
tin translates  i(j>'  if,  with  Au^rustin,  in  quo  (viz.,  Adamo), 
while  Hod;;e,  more  correct -y,  takes  it  as  a  conjunetion.] 

t  [Dr.-i.  Itidgelv,  Doddridiro,  Watts,  and  Cunniniihnm, 
of  Scotland  (in  lii.s'/7-y''<./c(/  Tlno'ogi/,  Edmb.,  ISli.i,  vol.  i., 
p.  515,  and  in  hiH  R' formers  and  the  Tlnotogi/  if  tlv  R  fn- 
malion,  Uilinb.,  1862,  pp.  .'(71  ft'.),  are  counti'd  on  this  Hide. 
Dr.  Hoilge,  of  Princeton,  is  tl  o  ablest  advocito  of  imm";- 
diate  forensic  imputationism.  He  stales  it  (on  Romans, 
p.  279)  as  follows:  "The  doctrine  of  impntatijii  is  clearly 
tanifht  in  this  passa-.?!-  (Rom.  v.).  This  doetrino  docs  not 
Include  the  idea  of  a  mysterious  identity  i>f  Adnm  and 
his  race,  nor  that  of  a  transfer  of  the  moral  turjiilude  of 
his  sin  to  his  descendants.  It  does  not  teao.li  that  his 
otfeiico  was  personally  or  properly  the  sin  of  all  men,  or 
that  his  act  was,  in  any  invt'torious  sen  e,  the  act  of  his 
posterity.  Neither  does  it  implv,  in  referenec  to  the  riuhi- 
eoasuess  of  Clirlst,  that  His  richleoasne-s  l)ceomes  person- 
ally and  inherently  ours,  or  that  His  momi  excellence  is  in 
any  way  transforre<l  from  Ilitn  to  believers.  The  sin  of 
Aiinm,  therefore,  i.s  no  jrround  to  us  of  remorse  ;  and  the 
rlffbleousness  of  Chri-t  is  lei  grrjiMid  of  solf-oomplacelicy  in 
tlfose  to  whom  it  is  Imputed.  This  doctrine  merely  teaches 
that.  In  virtue  of  the  uni>>n,  representative  ami  natural, 
between  .\dam  and  his  posterity,  bis  sin  i->  the  ground  of 
their  condemnation — that  ih,  of  their  subjection  to  penal 
tvlls  -iind  that,  in  virtue  of  the  u  lion  between  Christ  and  i 
His  \  eopln.  His  riKhtf ousne^s  Is  the  (jround  of  their  justili- 
eation.  Thi-  doctrine  is  taueht  almost  m  so  many  wonls  in  I 
vors.  \i,  15-19.  It  Is  BO  clearly  stated,  so  often  repeated  or  | 
BBsamed,  and  ho  formally  provoii,  th.it  very  few  rommrnta- 
tors  of  any  clas^i  fail  to  acUnowledne,  in  one  form  or  an-  i 
other,  that  it  is  the  doetrine  of  the  AposHo."  The  l:u)t  is 
a  mi-t'ike,  as  wo  have  shown  in  the  Ex^g.  Notes.  Hr. 
Hodge's  hoBtillty  to  the  realistic  Augustinian   view  pro-  J 


view.*  It  involves,  undoubtedly,  an  element  of 
truth,  but,  if  detached  from  the  idea  of  moral  par« 
ticipation,  it  resolves  itself  into  a  mere  legal  fiction, 
and  greatly  enhances  the  dillicuity  of  the  problem 
by  removing  the  best  reason  for  imputation.  For 
how  can  an  infinitely  just  and  holy  (iod  punish 
countless  millions  of  human  beings  simply  and  sole- 
ly for  the  sin  of  another,  in  which  they  had  no  part 
whatever?  The  passage,  Ezek.  xviii.  1—1,  where 
God  rebukes  the  Israelites  for  using  the  proverb  oi 
the  sour  grapes,  which  Julian  of  Eclanum  and  hia 
sympathizers  have  quoted  ad  nnunean  against  the 
Augustinian  theory,  returns  here  with  double  force. 
The  analogy  of  forensic  justification  is  not  to  the 
point,  for  the  righteousness  of  Christ  is  not  imputed 
to  the  impenitent  sinner,  but  only  on  tlie  subjective 
condition  of  faith,  by  which  Christ  is  apprehended 
and  made  our  own.  Justification  prcsn])poses  re- 
generation, or  an  action  of  the  Holy  Si)irit,  by  which 
He  creates  repentance  of  our  sins  and  trust  in  Jesus 
Christ,  and  makes  us  one  with  Him.  By  "  being  in 
Christ "  is  meant,  not  merely  a  nominal,  putative,  or 
constructive  relation,  but  a  real,  substantial  union  ; 
so  also  om-  "  being  in  Adam,"  by  which  the  other 
relation  is  illustrated,  is  real  and  vital.  This  anal- 
ogy, therefore,  leads  to  the  opposite  conclusion,  that 
moral  participation,  either  potential  or  persoiuU,  or 
both,  must  be  the  ground  of  the  imputation  of. 
Adam's  sin. 

(Jfi^^  The  Now  School  Calvinists  of  New  England 
(since  the  days  of  the  younger  Edwards),  in  radical 
0])position  to  Princeton,  reject  imputation  altogetiier; 
but  maintain  that  the  sinfulness  of  the  descendants 
of  Adam  results  with  infallible  certaintt/  (though  not 
with  necessity)  from  his  transgression  ;  the  one  class 
holding  to  hereditary  depravity,  prior  to  sinful  choice, 
the  other  cla.ss  teaching  (with  I)r.  N.  W.  Taylor,  of 
New  Haven)  that  the  first  moral  choice  of  all  is  uni- 
versally sinful,  yet  with  the  power  of  contrary  choice. 
This  is  a  peculiar  modification  of  the  Pelagian  con- 
ception of  libcriim  arbUrium,  but  differs  from  it  in 
making  a  nice  distinction  between  natural  ability  and 
monil  inability. f 

Q^  The  semi-Pklaoian,  and  the  cognate  Armin- 
lAiC^U'ories  (of  wliich  the  forim'r,  since  the  fifth  cen- 
tury, has  gained  large  influence  in  the  Latin,  the  lat- 
ter, since  the  seventeenth  century,  in  a  considerable 
portion  of  the  Reformed  Churches,  and  was  adopted 
by  the  Wcsleyun  Methodists),  tlnuigh  by  no  means 
explicit  and  unifoi'in  on  this  point,  agree  in  that  they 
admit  the  Adamic  unity,  and  the  disastrous  cffecta 
of  the  primal  apostasy  upon  the  whole  posterity  of 
Adam,  but  regard  the  native  or  hereditary  corrup- 
tion in)t  properly  as  sin  and  guilt  exposing  us  to  just 
punishment,  hut  only  as  an  eril,  an  infirmity,  mala- 
dy, iitid  mislortune,  lor  which  tlie  most  benevolent 
God  j)rovi<lcd  a  sufficient  remedy  for  all.  Zwingli 
taught  a  similar  view,  and  distinguished  original  sin 
as  a  moral  defect  or  disease  (he  called  it,  in  the 
Swiss  dialect,  Brestiii)  from  sin  jjropcr.  Semi-Pela- 
gianism  hohls  a  medium  position  between  Pelagian- 

ceods,  I  think,  from  a  misunderstandinpr.  He  does  not  dis- 
lininiish  iK'twpeii  a  virtual  or  potential,  and  a  personal  or 
indiviiluiil  roexislcnoe  and  eofipency  of  the  race  in  Ad-tm. 
.\u:rustino  taught  the  finner  only  ;  the  latter  is  inn>os.';ibie 
and  absurd,  unless  wo  bold  it  in  the  form  of  preOxisteuco, 
which  Aumisline  expn'sslv  rejects.] 

•  [Wiitts,  as  quoted  by" Prof.  Fisher,  1.  c.  p.  5or>,  naively 
confesses  that  he  would  R'adlv  renounce  this  theory  if  h< 
could  find  anv  other  way  to  vindicate  Providence,  1 

•  [Coiiip.  Stuart  and  Itarnes  on  Rom.  v. ;  Prof.  Ooo.  P 
Kisher,  "The  Princeton  Rview  on  the  Theoloiry  of  Dr.  N. 
W.  Taylor,"  in  the  New  Eaglandir  for  April,  1808.] 


CHAPTER  V.    12-21. 


195 


ism  and  Augustinianism  ;  Arminianism  wavers  be- 
tween semi-Pelagianism  and  Calvinism  ;  both  may, 
according  to  the  elastic  nature  of  compromises,  lean 
now  more  to  the  one,  now  to  the  other  extreme ; 
employing  at  times  the  Augustinian  phraseology,  but 
putting,  after  all,  a  dift'erent  interpretation  upon  it. 

The  stationary  anthropology  and  hamartiology  of 
the  Greek  Church  occupies  a  similar  position,  but  it 
.  never  passed  through  the  mill  of  Western  contro- 
versies, and  remains  to  this  day  theologically  incom- 
plete. 

Most  evangelical  divines  of  the  present  day  are  di- 
vided between  the  Augustinian  or  realistic,  the  federal 
or  forensic,  and  the  Arminiau  theories,  or  they  look 
for  a  still  more  satisfactory  solution  of  the  difficult 
problem  by  a  future  Augustine,  who  may  be  able  to 
advance,  from  a  deeper  study  of  the  Scriptures,  the 
knowledge  of  the  Church,  and  reconcile  what  now 
seem  to  be  irreconcilable  contradictions.  It  should 
be  remembered  that  the  main  difficulty  lies  in  ih^  fact 
itself^ — tlie  undeniable,  stubborn,  terrible  fact — of  the 
universal  dominion  of  sin  and  death  over  the  entire 
race,  infants  as  well  as  full-grown  sinners.  No  sys- 
tem of  philosophy  has  ever  given  a  more  satisfactory 
explanation  than  the  great  divines  of  the  Church. 
Outside  of  the  Christian  redemption,  the  fall,  with 
its  moral  desolation  and  ruin,  remains  an  impenetra- 
ble mystery.  But  immediately  after  the  fall  appears, 
in  the  promise  of  the  serpent-bruiser,  the  second 
Adam,  and  throws  a  bright  ray  of  hope  into  the 
gloom  of  despair.  In  the  fulness  of  the  time,  accord- 
ing to  God's  own  counsel.  He  appeared  in  our  nature, 
to  repair  the  loss,  and  to  replace  the  temporary  reign 
of  sin  by  the  everlasting  reign  of  superabounding 
grace,  winch  never  could  have  been  revealed  in  all 
its  power  without  the  fall.*  The  person  and  work 
of  the  second  Adam  are  the  one  glorious  solution  of 
the  problem  of  the  first,  and  the  triumpiiant  vindi- 
cation of  Divine  justice  and  mercy.  This  is  the 
main  point  for  all  practical  purposes,  and  in  this,  at 
least,  ali  true  Christians  are  agreed. — P.  S.] 

3.  [In  Lange,  No.  2.]  Criticism  of  the  Auc/nn- 
tininn  doctri.ie  of  Sin  and  Grace.  Augustine,  in 
his  controversy  with  Pelagius,  has  undoubtedly  ex- 
pressed and  defended  the  Church's  sense  of  religious 
truth,  and  thereby  become  a  rich  source  of  blessing 
to  Western  Christendom.  It  cannot  be  denied, 
however,  that  the  theologico-dogmatical  expression 
of  his  sense  of  truth — especially  his  doctrine  of 
original  sin — far  transcends  the  Scrij^tural  bounds, 
and  has  done  harm  by  its  erroneous  features.  Au- 
gustine has  not  only  supported,  but  also  obstructed 
the  Reformation.  His  explanation  of  i<f  oi  in  ver. 
12,  which  has  obscured  the  exegesis  of  this  passage 
even  in  Meyer  (not  to  speak  of  Tholuck  and  Philip- 
pi),  is  of  itself  a  sufficient  testimony  of  this.  See 
the  Exeff.  Nptes.     It  sets  aside  the  formal  freedom 

*  [This  idea  has  found  familiar  expression  in  devotional 
lines  such  as  those  of  Watts  : 

"  In  Christ  the  tribes  of  Adam  boast 
More  blessings  than  their  father  lost." 
Bishop  Ken  {Christian  Tear,  Sunday  next  before  Easter)  : 
"  What  Adam  did  amiss, 
Turned  to  our  endless  bliss ; 
O  happy  sin,  which  to  atone, 
Drew  Filial  God  to  leave  his  Throne !" 
k.  L.  Hillhouse : 

"  Earth  has  a  joy  unknown  in  heaven — 
The  new-b(irn  peace  of  sin  forprivcn  ! 
Tears  of  such  pure  and  deep  deliprbt, 
Ye  angels  1  never  dimmed  your  sight."] 


which  remains  even  within  the  inaterial  bondage 
and  slavery,  and  which,  inder  the  power  of  sin,  be- 
comes a  '/Mfipavfiv  of  death  by  means  of  unbelief 
but,  under  the  exercise  of  the  gratia  prcevcnicns, 
becomes  a  miipdvfw  of  the  marks  of  salvation  by 
means  of  faith.  It  thus  destroys  or  weakens  the 
ethical  signification  of  the  Xct/ifidvn,v  itself  [comp. 
vers.  11  and  17,  and  JVofes]  in  the  interest  of  tin 
Augustinian  dogmatics.  The  biblical  doctrine  of 
original  sin  is  distinguished  from  the  Augustinian 
mainly  in  the  following  respects : 

(a.)  The  Bible  teaches  an  ethico-physical  fall  of 
the  human  race  from  Adam,  as  a  fall  in  principle  ; 
Augustine,  a  physico-ethical  fall  of  the  human  race 
in  Adam,  as  a  completed  fact*  Therefore  Augu3. 
tine  ignores  the  distinction  between  the  inheritancr 
of  the  propensity  and  curse  of  sin,  or  of  death—, 
which  inheritance  oppresses  all  who  are  Adamically 
begotten — and  the  ethical  appropriation  of  the  cor- 
ruption. 

(6.)  With  Augustine,  the  ideal  and  potential  con- 
dition  of  condemnation — that  is,  the  condemnahle' 
ness  of  men,  apart  from  redemption — coincides  with 
a  judicially  compldcd  condition  of  condemnation. ; 
therefore,  with  him,  redemption  is  properly  a  new 
creation. 

(r.)  With  Augustine,  the  exercise  of  grace,  of 
the  Logos,  and  of  the  Spirit  of  God,  is  theocralically 
and  ecclesiastically  bound  and  limited  ;  his  Christ  is, 
in  substance,  not  greater  than  the  extent  {rayon)  of 
the  Church  ;  thercibre  he  does  not  perceive  the  (fro- 
dations  of  tlie  hereditary  blessing  and  of  the  heredi- 
tary  curse  witliin  the  general  corruption  of  mankind, 
and  still  less  the  significance  of  the  antithesis  in 
chap.  ii.  14,  1.5,  within  the  whole  world.  His  accep- 
tation of  mere  gradations  of  evil  downwardly,  is  in 
contradiction  with  his  own  system. 

{d.)  A  consequence  of  this  extreme  view  of 
original  sin  is  his  extreme  view  of  the  government 
of  grace.  He  had  in  mind,  probably,  the  great  re- 
ligious truth  of  the  ethical  irresistibility  of  all-con- 
quering love  ;  but  in  his  theological  system  he  gave 
it  a.  fatal 'Stic  character  in  opposition  to  formal  free- 
dom. 

(e.)  Because,  with  him,  the  ideal  and  potential 
condemnation  of  all  is  aggravated  into  an  actual  con- 
dition of  condemnation,  he  has  also — in  consequence 
of  the  fact  that  only  a  pnrt  of  humanity  within  the 
ecclesiastical  pale  of  this  world  believe  and  are 
saved — limited  the  extent  of  the  effects  of  the  ideal 
and  potential  (ibxaim/na,  or  righteous  act  of  Christ ; 
while  Paul  teaches  that  the  (ii.y.ai(o/<a  has  come  fu; 
dt'/.alw(Ti,v  Loi^^i;  upon  all  men. 

[There  is  considerable  force  in  these  objections 
to  the  Angustiniiui  system  which  apply  a  fortiori,  to 
Calvinism.  But  they  cannot  diuiinish  the  great 
merits  of  the  African  father,  who  searched  the  prob- 
lem of  sin  more  profoundly  than  any  divine  before 
or  after  him.  He  was  right  in  teaching  the  (virtual 
or  potential)  fall  of  the  whole  race  in  Adam,  and  the 
sinfidness  of  our  nahire,  or  depraved  will,  as  the 
source  of  all  sinful  volitions,  words,  and  acts.  But 
he  did  not  take  into  sufficient  account  that  there  ig 
a  Divine  nditfCHf;  and  aro/»;,  which  hold  the  arm 
of  God's  o(*;v/,  and  suspend  the  full  and  final  exo' 
cution  of  the  well-deserved  judgment,  until  men 
make  the  fall  of  Adam  their  personal,  individual  act, 
and  reject  the  offer  of  redemption  (comp.  t.ie  re- 
marks on  Rom.  iii.  24,  25,  p.  134).     Hence  Augu» 

♦  [Cump.,  however,  my  remarks  on  pp.  178  aEfJ  192.] 


196 


THE    EPISTLE    OF   PAUL   TO    THE    ROMANS. 


tine  consigns  even  ail  unbaptized  cliildren  to  condein- 
n;itiiin,  altlioiigli  in  the  mildest  form  {De  pecc.  orif/., 
€.  30  :  "  Infant  perdlfione  puni/ur,  quia  perlinet 
a  I  inasxam  p'nlitionis.'"  Ewhir.,  c.  93  :  "  MitisnU 
vt(j  •Miio:  oiimiiiin  ptena  eril  eoruin,  qui  prceler  pec- 
ea'uia  quod  oriyinale  traxerunt,  nullum  iMuper  ad- 
diJerunt")  In  tins  respect  even  the  strictest  Cal- 
viuistic  divines  of  our  uge  decidedly  dissent  from 
him,  and  are  disposed  to  lioid  tliat  all  children  who 
die  in  infancy,  whetiier  baptized  or  not,  will  be 
saved  by  the  iutinite  mercy  of  God.  This  chiuitable 
belief  and  hope  has  a  strong  su|)[)ort  in  the  uiii\*er- 
8al  sulUi-iency  of  the  atonement,  and  especiixliy  in 
the  words  of  our  Saviour  concerning  little  children, 
spoken  witliout  qualification  or-limitatioii  (Matt.  xix. 
14;  Mark  x.  14).  There  can.be  no  salvation  with- 
out Christ,  even  for  cliildren  ;  but  God  is  not  bound 
to  the  use  of  His  own  appointed  means,  by  which  the 
benefits  of  Christ  are  ordinarily  applied  to  men. — 
P.  S.J 

4.  On  the  question  why  Hve  is  not  the  one 
human  being  by  whom  sin  caine  into  the  world  (Pe- 
lagius  and  Ainbrosiaster  liave  really  held  that  Eve  is 
meant),*  compare,  in  addition  to  the  £zef/.  2^otcs, 
Tholuck,  p.  210. 

5.  The  Apostle  does  not  speak  here  of  the  first 

'Jlirist  Joes, 


Satan,  as  Cli 


John  \jii,  44. —  Although  the  doctrine  of  tiie  aevu 
is  by  no  means  wanting  in  his  writings,  it  does 
not  stand  out  very  prominently.  lie  here  speaks 
jjijMvl}'  of  the  entrance  of  sin  into  our  human  worKl 
.itiiin__anj  unknown  worlil  beyond  this,  whereJiC-is 
a^'Uiii^MTTTiat  it  already  e.\is[ed  III  pTTSoiiTlTed  form. 
Now,  tliis  liiiman  world  is  neither  lliu  Wliulc  iiilt^ 
verse,  nor  merely  human  natun;,  but  the  human  race 
in  connection  with  the  earth  and  the  cosmic  nature 
a.s  t^ir  as  it  is  organically  connected  with  man  (see 
2  Peter  iii.  10,  and  other  passages).  The  personifi- 
cation of  sin  and  of  death  exhiliits  both  as  (pseudo- 
formative)  principles  which  have  pervaded  the  organ- 
ism of  the  human  world,  but  under  the  ethical  con- 
ditions under  which  they  can  alone  become  thoroughly 
dominant.  The  individual  man,  in  hi.s  organic  na- 
ture, is  connected  with  humanity,  Ijut  as  an  individ- 
ual intellectual  being  he  has  an  existence  in  himself. 
Pelagius  denied  the  former,  while  Augustine  has 
largely  ignored  the  latter.  The  organic  connection 
implies  the  propagation  of  the  sinful  propensity  and 
guilt,  according  to  John  iii.  0,  as  well  as  acconling 
to  chaps,  vi.-viii.  of  this  Epistle.  In  the  Ijroader 
sense,  C'hrist  also  stood  in  the  organic  connection  of 
humanity  as  the  Son  of  .Man,  liut  only  in  the  histori- 
cal sense.  Therefore  He  bore  the  burden  of  hu- 
manity for  its  reconciliation. 

6.  Paul  calls  the  sin  of  Adam  naQafiani,!;, 
as  the  IruMf/rrxition  of  the  Divine  commandment 
Stantling  clearly  before  him;  /ict(>ci  nnoii  a,  as 
the  sin  wliich  resulted  \n  a.  /all  ;  nn  n(jT ij  ii  a,  as 
a  slartini/'/ioiiit  of  many  sins  ;  nci(inxoii,  as  (//,i- 
o/iiilicncr  to  the  kiiowu  will  of  God.  These  designa- 
tions anil  statements  set  aside  such  theories  on  the 
origin  of  sin  as  thai  of  J.  Miiller  (that  there  was  a 
previoas  or  timeless  fall  of  the  human  .souls),  and 
that  of  \{.  llothc  (that  sin  was  the  original,  abnormal 
condition  of  humanity  proceeding  from  their  mate- 
rial constitution). 

7.  The  relation  of  sin  Co  death.      Sin  ?«  death, 


•  frcl.Teiuo,  in  his  aupi'rfloinl  commontnry  on  Romans, 
rro»i'rvi'il  in  Hio  works  ot  Jerome  nnd  Au(ru«tiiip,  oxplnins 
Br  tvot  avBjMnov  :  "jttr  unain  lu>mintin  jKoam."— P.  8.  J 


says  John  (I  John  iii.  14,  15);  sin  bringeth  forth 
death,  says  James  (chap.  i.  15);  sin  ha.s,  as  its  wages 
or  punishment,  death  as  a  consequence,  says  Paul 
(Rom.  vi.  23).  This  is  all  the  same  relation,  but 
from  ditt'ereut  points  of  view.  The  physical  dying 
of  the  creature  in  itself  is  not  thereby  meant,  but 
the  perishableness  of  the  creature  is  incre;ised  by 
ethical  or  spiritual  death  (Rom.  viii.) ;  and  the  origi. 
nal  transformation  destined  for  man  (2  Cor.  v.  1  Vl.) 
has,  by  sin,  become  fearful  death,  in  eonnection  with; 
corruption  and  the  gloom  of  Sheol.  ThereJort 
Death  itself  is  conquered  by  the  death  of  Christ,  be- 
cause its  sting  Ls  taken  from  it  (1  Cor.  xv.  51,  £6). 
The  ethical  character  of  death  and  the  salvation  of 
the  redeemed  from  death  are  brought  to  light  not  onlj 
in  the  resurrection,  but  also  in  the  revelation  of  the 
original  transformation  at  the  end  of  the  world  (1 
Cor.  XV.  51) ;  while  the  ungodly,  in  spite  of  the  gen- 
eral  resurrection,  are  subject  to  the  second  death 
(Rev.  ii.  11;  xx.  6,  &c.). 

8.  In  the  period  between  Adam  and  Moses,  death 
appeared  to  be  merely  the  order  of  nature,  because 
the  paradisaical  law  had  disappeared  from  knowledge 
by  the  fall,  and  ihe  Mosaic  law  iiad  not  yet  appeared. 
Nevertheless,  sin  was  also  at  that  time  the  causality 
of  death,  but  not  as  transgression  in  the  light  of  leg;d 
knowledge.    The  concealed  sin  against  the  law  dwell- 

"iug  in  all  men  (chap.  ii.  14,  15)  was,  indeed,  attest- 
eti  by  the  manifest,  tyrannical,  and  terrible  dominion 
of  death.  Sin,  says  Paul,  is  not  imputed  where 
there  is  no  law — that  is,  not  fully  settled  until  the 
law.  ]3ut  since  it  is  with  the  gospel  that  the  full 
significance  of  the  law  becomes  clear,  it  follows  that 
condemnation  can  only  come  with  iinal  hardening  of 
the  heart  against  the  gospel. 

9.  Adim  and  ChriM  appear  here  as  principles  of 
the  old  and  new  humanity,  of  the  first  and  second 
aeon,  so  far  as  their  posterity  is  determined  by  their 
life.  Yet  it  is  not  Adam  in  himself  who  is  the  prin- 
ciple of  sin  and  death,  l)ut  Adam  in  his  deed — his 
disobedience.  From  the  nature  of  sin,  the  disobe- 
dience {naiiaxoi])  cannot  coincide  in  him  with  per- 
sonality. In  Christ,  on  the  contrary,  pei-sonality 
and  the  obedience  [vTrn-Aot])  arc  one.  In  reference 
ti;  personal  issue,  Adam  is  the  natural  ancestor  of 
the  whole  human  race.  Christ  is  the  spiritual  found- 
er of  the  whole  human  race.  Both  constitute  to- 
gether a  harmonious  antithesis  in  historical  conse- 
quence (1  Cor.  XV.  45).  Rut  they  represent  the 
principal  antithesis  in  so  far  as  sin  anil  death  pro- 
ceeded from  one  (through  him),  and  righteousness 
and  life  from  the  other.  The  Apostle  sets  forth 
these  antitheses  in  a  aeries  of  parallels,  in  which, 
first,  their  homogeneousness  comes  into  considera- 
tion (the  throuf/li  oiv,  the  organic  development),  and 
second,  the  dLs-similarity  (the  m  ch  more  on  Christ's 
part) ;  then  the  removal  of  sin  by  grace,  and  the 
triumi)h  of  the  new  principle  (so  far  as  by  means  of 
the  law  it  makes  sin  itself  .serviceable  to  its  glory). 
On  the  construction  of  these  antitheses,  compare  the 
general  groundwork  of  the  E.rcg.  Notes. 

10.  While  doctrinal  theology  has  ascribed  to  the 
law  a  threcfolil  use  or  pur|)ose  (bar  or  bridle,  mirror, 
rule — Xi't'ifl,  Sj>iff/el,  Riijil),  the  Apostle  seems  hero 
to  add  a  iixus  i/u(trlus,  or  rather  primus,  in  so  far  na 
he  says  that  the  law  must  have  brought  sin  to  full 
manifestation  and  development.  This  thought  is  not 
altogether  inelu<lcd  in  the  use  of  the  mirror  (sec  the 
Eref.  JVolrs),  but  it  is  most  intimately  connected 
with  it.  As  the  knowledge  of  sin  must  come  by 
the  law,  so  also  the  revelation,  lite  bringing  of  sin  to 


CHAPTER  V.    12-21. 


197 


lighi,  must  come  by  the  law.  The  law  has  not  pro- 
ikiced  real  inward  sin,  but,  like  a  chemical  element, 
it  has  introduced  a  fermenting  process  into  human- 
ity, in  whicli  human  nature  and  sinfulness  seem  to 
be  identical ;  and  by  this  means  the  external  mani- 
festation oi  sin  is  finished,  in  order  to  render  possi- 
ble its  distinction  and  separation  IVom  human  nature 
itself.  The  holiness  of  this  eii'ect  is  properly  under- 
6tood  \vhen  we  distinguish  properly  between  the  in- 
ward siu  and  its  outward  realization,  its  phase,  in 
which  the  judgment  has  already  commenced.  Hence 
it  is  clear  that  the  use  of  the  law  is  the  effecting  of 
the  knowledge  of  siu.  The  manifestation  of  sin  for 
bringing  to  pass  the  knowledge  of  sm,  comes  by  the 
law.  The  law,  as  kiier,  has  completed  the  d<velop- 
meni  of  sin  ;  the  law,  as  the  ivord  of  the  Spirit,  has 
brought  the  perfect  knowlvJge  of  sin. 

11.  Althougii  Paul,  in  this  section,  has  mostly 
contrasted  the  mauy  on  the  one  side  with  the  incmy 
on  the  other — because  this  expression  makes  more 
apparent  the  grandeur  of  the  lundamental  develop- 
ments from  the  one — he  yet  declares  definitely,  in 
ver.  18,  that  the  dlxaiio/ta  of  the  one  Christ  is  avail- 
able for  all  men,  with  the  tendency  to  become  for 
them  the  di/.aiiixjii;  toi^i,'. 

12.  The  Apostle  makes  prominent  in  many  ways 
the  great  prep  mderauce  of  the  antitheses  of  urace 
over  the  theses  of  sin.  The  author  of  sin  becomes 
to  him  a  nameless  being,  who  is  opposed  by  God 
in  His  grace,  and  by  the  man  Jesus  Christ  as  the  per- 
sonal gift  of  grace.  Sin  itself  falls  immediately  into 
the  y.oi/ia,  and  meets  the  /.ardy-iJiHa.  But  the  work 
of  grace  breaks  through  many  offences,  as  if  invited 
and  augmented  by  them,  like  a  mountain  stream 
from  the  rocky  cliff;  and  the  dominion  of  death  on 
one  side  is  only  a  measure  of  the  much  more  power- 
ful revelation  of  grace  on  the  other.  But  the  so- 
called  dnoxarcicTTaau;,  as  a  necessary,  natural  result 
of  salvation,  is  no  more  declared  in  the  TTtivTii:  of 
ver.  15,  than  the  exiiression  ot  noD.oi  is  designed  to 
abridge  the  universality  of  grace.  The  ethical  part 
of  the  organized  process,  the  ).afifi(ivfi,v  on  one  or 
the  other  side,  is  opposed  to  such  a  conclusion. 
Nevertheless,  it  is  the  Apostle's  aim  to  glorify  the 
unfathomableness,  innneasurableness,  and  illimitable- 
ness  of  the  stream  of  grace,  and  its  absolute  and  uni- 
versal triumph  in  the  history  of  the  world. 

["  Sin  reigns  in  death,  grace  reigns  unto  life." 
On  this,  Dr.  Hodge  remarks  (p.  279) :  "  That  the 
benefits  of  redemption  shall  far  outweigh  the  evils 
of  the  fall,  is  here  clearly  asserted.  This  we  can  in 
a  measure  comprehend,  because,  (1.)  The  number 
of  the  saved  shall  doubtless  greatly  exceed  the  num- 
ber of  the  lost.  Since  the  half  of  mankind  die  in 
infanc.y,  and,  according  to  the  Protestant  doctrine, 
are  heirs  of  salvation  ;  and  since,  in  the  future  state 
of  the  Church,  the  knowledge  of  the  Loid  is  to 
3over  the  earth,  we  have  reason  to  believe  that  the 
lost  shall  bear  to  the  saved  no  greater  proportion 
than  the  inmates  of  a  prison  do  to  the  mass  of  the 
community.  (2.)  Because  the  eternal  Son  of  God, 
by  His  incarnation  and  mediation,  exalts  His  people 
to  a  far  higher  state  of  being  than  our  race,  if  un- 
fallen,  could  ever  have  attained.  (3.)  Because  the 
benefits  of  retiemption  are  not  to  be  confined  to  the 
human  race.  Christ  is  to  be  admired  in  His  saints. 
tl  is  through  the  Church  that  the  manifold  wisdom 
of  God  is  to  be  revealed,  throughout  all  ages,  to 
principalities  and  powers.  The  redemption  of  man 
is  to  be  the  great  source  of  knowledge  and  blessed- 
oess  to  the  intelligent  universe." — I  add  a  fine  pas- 


sage from  Dr.  Richard  Gierke  (Sermon  on  Titus  iL 
11,  quoted  by  Ford) :  "  Grace  wdl  not  be  confined. 
For  God's  goodness  cannot  be  exhausted.  He  ia 
dives  in  otnnes,  saith  the  Apostle,  rich  enough  fof 
all  (x.  12).  It  is  an  excellent  attribute,  which  ig 
given  him  by  St.  James,  no/.i'i-i'an/.ay/voq  [in  soma 
MSS.,  but  the  usual  reading  in  James  v.  11  is  no/.i- 
(Trt).ay/r(jc. — P.  S.]  In  God's  mercy,  there  is  both 
fr  and  no/.i'i :  it  is  both  free  and  rich  ;  both  c/ra- 
tiosa  et  co^iiosa  (Ps.  cxxx.),  both  bountiful  and  ]den- 
tiful :  not  only  TTf^iKTfffi'orcra,  bursting  forth  round 
about,  rotmd  about  all  ages,  round  about  all  nations, 
round  about  all  sorts,  but  v7i!^7Tf()(,aai-vor(7a  (ver. 
20),  surrounding  all  those  rounds,  and  with  surplus 
and  advantage  overflowing  all.  I  say,  not  only 
nhovdiioiaa,  an  abounding  grace,  abounding  unto 
all,  to  the  whole  world,  but  intijnhovaCoina  (I 
Tim.  i.  14),  a  grace  superabounding ;  that,  if  there 
were  more  worlds,  grace  would  '  bring  salvation  ' 
even  unto  them  all.  St.  Paul's  own  parallel  shall 
end  this  point  (1  Tim.  ii.  4).  It  is  God's  will  that 
'  all  men  should  be  saved.'  " — P.  S.] 


HOMILETICAI;  AND  PRACTICAL. 

What  follows  from  the  comjiarison  of  Adam  with 
Christ  ?  1.  That  by  the  one  Adam,  sin,  death,  con- 
demnation, and  the  dominion  of  death  have  come; 
2.  But  by  the  one  Christ,  life,  righteousness,  and  the 
dominion  of  grace  have  come  upon  alF  men  (vers. 
12-21). — Sin  and  death  passed  upon  all  (vers.  12- 
14). — Sin  as  the  cause  of  death;  1.  Original  sin; 
2.  Sins  of  commission  (ver.  12). — They  too  have 
sinned  who  have  not  committed  the  same  transgres- 
sion as  Adam  ;  comp.  chap.  ii.  12  (ver.  14). — All  sin 
is  transgression  of  the  law,  but  not  in  the  same  way 
(ver.  14). — Adam  is  a  figure  of  Him  that  was  to 
come  (ver.  14). — Man  a  figure  of  the  Son  of  Man 
(ver.  14). — The  first  and  second  Adam  :  1.  Resem- 
blance ;  2.  Difference  (vers.  14-19).— The  differ- 
ence between  sin  and  gift.  It  consists  herein  :  1. 
That,  through  the  sin  of  one,  many  have  died,  but 
that,  on  the  other  hand,  God's  grace  and  gift  have 
freely  abounded  unto  many  ;  2.  By  one  man's  sin 
many  have  become  condenmcd,  but  one  gift  has 
abounded  from  many  offences  to  righteousness;  3.  By 
the  sin  of  the  one,  death  has  reigned  over  many,  but 
by  the  one  Jesus  Christ  will  many  still  more  rejoice 
in  the  dominion  of  life  (ver.s.  15-17). — The  aole  man 
Jesus  Christ ;  not  only  (1.)  one,  but  also  (2.)  the 
only  one  of  His  character  (ver.  IS).: — Yet  how  differ- 
ent are  the  fruits  of  sin  and  righteousness  1  1.  The 
fruit  of  the  former  is  condemnation  ;  2.  The  fruit 
of  the  latter  is  justification  of  life  (ver.  IS). — As 
condemnation  is  come  unto  all  men,  so  also  is  jusii. 
fieation  of  life  (ver.  18). — The  universality  of  Divine 
grace  brought  to  pass  by  the  righteousncs^s  of  Christ 
(ver.  18). — The  different  effects  of  Adam's  disobe- 
dience and  Christ's  obedience  (ver.  19). — For  what 
purpose  did  the  law  enter?  1.  Not  merely  to  maka 
sin  prominent ;  but,  2.  To  bring  it  to  a  crisis  ;  ami 
so,  3.  To  prepare  for  grace  by  Jesus  Christ  oui'  Lortl 
(vers.  20,  21). 

LnuER  :  As  Adam  has  corrupted  us  with  Oireign 
sin  without  our  fault,  so  has  Christ  saved  us  with 
foreign  grace  without  our  merit  (ver.  14). — Notice 
that  he  speaks  here  of  original  sin,  which  has  come 
from  Adam's  disoV)cdience  ;  tliercfore  every  thing  ia 
sinful  which  pertains  to  us  (ver,  18).— As  Adam'f 


198 


THE   EPISTLE   OF   PAUL   TO   THE   ROMANS. 


sin  has  become  our  own,  90  has  Clii'i:4t's  righteous- 
ness hecoiiie  our  own  (vlt.  19). 

liKNUKL :  (iod's  '/lit  is  fjrace,  flowing  from  the 
Father  upon  Him,  and  ihrough  Him  to  us. 

Staukk:  Believers  an.-,  I>y  the  spiritual  life  of 
the  new  bitih,  n-igning  kings  ovi-r  sin  on  earth,  as 
they  sliail  also  be  fellow-kings  in  the  heaven  of  glory 
(ver.  17). — 0  universal  graee  of  God,  by  wliieh  all 
niuy  be  saved  by  Ohiist !  1  Tim.  ii.  4  ;  Acts  xvii. 
80,  31  (ver.  18). — A  small  drop  of  grace  can  calm 
and  engulf  the  raging  waves  of  corruption  (ver.  2i)). 
— Ckamkk:  As  no  one  can  deny  that  he  is  mortal, 
BO  also  must  no  one  say  that  he  is  not  sinful  (ver. 
14). — Xova  Bibl.  Tub.:  Sin  has  a  mighty  kingdom 
and  dominion.  Let  nobody  regard  it  as  small  and 
coniemptible  1  Yet  the  kingdom  of  grace  is  much 
more  mighty.  The  purpose  of  the  latter  is  to  de- 
stroy the  former;  where  the  kingdom  of  grace  in- 
creases, the  kingdom  of  sin  declines.  The  former 
brings  life,  the  latter  death. 

Gkklach  :  There  is  this  great  difference  between 
the  elfeets  ot  the  fdl  and  of  redeni|)lion  :  the  elfeets 
of  tlie  former  consist  in  a  strongly  legal  judgment, 
which  must  ensure  condemnation  in  consequence  of 
a  single  tran.sgression  ;  but  the  effects  of  the  latter 
art!  a  free  gif'i,  which  made  amends  not  merely  for 
one  sin,  but  for  all  the  repetitions  of  Adam's  trans- 
gression that  have  arisen  from  that  first  one  ;  and  it 
has  made  amentls  so  completely,  that  it  has  really 
etfeeted  in  fallen  men  the  lighteousness  re(piired  by 
the  law  (ver.  Ki). — So  powerfidly  does  graee  operate 
on  those  who  have  received  its  fidness,  that  they,  by 
grace,  become  rulers  in  life  through  Jesus  Christ 
(ver.  17). 

Lisco  :  Mankind  is  united  in  Adam  and  Christ ; 
therefoie  the  sin  of  Adam  i)eeanie  the  sin  of  all,  and 
Christ's  offering  became  the  propitiation  for  all.  As 
every  leaf  of  the  tree  suffers  by  disease  of  the  root, 
HO  does  every  one  recover  by  its  restoration  ;  thus  it 
is  with  mankind  in  Adam  and  Christ  (vers.  12-21). 
— Death  is  the  great  evil  tiiat  was  begotten  by  sin 
(ver.  12). — As  Adam's  sin  has  become  our.s,  so  has 
Ciirisi's  righteousness  become  ours  (ver.  19). 

KiK.OKK  :  This  little  passage  is  as  the  pillar  of  Are 
in  the  wilderness;  dark  ami  threatening  toward  llie 
Kgyptians  and  impenitent,  but  bright  ami  clear  toward 
the  Isr.ielites.  This  pa.xsage  lightens  ami  thniidi'rs 
against  hard  simiers,  wiio  treat  every  thing  lightly  ; 
but  it  shines  with  thi;  lovely  sphnidor  of  grace  upon 
penitent  and  an.xious  souls  (ver.  2<i). 

Hkiiinku:  The  dominion  of  sin  in  thi>  world  is 
not  (lod's  work,  but  man's  guilt. — 'I'he  universality 
of  corruption  should  not  comfort,  t)ut  humiliate  us: 

1.  We  should  each  be  asliamed  bef(jre  all  the  rest ; 

2.  We  .should  be  tishamed  before  the  inhabitants  of 
other  worlds,  who  perhaps  do  not  know  any  thing 
about  sin  ;  3.  We  should  so  much  the  more  bear  in 
mind,  that,  amid  the  universal  sinfulness,  we  shall 
not  l)e  th(!  only  puri;  ones ;  4.  We  must  therefore 
Work  out  oin-  salvation  the  more  earnestly  by  j)rayer, 
and  faith  in  Christ  (ver.  12). — .Vdam  is  the  natural, 
Christ  is  the  spiritual  ancestor;  the  former  is  the 
transgressor  of  the  Divine  commandment,  the  latter 
the  fulliller  of  thi"  whole  Divii\e  law  ;  the  former  is 
the  cause  of  death  and  hiiinun  corruption,  the  latter 
the  author  of  Ife,  redemption,  and  holiness  (ver. 
14)- — '''"■  real  ground  why  the  operaticni  of  Divine 
praee  is  as  imiversal  as  the  sinful  corruption  from 
Adam,  is  this  :  that  i/nin:  knows  no  other  limits  than 
those  which  man  himself  .sets  l)y  unbelief  (ver.  17). 
— Thi!  more  man  is  pervaded  by  the  knowledge  of 


his  sin,  the  richer  will  be  his  reception  of  grace 
(Luke  vii.  47).  ^ 

liKssKK  :  By  one  upon  all  (vers.  12-21). — Tha 
saving  counsel  of  God  lias  always  been  one  aiul  the 
same  to  all  men,  not  only  to  the  children  of  Abra- 
ham,  but  to  all  the  sons  of  Adam  (ver.  12). — Death, 
having  once  stepped  its  foot  into  the  world,  haa 
forced  its  way  to  all  men  (ver.  12). — Sin  hiis  become 
a  natural  jxiwer  over  persons,  which  cannot  be  dis- 
lodged by  the  blows  of  any  club  ;  but  grace — which 
does  not  enter  with  compulsory  jjower,  but  with  the 
evangelical  drawing  of  the  word  of  God — is  so 
powerful  that  it  breaks  the  power  of  natme  (ver. 
12). — JJett/h  riiffiuJ.  Well  for  us  that  this  is  said 
as  of  a  ruler  who  is  dead  (ver.  17). — The  new  de- 
cree,  "  You  shall  live,"  which  is  warranted  by  the 
empty  grave  of  Jesus  Christ,  is  higher  and  stronger 
than  the  old  decree,  "  You  must  die,"  which  is  con- 
firmed by  millions  of  graves  (ver.  17). — The  Apostle 
once  more  recapitulates  the  abundance  of  doctrine 
which  he  has  demonstrated  all  along  from  ver.  12  : 
Siii^  ill  a  /(,  (/riirr,  ri(//i/r,,usmns,  life.  The.se  five  stand 
thus :  grace  rises  highest  in  the  middle ;  the  two 
conquering  giants,  Sin  and  Death,  at  the  left ;  the 
double  prize  of  victory,  Kighteousness  and  Life,  at 
the  right ;  and  over  the  buried  name  of  Adam  the 
glory  of  the  name  of  Jesus  blooms  (ver.  21). 

Sriii.KiKKMACiiER,  on  ver.  19:  The  effects  of  the 
death  of  the  Kedeemer,  so  far  as  it  was  a  work  of 
His  obedience. — Deicukkt:  Has  the  Christ  who  died 
for  us  become  the  Christ  within  us  y — How  much 
more  blessed  to  live  under  grace  than  under  the 
law ! 

Lange:  Adam  and  Christ  in  the  internal  and 
historical  life  of  mankind. — As  all  men  are  compre- 
hended in  the  fidl  of  A<lam,  so,  and  still  more,  are 
they  in  the  righteousness  of  Christ. — As  sin  and 
death  have  assumed  the  appearance  of  |)ersoiuil, 
l)rincely  i)Owers,  in  ortler  to  extinguish  the  personal 
life  of  mankind,  so  does  the  personal  (Jod  again 
elevate  men,  bv  the  glorious  personality  of  Christ, 
to  a  personal  life  in  royal  freedom. — The  antithe- 
sis between  Adam  and  Christ :  1.  In  personal  ef- 
fects (ver.  15);  2.  In  e.ssential  effects  (ver.  IG) ; 
•i.  In  the  ili!struction  of  the  a])parently  personal  life 
of  sin,  and  the  restoration  and  glorification  of  the 
true  |)ersonal  life  of  graee,  or  the  false  and  the  true 
,;'ct<n/.n'n.v  (ver.  17);  4.  In  the  final  aims  of  both 
(ver.  IS);  5.  In  the  full  manifestation  of  both  in 
the  light  of  the  gospel  (ver.  19). — The  glory  of  God's 
grace  in  the  e.vercisc  of  its  authority.  How  it  has 
not  only,  1.  Conrpiered  sin  and  death  ;  but,  2.  Even 
made  them  of  service. — The  Divine  art  of  disiin- 
guishing  the  effect  of  the  law. — The  twofold  charac- 
ter of  the  law  :  1.  Api)arently  a  |)nunotion  of  sin  ; 
but,  2.  Keally  a  connnuiiieation  of  grace. — Adam, 
Mosi's,  and  Christ. — How  far  does  Mo.-^es  appear  to 
stand  on  Adam's  siile  ;  but  how  far  iloes  he  rather 
stand  on  Christ's  .side? — The  twofold  effect  of  the 
law  and  of  leirality  in  the  history  of  the  world.— 
The  twofold  curse  of  the  law  :  1.  The  cur.se  of  the 
law,  well  understood,  leads  to  salvation ;  2.  Tht 
curse  of  the  law,  misunderstood,  lea<ls  to  ruin. 

f  BiMKiTT  (condeii.sed):  Every  sin  we  commit  in 
defiance  of  the  threateniiigs  of  (Jod  is  a  Justifying 
of  Adam's  rebellion  agiinst  (Jod.  Our  destruction 
is  in  ourselves,  by  our  actual  rebellion  ;  and  at  the 
great  day  we  shall  charge  our  sin  and  uiisery  upon 
ourselves— -not  on  God,  not  <mi  Satan,  not  on  instru- 
ments, and  not  <ui  our  first  parents. —  ilivav:  Wi 
arc  by  Christ  and  His  righteousness  entitled  to,  and 


CHAPTER   V.    12-21. 


19S 


Instated  in,  more  and  greater  privileges  than  we  lost 
by  the  oft'unee  of  Adam.  The  plaster  is  wider  than 
the  wound,  and  more  healing  than  the  wound  is  kill- 
ing.— Si  (ITT  :  Instead  o(  per))lc.xing  our.selvcs  aliout 
the  ineomprehensihle  but  nlo^t  righteous  dispensa- 
tion of  Gotl,  in  permitting  the  entrance  of  sin  and 
death,  let  us  learn  to  adore  His  grace  for  providing 
BO  adequate  a  remedy  for  that  awful  catastroplie. — 
As  our  children  have  i-eceived  a  sinful  and  sufl'ering 
nature  from  the  first  Adam,  let  us  be  stirred  up  by 
their  pains  and  sorrows  to  seek  for  them  tjie  bless- 
ings of  the  second  Adam's  righteousness  and  salva- 
tion.— Wksi.ky  (Sermon  on  Ood'x  Lure  to  FulUu 
Man,  Rum.  v.  15):  The  more  we  deal  our  bread  to 
the  hungry  and  cover  the  naked  with  garments,  and 
the  more  kind  oUices  wc  do  to  those  that  groan  un- 
der the  various  Ills  of  human  life,  the  more  comfort 
we  receive  even  in  the  present  world,  and  the  great- 
er the  recom|)ense  we  have  in  our  own  bosom. — 
DwKiUT  :  The  subject  of  moial  evil  is  too  exten.'-ive 
and  mysterious  to  be  compi-ehended  by  our  under- 
Btanding.  Many  things  connected  with  it  lie  wholly 
beyond  our  reach.     I3ut  where  knowledge  is  unat- 


tainable, it  is  our  duty  and  interest  to  trust  liumbly 
and  subnnssively  to  the  instructions  of  Him  who  iu 
the  Only  Wine. — Ci.ahkk  :  The  grace  of  the  gospel 
not  only  redeems  from  death  and  restores  to  life,  biW 
brings  the  soul  into  such  a  relationship  with  God, 
ami  into  such  a  partici{)ation  of  eternal  glory,  as  wo 
have  no  authoiity  to  believe  would  have  been  tlie 
portion  of  Adam  himself,  had  he  even  eternally  re- 
tained  his  innocence. — Hodgk  :  We  should  never 
yield  to  temptation  on  the  ground  that  the  sin  to 
which  we  are  solicited  appears  to  be  a  trifle  (nieielj 
eating  a  forbidden  fruit),  or  that  it  is  but  for  once. 
Remember  the  one  (jllence  of  one  man.  How  often 
has  a  man,  or  a  fannly,  been  ruined  forever  by  one 
sin  ! — Compare  Isaac  de  la  I'eyrere's  3Icn  before 
Adam  (London,  1G50),  in  which  the  author  attempts 
to  prove  that  the  first  men  were  created  before 
Adam,  and  builds  up  a  curious  theological  system 
on  that  supposition. — Compare  also  W.  Hucklamj's 
liKjairii  irliiUicr  the  ISin/r/ice  of  Death  pronounced 
at  the  Fall  of  Man  included  the  Whole  Animal  Cre- 
ation, or  was  restricted  to  the  IIum.an  liace.  Lon- 
don, 1839.— J.  F.  H.] 


PRELIMINARY   REMARKS   ON   THE    CONSTRUCTION    OF   CHAPTERS   VI.-VIII. 


After  the  Apostle  has  exhibited  the  antithesis 
of  Adam  and  Christ  in  its  principal  or  fundamental 
form  and  significance,  chap.  v.  12-21,  he  pa.sses  on 
to  exhibit  the  same  antithesis  in  all  its  conse- 
quences, first  of  all  for  believers,  but  then  also  for 
the  whole  world. 

The  ne(/ative  side  of  this  consequence  is  exhibit- 
ed in  chaps,  vi.  and  vii. ;  The  dying  with  Christ  to 
sin  and  to  the  entire  old  form  of  life. 

The  positive  side  is  exhibited  in  chap.  viii. :  The 
new  hfe  in  Christ. 

I.  The  first  division  is  again  divided  into  four 
parts. 

A.  As  Christians  have  fundamentally  (objective- 
ly by  the  death  of  Christ  himself,  and  subjectively 
through  the  faith  sealed  by  baptism)  died  with  Christ 
to  sin  in  order  to  walk  in  newness  of  life,  so  should 
they  act  as  those  who  are  dead  to  sin.  For  their 
new  life  is  an  organic  coimection  with  Christ,  an 
organic  development ;  yet  it  is  not  a  lil'e  subject  to 
fatalistic  natural  necessity,  but,  in  conformity  with 
fellowship  with  (Jhrist,  it  is  a  life  in  true  freedom,  as 
life  after  Adam  has  been  one  in  false  freedom,  or 
the  seeming  freedom  of  hard  service.  It  is  a  re- 
ligiously or  ethically  organic  relation  ;  chap.  vi.  1-11. 

B.  Because  believers  are  dead  to  sin,  they  are 
Tree  from  its  dondnion.  They  .should  therefore  take 
knowledge  of  the  fact  that  they  are  delivered,  and 
keep  themselves  from  the  hondaae  of  sin  ;  and  in 
the  power  of  their  freedom,  they  should  yield  them- 
selves under  grace  to  be  the  servants  of  righteous- 
ness ;  chap.  vi.  12-23. 

(J.  But  their  being  dead  to  sin  means  also  that 
thjy,  as  those  who  passed  into  newness  of  life,  have 
received  in  themselves  the  new  principle  of  life, 
which  is  righteousness,  or  the  inwanl  substance  of 
the  law.  Therefore,  by  Christ,  they  are  dead  to  the 
law  iu  the  narrower  sense,  in  which  they  lived  in 
matrimonial  alliance.  They  sliould  serve,  not  in  out- 
Ward  ordinances,  but  inward  principle — from  the  force 
©f  grace,  the  impulse  of  the  heart ;  chap.  vii.  1-6. 


D.  But  if  to  he  dead  to  sin  means  also  to  he  dead 
to  the  low,  as  well  as  the  reverse,  there  follows  noth- 
ing tlierefVoin  contrai'y  to  the  hoUntss  of  the  law. 
The  law,  rather,  was  designed,  by  its  constant  o[)era- 
tion  in  awakening  and  increasing  the  conflict  with 
sin,  to  effect  the  transition  from  the  state  of  sin  to 
the  state  of  grace  ;  chap.  vii.  7-25. 

II.  The  second  or  positive  part  is  thus  prepared. 
The  condition  of  believers  is  free  from  all  condeni- 
nation,  because,  in  harmony  with  its  character,  i(  is 
a  life  in  the  Spirit  of  Christ.  But  it  is  a  life  in  the 
Spiiit  which  is  prepared  by  the  Siiirit  through  the 
glorification  of  thi;  l)ody  and  the  whole  nature  ;  for 
tlie  Spirit,  as  the  Spirit  of  adoption,  is  the  first  se- 
curity for  it,  and  the  believer  is  certain  of  it  before- 
hand in  blessed  ho|)e ;  chap.  viii. 

A.  This  life  in  the  Spirit  now  demands,  first  of 
all,  the  laying  off,  in  the  conduct  of  the  Christian, 
of  all  carnal  lu.sts,  which  must,  however,  I)e  distin- 
guishe<l  from  a  positively  ascetic  mortification  of  the 
body  ;  chap.  viii.  1-10. 

B.  As  the  Spirit  of  God  testifies  to  adoption,  so 
does  it,  as  tlie  Spirit  of  the  risen  Christ,  secure  the 
inheritance — that  is,  the  renewal  of  the  body,  and 
tlie  glorification  of  life;  vers.  11-17.  The  certain- 
ty of  this  blesseil  hope  is  established  :  n.  On  the  de- 
velojiment  of  life  in  this  world,  vers.  18-30  ;  b.  On 
the  future  or  heavenly  administration  of  the  love  of 
(iod  and  the  grace  of  Christ,  which  make  all  the 
forces  that  apparently  conflict  with  salvation  even 
serviceable  to  its  realization  ;  vers.  31-39.  _ 

Meyer's  inscription  over  chaps,  vi.-viii.  is:  "Eth- 
ical Effects  of  the  tiv/xunavvri  f)tov.  Chap.  vi.  7 
shows  that  the  dtx.,  far  from  giving  aid  to  immo- 
rality,  is  the  first  to  exclude  it,  and  to  promote, 
restore,  and  vitalize  virtue ;  and  chap.  viii.  exhibit,' 
the  blessed  condition  of  those  who,  l)eing  justified, 
are  morally  free."  Tholuck  :  "  It  has  been  showt 
down  to  this  point  how  much  the  Christian  has  re- 
ceived by  that  dix.  nt,nr.\  chap.  i.  17.  It  is  the 
mention  of  the  fulne^s  of  grace  called  foith  by  th* 


200 


THE   EPISTLE   OF   PAUL   TO   THE   ROMANS. 


power  of  sin,  that  now  leads  the  Apostle  to  exhibit 
the  luonil  conseqiunees  of  this  conimuniciition  of 
grace,  which  in  turn  leads  him  further  (chap.  vii). 
to  the  statement  of  the  insulliciency  of  the  lef,'al 
economy ;  and  in  antithesis  thereto  (chap,  viii.), 
to  the  moral  etfeets  of  the  econ(imy  of  grace  and 
it;  saving  issue ;  so  that  the  Apostle,  after  am- 
pli.'ying  and  enriching  the  explanations  between 
chap.  i.  18  and  chap,  v.,  returns  to  the  same  point 


with  which  chap.  v.  concluded.''  The  Apostle  docj, 
indeed,  return  to  the  same  point  with  whieh,  not  th« 
whole  of  chap.  v.  concluded,  but  with  whieh  chap 
V.  11.  concluded,  but  in  a  sense  altogether  ditferent, 
iuiismuch  as  from  chap.  v.  12  on,  the  Apostle  Ijringa 
out,  not  merely  the  aduul  antagonism  of  sin  and 
grace  in  humanity,  as  before,  but  the  princi/iiui  an- 
tagonism  of  the  two  principles  in  its  ethical  aiiJ 
organic  aspect. 


Sbconp  Skctiox. — 77ie  contradiction  between  sin  and  grace.  The  calling  of  Christians  to  newness  of  life^ 
since  t/iei/  were  trannhitid  by  baptism  into  the  death  of  Christ  from  the  sphere  of  sin  and  death  int<y 
the  sphere  of  the  new  life. 

Chap.  VL   1-11. 

1  "NVliat  shall  \vc  say  then  ?     Shall  [May]  *  we  continue  in  sin,  that  grace  may 

2  abound?     God  forbid  [Let  it  not  be!].^    How  shall  we,  that  are  dead  [who  died] 

3  to  sin,  live  any  longer  therein  ?  Know  ye  not,  that  so  many  of  us  as  [all  we 
who]'  were  baptized  into  Jesus  Christ  [Christ  Jesus]*  were  baptized  into  his 

4  death  ?  Therefore  we  are  [were]  buried  with  him  by  [thi'ongh]  baptism  into 
death  :  that  [in  order  that]  like  [«■"'<  like]  as  Christ  was  raised  up  from  the 
dead  by  [thiough]  the  glory  of  the  Father,  even  ["»"<  even]  so  we  also  should 

6  walk  in  newness  of  life.  For  if  we  have  been  planted  together  in  [become 
united  ^  with]  °  the  likeness  of  his  death,  we  sliall  be  also  in  \^nith\  the  likeness 

6  of  his  resurrection  :  Knowing  this,  that  our  old  man  is  [was]  crucified  with 
hhn,  that  [in  order  that]  '  the  body  of  sin  might  be  destroyed,  that  henceforth 

7  we  should  not  serve  \)w  slaves  to] "  sin.     For  he  that  is  dead  [hath  died] "  is 

8  freed  [acquitteil]  from  sin.     Now  if  we  be  dead  [died]   with  Christ,  we  believe 

9  that  we  shall  also  live  with  him  : '"  Knowing  that  Christ  being  raised  from 
the  dead  dieth  no  more  ;  death  hath  no  nuire  dominion  over  him  [dominion  over 

10  him  no  moie].     Yor  in  that  [»'•.  the  ilenth  that]  "  he  died,  he  died  unto  sin  once 

11  [for  all]:  but  in  that  ['";.  tlie  life  tliat]  he  liveth,  he  liveth  unto  God.  Like- 
wise [Ihus]  reckon  ye  also  yourselves  to  be  ["»"<  to  be] ''^  dead  indeed  unto  sin, 
but  alive  imto  God  through  Jesus  Christ  our  Lord  \iv  Xgiaia  ^Itjaov.,  in  Christ 
Jesus.     Omu  our  Lord]." 


>  Vpr.  1.— (The  readlnp  of  the  R'C.  ((VijuKfoS/xef)  is  poorlv  supported.  A.  H.  C.  D.  F.  read  imiiivmiitv  :  adopted 
by  Oncsb.-ich,  Lnrhmann,  Tisolicndorf,  M<!.\cr,  Alfoid,  Woruaworth.  The  above  emendation  iti  supj)<)rted  by  the  lost 
two  rditors.     N.  K.,  and  some  cursivos,  have  «7r(;x^i'o;i«i'. 

^  ViT.  2. — [  M  ij  y  «'  1/  0 1 T  0  is  a  very  forcible  ni'tfutivp.  How  it  should  be  rendered,  ia  perhaps  a  matter  of  taste,  but 
the  G'ld  fiirh'd  expresses  its  forriblene-'n  as  no  other  KnK'i"h  phiase  can.    Comp.  Onlnliaii.i,  ii.  17  ;  p.  49,  noti'. 

'  Ver.  .1.— [The  K.  V.  is  literally  conoct,  but  the  reference  seems  to  be  to  those  baptized  as  a  whole  (Meyer) ;  henco 
the  emendation,  whieh  is  a<lopted  by  Alford,  Wordsworth,  Amer.  Uible  Union. 

•  V<r  3.— [H.,  and  a  number  of  cursives  and  fathers,  omit  'IijcroOi'.  The  order  in  almost  all  authorities  is 
Xpurrbv   'Iriirovv . 

•  Ver.  5. --[Wordsworth  renders  (tv^x^vtoi  ytydvaixtv:  hnvr  brcfunt  rnnnuli  with.  This  is  literal  and  exaet, 
but  rnnri'ilr  would  w^areely  bo  projjer  in  a  popular  version.  Meyer,  Lanfrc  :  "  sii.tammi'Dff'WiiifiS'ii,  gmwii  logrlhrr. 
Unilil  (^Alford,  Amor.  IJihlo  Union)  is  ndoi'ted  in  lieu  of  a  better  word.  The  E.  V.:  plaut'-d  logrih.r,  Is  based  on  a 
WTon^'  view  'if  the  etvni'iloi;y  of  <ru/ii^uToi. 

•  Ver.  .'). — [In  lA  the  K.  V.  is  not  found  in  the  Oreek.  With,  in  both  clauses,  is  borrowed  from  avtL^ivToi.  Any 
further  emendation  must  be  based  mi  excKefiejil  viewn  of  the  verwe. 

'  Ver.  0. — ['I  fa,  to'ie,  hi  md  r  that.  The  next  clause  is  telic  also  ;  but  as  a  different  form  is  chosen  in  Oreek,  it  In 
Ix'tter  to  let  the  simple  that  reraiin.  Amor.  Uiblc  Union  reverses  tho  position  of  in  urdfr  that,  that,  loavinp;  it  iiideflnite 
whether  tin-  first  clause  is  telle. 

•  Ver.  0.— (The  verb  5ovAcu«ii/  means,  first,  to  bo  a  servont,  or  slave,  then,  to  serve.  Tho  personifieation  of  sin, 
liiplio'l  in  this  pasHa);c,  mikes  tho  primal^  meaning  more  correct  here,  and  slaves  Is  preferable  to  «<;/Tiin/.«,  for  obvioua 
ra-vflou'). 

•  Ver.  ".—(This  verse  has  an  noriat  (anoBavmv)  in  the  first  part,  and  a  perfect  ( j<ii<caiwrai>  in  ihe  socond. 
Yet  tlic  rrndenuK  :  fT-'  Ih'il  iliid  hns  breii  jun'iJUd  fntm  tin  (Amer.  Itible  Uiiion)  dors  not  convey  its  meaning  iiioperly. 
Thi'imii-it  icfi'i-H  to  somethinc  antecedent  to  the  perfect,  while  the  perfect  states  what  continues  lo  be  true;  beiiee,  in 
].  ■.li-l,  we  iiiu>t  invert,  rendering  the  aorint  bv  hux  iliiii,  Ihe  perft'Ct  by  m  (nqiiilliil.  The  Apostle  is  stating  a  general 
priii"i-nion,  which  is  not  tbe<doffieal,  but  leual ;  hence,  najiiill'il  is  pri'ferable  to  jusli/Uil. 

'"  Ver.  H.-[Tlie  readjiiu  trvv^^iroiit  v  is  foiiiid  In  N.  B'.  T).  F.,  anil  is  now  generally  adopted.  Rec:  vv^ijaotity, 
found  in  B''.  L.  C.  K.,  have  <rviri<T ut iity  ;  whtch  Lunge  considers  a  legal  correction  to  the  hortuttiry.  F.  has  <niyirf 
w6u.tBm. 


CHAPTER  VI.    1-11. 


201 


'»  Ver.  10. — [The  granunatical  question  respecting  o  is  indicated  by  tlie  twc  renderings  given  in  each  member  o/ 
this  verse.     The  meaning  is  essentially  the  same,  whichever  he  atlopted  (ileyer). 

"  Ver.  \l.—[R'C.,  \*.  K.  L.,  insert  elvai  after  vexpovs  /J^iv  ,  N'.  B.  C.,  before  ;  it  is  omitted  in  A.  D.  E.  F.  G.,  bj 
most  modern  editors. 

'S  Ver.  11. — [The  E.  v.  is  unfortunate  in  rendering  iv,  Ihrotigh,  since  the  point  of  the  whole  passage  is,  that  yrt 
arc  alive  in  virtue  of  our  union  to  Chri.-t — )'.  f.,  hi  Christ  Jesu.t.  The  Itic.  adds  rep  Kvpiw  ijiiiav,  on  the  authority 
of  .  C.  K.  L.,  some  versions  and  fathers.  The  words  are  omitted  in  A.  B.  D.  F.V  most  versions,  by  many  lathei-s, 
Meyer,  Alfoni,  Wordsworth. — R.] 


EXEGETICAL  AXD  CRITICAL. 

The  section  chap.  \i.  1-11.  Survey.  The  death 
of  Christiaiis  to  sin,  and  their  new  life. 

a.  The  effect  and  demand  of  grace  :  death  and 
life,  vers.  1,  2. 

6.  According  to  baptism,  vers.  3,  4. 

c.  According  to  the  connection  with  Christ  in 
His  death  and  resurrection,  vers.  5,  6. 

d.  According  to  the  power  and  import  of  death, 
especially  as  a  dying  with  Christ,  vers.  V,  8. 

e.  According  to  the  power  of  the  new  life  as  an 
incorruptible  life  with  Christ,  vers.  9-11. 

Ver.  1.   What  then  shall  we  say?     The  orr 

introduces  the  true  conclusion  from  the  previous 
verses,  chap.  v.  20,  21,  by  repelling  the  false  con- 
clusion which  might  be  deduced  from  what  is  said 
there.  [iTTi/i  ivioftfv,  the  deliberative  subjunctive. 
See  note  on  t/mitu;  p.  160. — P.  S.] 

Ver.  2.  Let  it  not  be  [/</)  ys'iotTo].  See 
chap.  iii.  4,  ti  [and  Textual  Note  %  p.  112. — P.  S.]. 

How  shall  we  who  died  to  sin  [oixivf? 
an f  0-dvo  11  tv  Ti  ^ua(jria.^  Oirn'^c;  [de- 
cribing  the  quality'^,  as  such  who.  Living  in  siu  is 
utterly  contradictory  to  the  character  of  Chri.«tiaiis. 
And  the  contradiction  is  very  intense,  not  simply 
because  of  the  aversion  and  repulsion  between  natu- 
ral death  and  life  referred  to  by  Rungius  (see  Tho- 
luck).*  The  Christian  is  specifically  dead  to  sin  ; 
and  the  life  in  sin,  as  a  definitdy  false  life,  is  op- 
posed to  this  definite  death.  We  have  here  an  ex- 
pression, therefore,  not  merely  of  "  freedom  from 
all  life-fellowship  with  sin  "  [so  Meyer],  but  also  of 
the  positive  contradiction  and  repulsion  between  sin 
and  Christian  life.  The  reality  of  this  contradiction 
is  decided,  figuratively  exhibited,  and  sacramentally  j 
sealed  by  baptism.  Yet  the  Apostle  does  not  sini-  , 
ply  borrow  his  expression  of  it  from  baptism  ;  but, 
rather,  the  death  and  resurrection  of  Christ  under-  j 
lie  the  figuratire  meaning  of  baptism. 

[ant  0  a  v  o  /<  i  v ,  we  died  (not,  are  dead,  E.  V.), 
is  the  historic  aorist,  as  ij/iuitror,  v.  12,  and  ant- 
SdvfTf  aiv  T(T)  X(Ji,iTT(J>,  Col.  ii.  20 ;  comp.  Gal.  ii. 
19,  v6/iii)  dnifiavov;  Rom.  vii.  4.  The  act  of  dying 
refers  to  the  time  of  baptism,  ver.  3  (Bengel,  Meyer, 
Plulip[)i,  Alford,  Wordsworth),  which,  in  the  Apos- 
tolic Church,  usually  coincided  with  conversion  and 
justification,  and  implied  a  giving  up  of  the  former 
life  of  sin,  and  the  beginning  of  a  new  life  of  holi- 
ness. The  remission  of  sin,  which  is  divinely  assured 
and  sealed  by  baptism,  is  the  death  of  sin.  Sin  for- 
given is  hated,  sin  unforgiven  is  cherished.  This, 
too,  shows  the  inseparable  connection  between  justi- 
fication and  sanctification ;  and  yet  they  are  kept 
distinct:  the  justified  is  sanctified,  not  vice  versd  ; 
first  we  are  freed  from  the  ffuilt  (reafus)  of  sin,  then 
.'rom  the  dominion  of  sin  ;  and  we  are  freed  from 
the  one  in  order  to  b&  freed  from  the  other,     t-^ 


[ThoUick  quotes  from  Rungius  :  ^'  Signifcot  -non  vwdo 
vutffinein   quan'finn  (ibxliuiiitinm  a  propufilo  pe'canr/i,  sed 
quiindani  ai'TiTrafleiac,  qualis  est  inter  mortuos  el  vivos." — 
S.J 


¥ 


diia^jTia,  as  far  as  regards  sin;  it  is  the  dative 
of  reference,  as  Gal.  ii.  19  ;  1  Peter  ii.  24  ;  while  in 
Col.  ii.  20  Paul  uses  dno  with  the  genitive  in  the 
same  sense.  A  similar  phrase  is  aTc<i(Jo7aOai,  nji 
y.6a/io),  Gal.  vi.  14,  to  be  crucified  to  the  world,  so  a3 
to  destroy  all  vital  connection  with  it,  and  to  have 
no  more  to  do  with  it,  except  to  oppose  and  hate  it. 
niiiii  expresses  the  possibility,  which  is  denied  by 
the  question  (Meyer),  with  a  feeling  of  indignation 
(Grotius  :  indignum  est  si  loti  in  lutuvi  revolvimiir). 
Lt'jffOfifv  covers  the  whole  future.  To  live  in  sin, 
to  hold  any  connection  with  it,  is  henceforth  and 
forever  incompatible  with  justification. — P.  S.] 

Ver.  3.  Enow^  ye  not  [Or  are  ye  ignorant, 
^  dyvoftTf;].  This  form  of  speech,  like  chap, 
vii.  1,  is  undoubtedly  a  reminder  of  someihing  already 
known  to  the  readers  (Tholuck),  yet  it  imparts  at 
the  same  time  a  more  definite  consciousness  and  a 
fuller  view  of  what  is  known.  "  It  is  very  question- 
able," says  Tholuck,  "  whether  other  apostles  exhibit 
baptism  with  the  same  mystical  profoundness  as 
Paul  did."  But  1  Peter  iii.  17-22  is  a  modification 
of  the  same  fundamental  thought.  So,  too,  1  John 
V.  4-6.  [Paul  evidently  regarded  baptism  not  merely 
as  a  sign,  but  also  as  an  efiective  means  of  grace 
(comp.  Gal.  iii.  27  ;  Col.  ii.  12  ;  Titus  iii.  5  ;  Eph. 
V.  26) ;  else  he  would  have  reminded  his  readers  of 
their  conversion  rather  than  their  baptism.  We 
must  always  remember,  however,  that  in  the  first 
missionary  age  of  the  Church  the  baptism  of  adults 
implied,  as  a  rule,  genuine  conversion — the  baptism 
of  Simon  Magus  being  an  exception. — P.  S.] 

That  so  many  of  us  (all  we  who  vrere). 
"Offot,  (piotquot.  [It  denotes  universality,  f«  r/«a»?2/ 
of  us  as,  all  without  exception,  but  it  is  not  stronger 
than  o'lrivm,  which  indicates  the  quality,  such  of  U8 
as. — P.  S.]  The  phrase  pamiZii,v  fic  retains  the 
most  direct  figurative  reference  of  baptism.  It 
means  strictly,  to  immerse  into  Christ  (Riickert) — 
that  is,  into  the  fellowship  of  Christ.  [Con)p.  ver. 
4:  pdnri,(jf>u  ftq  &dvaTov;  Gal.  iii.  27:  fit;  X(Jia' 
Toi'  ifjanTt(T9  tjTe ;  Matt,  xxviii.  19  :  nq  to  ovu/ia. 
Alford  :  "  '  Into  participation  of,'  '  into  union  with' 
Christ,  in  His  capacity  of  spiritual  Mastership,  Head- 
ship, and  Pattern  of  conformity." — P.  S.]  The  ex- 
planation of  Meyer  [accepted  by  Hodge],  that  it 
never  means  any  thing  else  than  to  baptize  in  refer' 
ence  to,  with  relaiian  to,  and  that  the  more  specific 
definitions  must  arise  from  the  context,  fails  to  do 
justice  to  this  original  meaning.  [Comp.  Lange 
and  Schaff  on  Jfotthew,  pp.  555  {Textual  Note  *), 
557,  558,  560. — P.  S.]  But  the  baptizing  into  the 
full,  living  fellowship  of  Christ,  is,  as  the  Ap^tetle 
remarks,  a  baptism  into  the  fellow.ship  of  His  death. 
And  there  is  implied  here,  according  to  the  idea  of 
a  covenant,  the  Divine  adjudication  of  this  saving 
fellowship  on  the  one  hand,  and  the  human  obliga- 
tion  for  an  ethical  continuance  of  the  fellowship  on 
the  other.  The  explanation  of  Grotius  and  other.s, 
the  idea  of  imitation,  is  digressive,  and  weakens  tii« 
sense.     See  Gal.  iii.  27  ;  Col.  ii.  11  ;  Titus  iii.  5. 

Ver.  4.  Therefore  w^e  were  bxiried  with 
him   \_avvirdqjrj^iiv    o  vv    aurw    did    t  oZ 


202 


THE   EPISTLE   OF   PAUL   TO   THE   ROMANS. 


^ 


pant  ia  nat  Qi;  tli;  tov  &  dvarov.  To  be 
buried  is  a  stronger  expression  than  to  die,  for  the 
burial  oonfirius  death  and  raises  it  beyond  doubt ;  it 
witlidraws  the  dead  from  our  sight,  and  annihilates 
him,  as  it  were.  The  same  figure  in  Col.  ii.  12. 
The  mystic  (n'<v  in  fnn'rd(iiiifiai,  as  also  in  arvano- 
OrtjfTxiii,  ariTrar(jurf{cu,  &c.,  signifies  the  li/n-nmoD 
of  the  believer  with  Christ ;  comp.  the  remarks  of 
Tholuek,  p.  281  f.— P.  S.].  Buried  in  death;  an 
oxymoron,  according  to  which  burial  precedes  and 
death  follows,  as  is  illustrated  in  the  immersion  into 
the  bath  of  baptism.  The  analogous  feature  in  the 
life  of  Christ  was  His  rejection  by  the  world,  and 
His  violent  death  on  the  cross.  The  expression  de- 
notes not  only  a  burial  before  death  and  for  death, 
but  it  is  likewise  an  expression  of  the  decision  and 
completion  of  death,  and,  finally,  a  reference  to  the 
transition  from  death  to  the  resurrection.  The  fin- 
ished x«T«()r/Tn,',  as  the  bringing  about  of  the  dvd- 
diai^  ;  Col.  ii.  12.* 

Into  death  [fit;  1 6v  &dvaroi'^.  The 
death  of  Christ  is  not  merely  a  death  of  the  indi- 
vidual Jesus,  but  the  death  which,  in  principle  or 
power,  comprehends  all  mankind,  and  which  abso- 
lutely separates  the  old  world  and  the  new  world. 
Therefore  it  nnist  not  here  be  particularized  (Calov. : 
the  declared  death  of  sin ;  others  give  different  in- 
terpretations). [El^  Tov  OdvccTov  must  be  closely 
oonneuted  with  fjanTia/ictToq,  baptism  into  the  death 
of  Chi'ist  for  the  appropriation  of  its  full  benefit, 
viz.,  the  remission  of  sins  and  reconciliation  with 
God.— P.  S.] 

In  order  that,  as  Christ  ixras  raised  up 
[  i  V  a  (li  i;  7T  1 1)  'j  y  i(,'  0  tj  A'  ()  kt  t  6 1;  i  x  v  i  y.  (>  ii)  v 
di,d    riji;    doitj^    toTi    llax^oi;,    x.t./.].      The 

*  (aU  commentatorB  of  note  (except  Stuart  and  Hedge) 
expressly  admit  or  take  it  lor  granted  that  in  this  verse, 
especially  in  <TvveTaii>T)iJLev  and  ifyipd-i),  the  ancient  prevail- 
ing mole  of  baptism  hy  immersion  aiul  emersion  is  implied, 
SB  giving  additional  force  to  the  idea  of  the  going  down  of 
the  Old  and  the  rising  up  of  the  new  man.  Chrysostom  on 
John  iii.,  ir)m.  xxv.  (al.  xxiv.,  Op/-.,  torn.  viii.  p.  151) : 
Kada7r«p  iv  nvi  Ta.'pro,  Tw  v5aTt  KaradvovTiuv  ijfxutv  Ta?  #C€- 
(^oAac,  6  TroAAatbf  avdpoiiTO^  9dnTCTai,  Kai  KaToSuv  KaTut 
KpvTTTtTac  oAujc  KaBdna^ '  cira  dvavevoi'Twv  i]fjiwv,  6  Kat-uo^ 
dfcicrt  TToAii'.  Ill'  tlien  quotes  t'ol.  ii.  12;  Horn.  vi.  (i. 
liloomfii-ld  :  "There  is  a  plain  allusion  to  tl'C  ancient  mode 
of  baptism  by  immersion  ;  on  which,  see  Suieer's  Tlies.  and 
Uingliam's  Anbqnitiis."  Birneg  :  "  It  is  altogotlier  proba- 
ble that  the  A])ostlo  has  allusion  to  the  custom  of  bajitiziiig 
by  immorsion."  Conybeare  and  Howson  :  "This  passage 
Ciinnot  be  understood,  unless  it  be  borne  in  mind  that  the 
primitive  baptism  was  by  immersion."  Webster  and  AVil- 
Kinson  :  "Uoublless  there  is  an  allusion  to  immersion,  as 
the  uriual  mnde  of  baptism,  introduced  to  show  that  bap- 
ti.sTn  symboliEod  also  our  spiritual  resurrection,  utircp 
mip^'X."  Comp.  also  Hengel,  Uiickeri,  Tholuek,  Meyer. 
ITie  objection  of  Philippi  (whn,  however,  himself  rcgiirds 
this  ailusion  probable  in  ver.  4),  that  in  this  c;ise  tho.  Apos- 
tle would  have  expressly  mentioned  the  symbolic  act,  lias 
no  force  in  view  of  the  daily  practice  of  baptism.  But  im- 
morsionists,  on  the  other  hand,  make  an  unwarranted  use 
of  this  passage.  It  should  be  remembered,  that  immiMsinn 
ia  not  coinfnandi'd  here,  but  simply  alluded  to,  and  that  the 
immiriiiiti,  or  Karafvatt,  is  only  one  part  of  the  baptismal 
act,  symbolizing  the  going  down  of  the  old  man  of  sin  ; 
and  tnat  the  einirxiim,  or  ai'dSucrit,  of  the  new  man  of 
nghteou.iiios.i,  is  just  as  essential  to  complete  the  idea. 
Hence,  in-espeolivo  of  other  considerations,  the  substitu- 
tion of  the  onesided  and  secular  term  imm.  rsimi  for  bnp- 
tirni,  in  a  revision  of  the  Englinh  Bible,  would  give  a  mere- 
ly negative  view  of  the  meaning  of  the  sacrainent.  ilnp- 
tvsra,  and  the  corresponding  verb,  which  have  long  sbico 
become  naturalized  In  the  Kngli-h  language,  as  much  9<J 
a«  ('liri>l,  apiiflh-,  iiiifjtl,  &{;.,  arc  the  only  terms  to  rxpress 
properly  the  use  of  water  foi  tacrnl,  surfnvn  ntal  purposes, 
ami  the  Idea  of  resurrection  as  well  as  of  death  and  burial 
with  (Miiist.  Immersion  is  undoubtedly  a  more  expressive 
form  tlian  sprinklinu' ;  y<'t  the  eincacy  of  the  sacrament  does 
not  ili'pend  upon  the  (ju-antity  or  quality  of  Water,  nor  upon 
He  muUo  of  its  appllcution. — i;*.  S.J 


purpose  of  dying  with  Christ.  The  power  that  raised 
our  Lord  was  the  (Voja  of  the  Father.  Thus  the 
resurrection  of  Christ  is  traced  back  to  the  highest 
Cause.  God  is  the  Father,  as  Origin  and  Author  of 
the  spiritual  world  comprehended  in  Christ,  liefijre 
the  Father's  name  the  creature-world  ascends  into 
the  spiritual  world,  and  the  spiritual  world  is  con 
joined  in  the  Son.  The  glory  of  the  Father  is  th* 
concentrated  revelation  of  all  the  attributes  of  the 
Father  in  their  unity,  especially  of  His  omnipotence 
(1  Cor.  vi.  14;  Eph.  i.  19),  wisdom,  and  goodness; 
or  of  His  omnipotent  love  in  its  faithfulness,  and  of 
His  personality  in  its  most  glorious  deed.*  Before 
the  glory  of  the  Father  the  whole  living  world  goes 
to  ruin,  is  doomed  to  death,  in  order  that  the  dead 
Christ  may  be  made  alive  as  Prince  of  the  resurrec- 
tion. Applications  of  the  duia  to  the  divinity  of 
Christ  (Theodoret  [fj  olxtia  Otortjc'],  and  others); 
in  gloriam  palrin  (Beza  [inadmissible  on  account 
of  di,d  with  the  genitive]  ) ;  in  paterna  gloria  re- 
surrcx't  (Castalio). 

From  the  dead,  ly.  viy.{)ii)v.  The  world  of 
the  dead  is  regarded  as  a  connected  sphere.  Also 
antithesis  to  tli;  Ouvutov. 

So  vre  also  should  walk  in  newness  of  life 
[o!/T(i>(,-  y.ai  /jfifti;  iv  xaivoTfjTi,  tmtjq  nt- 
(t  I, n nr  t'j ail) ft.(v'\.  In  newness  of  life  ;  that  is,  in 
a  new  kind  and  form  of  life,  which  is  subsequently 
denoted  as  incorruptibility,  and  therefore  also  by 
implication  as  continual  newness  and  perpetual  re- 
newal of  existence.  Consequently,  more  than  uo/; 
y.ai,%'ti  (Grotius).f  [Meyer,  Alford  :  "  Not  '  a  new 
life  ; ' — nor  are  such  expressions  ever  to  be  diluted 
away  thus." — P.  S.]  Walk  gives  prominence  to  the 
practical  proof  of  this  newness  in  new,  free  condtict 
of  life. 

Ver.  5.  For  if  we  have  grown  together 
[il  YCi(i  ail fi  qi  I' TO !■  yi-yova/ifv^.  The  ex- 
pression a  i'fi  <{>  i'Tot;,  denoting  originally  inborn 
[innate] ;  born  with  [congenital,  connate],  means 
here  the  same  as  at'/iq^i'/ji;,  grown  together  bji  nature. 
[Grotius :  coaluimus ;  Tholuek,  Philippi,  Meyer: 
ZHsanun'-ngewac/men,  vei'waclisen  init,  coHcretiis  ;  Stu- 
art :  become  homogeneous  ;  Alford  :  intimnteli/  and 
prugressit'elji  united. — P.  S.]  The  expression  com- 
plantati  (Vulgate,  Luther  [E.  V.:  planted  toiethfr'\) 
goes  too  far,  and  is  not  justified  by  the  language  ;  \ 
while  the  interpretation  grafted  iido  (Era.-iiiius  [Cal- 
vin, Estius,  Conybeare  aiul  Howson],  atid  others) 
does  not  express  enough  here  [and  would  require 
f/ii/i'TfrTo^,  insititiii^. — P.  S.]  The  figure  denotes 
believers  as  a  unity  of  dilVeient  branches  in  one  root 
or  one  trunk.  These  characters,  which  are  utiited 
in  one  spirit,  as  the  grapes  of  a  chister,  have  siirung 
from  one  gos|)el  or  new  principle  of  life.  Thus  be- 
lievers have  grown  into  an  image  or  analogue  of  the 
death  of  Jesus  {t(7>  6/i  omi/i  «Tt,  dative  of  direc- 
tion), but  not  with  such  an  analogue  (Meyer,  Tho- 


*  [  J6(a  and  ivvaixLt  arc  closely  related  ;  comp.  the  He- 
brew "(5,  and  ri>  Kpdrot  t^«  £<>(>)«,  Col.  i.  11.  Meyer  ex» 
iilains  Wfa,  dir  glorvtichi:  Oesainmlvullkuiiimiiih'it  GotUt. — 
i'.  S.) 

t  [fo  \\.\*n  Koppe,  Keiche,  Stuart :  "  Kaxv&niri  t^c  fc  ^ 
I  regard  as  a  Hebraistic  funn,  in  which  the  tirst  noun  sup- 
plies tlie  place  of  the  adjectiA-e."  Agiiinst  tills  dilution, 
comp.  Winer,  y.  '.'11,  Meyer  and  -Vlfurd  m  <■»■.  The  ab- 
stract noun  Kat.v6-ni%  gives  greater  jiromin'Mice  to  the  qual- 
ity of  ;irio/H»<,  which  is  the  chief  point  hero ;  eomp.  % 
ThesH.  u.  II  ;  1  Tim.  vi.  17.-1'.  S.] 

J  |<rvM<^i>Tot  is  not  derived  from  ^vTctiw,  tn  pUi'xl  (^vrtv- 
rot,  used  bv  I'lito),  but  from  ^liw,  or  (/)uo>»rt<,  '"  prmo. 
Comp.  on  ih<-  dillcieiit  meanings  of  o-bfi^i/re.<  llcich^ 
Fritttcbe,  and  i'hilippi  in  luc.—i!.  S.] 


CHAPTER  VI.   1-11. 


203 


luck),  with  which  we  cannot  connect  any  clear 
thought.  [Philippi  and  Meyer  explain :  grown  to- 
gether, or,  intimately  connected  with  the  likeness 
of  His  death  ;  the  ofiouo/na  being  spiritual  death,  so 
that  the  meaning  is :  If  we  are  spritually  dead  to 
sin,  as  Christ  was  physically  dead,  &c.  So  in  the 
other  clause  our  spiritual  resurrection  is  the  6/ioiu)/ia 
of  the  bodily  resurrection  of  Christ. — P.  S.]  Nei- 
ther can  rtZ  on  0  1,(1)  fiat  I,  be  the  dative  of  instru- 
ment :  We  have  grown  together  with  Christ  [tw 
A'^MTTw  being  understood  as  in  ver.  6]  through  the 
resemblance  of  His  death-baptism,  the  likeness  of 
His  death  (Enismus  [Beza,  Grotius],  Fritzsche,  Baur 
[Van  Hengel],  and  most  others).  For  [this  would 
require  ahtiTi  after  at'niqivroi,  and]  believers  are  not 
grown  together  by  the  likeness  of  the  death  of 
Christ,  but  by  His  death  itself  in  a  religious  sense, 
as  cause  (through  the  medium  of  the  gospel),  in 
order  that,  as  an  organism,  they  should  now  exhibit 
as  a  copy  His  death  in  the  ethical  sense. 

We  shall  be  also  with  his  resurrection 
[«AAa  xal  rrc;  avaaTafTioii;  tao/iif&a^. 
The  antithesis  is  strengthened  by  aX/.d  [which  is 
used  sometimes  also  by  the  classics  for  the  rapid  and 
emphatic  introduction  of  the  antithetical  idea  in  the 
apodosis  after  a  hypothetical  protasis ;  see  Meyer 
in  I'lC,  and  Hartung,  Partikellchre,  ii.  p.  40. — P.  S.]. 
We  shall  also  be  grown  together  with  Him  into  the 
likeness  of  His  resurrection  (Beza,  Grotius,  Meyer, 
Ptiilppi ;  Tholuck  :  "  abbreviated  comparative  "). 
Kot  (rvfiqivroi,  t7j<;  dvaardanoi;  (Erasmus,  Calvin, 
Olshausen,  and  others).*  The  reference  of  the  ex- 
pression to  the  resurrection  of  the  body  (by  Tertul- 
lian,  and  others)  is  not  in  harmony  with  tlie  context 
(see  ver.  4) ;  yet  is  altogether  authorized  by  ver. 
9,  if  we  regard  the  new  life  as  C(mtinuing  to  the 
bodily  resurrection  (therefore  an  ethical  and  physical 
resurrecticm,  which  Meyer  and  Tholuck  oppose). 
The  future,  trrofnOa,  is  indeed  not  imperative 
(Keiche  [Olshausen,  Stuart :  expressive  of  obliga- 
tion] ) ;  nor  does  it  denote  willingness  (Fritzsche), 
but  the  certainty  of  the  result,  the  necessary  conse- 
quence of  dying  together  with  Christ  [Tholuck, 
Meyer,  Hodge],  if  we  understand  tiiereby  not  merely 
a  natural  consequence,  but  an  etliical  one,  which  in- 
volves an  ever-new  willingness.  Tliis  is  likev\'ise  in- 
dicated by  what  immediately  follows. 

Ver.  6.  Knowing  this.  That  objective  rela- 
tion of  the  resurrection  is  not  only  confirmed  by  the 
subjective  consciousness  (Meyer),  but  it  is  also  con- 
ditioned by  it. 

That  our  old  man  [6  n a).av6c;  ij n  mv 
a V f)- (i lit n 0 i;'\.  Meyer:  our  old  eria.  Tiiis  is  liable 
to  misunderstanding,  and  expresses  too  much.  Meyer 
f\irther  explains :  "  Personification  of  the  entire 
state  of  sinfulness  before  the  nahyyfrfcrla  (John 
iii.  3  ;  Titus  iii.  5  ;  Eph.  iv.  22; ;  Col.  iii.  9)."  Tiiis 
expresses  too  little.  The  old  man  is  tiie  whole  sin- 
fulness of  man,  which,  proceeding  from  Adam,  and 
pervading  the  old  world  and  making  it  old,  lias  be- 
come, in  the  concrete  human  image,  the  pseudo- 
plasmatic  phantom  of  human  nature  and  the  human 
form  f  (see  cliap.  viii.  3).     Tholuck's  explanation  is 


♦  [Grammatinally,  this  is  not  impossible,  since  <ruix<l>vToi 
is  consiructed  with  the  genitive  as  well  as  with  the  Jative  ; 
but  TTJ  aicKTrdrTfL  would  have  been  more  natural  in  this 
case  ;  hence  it  is  better  to  supply  <rvij.(j>vTot.  tu!  6/[io(.co|iiaTt, 
BO  that  T^9  avao-Tcio-eius  depends  upon  t.  o^iouojuari. — P.  S.] 

t  [One  of  Lange's  hardest  sentences:  " />■;■  .iHc  J/j««7j 
ist  die  tiiihiillich  Suiiilh'\fiigkKii  dex  Meii^dien,  trie  sie  van 
Adam  aiisffihend,  die  aik  Wilt  durchziehend  und  zur  alien 
macliend  in  dein  coiicreUn  Menschenbilde  tuim  pseiukmlasma- 


almost  unintelligible  :  "  Indication  of  the  ego  of  th* 
earlier  personality ;  as  in  tao)  civ&Qoinoi;,  6  y.(JV7z^ 
Toy  iv  ri]  y.ctii^ia  avQ^otno';,  1  Peter  iii.  4.* 

Was  [not  is,  as  in  the  E.  V.]  crucified  with 
him  [avvtaravQMdii,  comp.  Gal.  ii.  20:  A'()kt- 
tip  ai'VfaxaT'QiD^ai, '  tw  dk  orxtxi.  tyo),  t-.'J]  dt  tv 
i/tol  A'^/tffToq].  "  Namely,  at  the  time  when  we 
were  baptized,"  says  Meyer  [referring  to  vers.  3,  4]. 
But  this  is  rather  a  superficial  view.  Baptism  haa 
actually  and  individually  realized  a  connection  which  r 
had  already  been  realized  potentially  and  generally 
in  the  death  on  the  cross;  see  2  Cor.  v.  14,  16; 
Gal.  ii.  19;  Col.  iii.  1,  Tholuck:  " Calovius  says  very 
properly  against  Grotius :  avv  no7i.  similitudinem 
notat^  verum  simultatem,  ut  ita  dicam,  et  commu- 
NioNEM.  The  accessory  idea  of  pain,  or  of  gradual 
death  [advocated  by  Grotius,  Stuart,  Barnes],  could 
hardly  have  been  thought  of  in  this  connection  by 
the  Apostle."  Yet  we  are  also  reminded  of  the 
violence  and  efiFective  energy  of  the  death  on  the 
cross  by  the  following :  in  order  that  the  body  of  sin 
might  be  destroyed.  The  destructive  power  of  the 
death  on  the  cross  involves  not  merely  pain  and  sor- 
row,  but  also  the  ignominy  of  the  cross  of  Christ. 
According  to  Meyer,  Paul  only  made  use  of  the  ex- 
pression because  Christ  had  died  on  the  cross. 

In  order  that  the  body  of  sin  might  be 
destroyed  [iVa  x ar a (j  y  tj  S^ri  to  aoi/ia  xfji; 
afia^riac;;  comp.  to  awfia  t^i;  ffa^zdt;,  Col.  ii. 
11,  and  TO  ao)/>a  to?  Savdrov  toi'toi',  Rom.  vii.  . 
24].  It  is  self-evident,  from  Paul  and  tlie  whole  ' 
Bible,  that  there  is  not  the  slightest  reference  here 
to  a  [literal]  distruction  of  the  body  [«.  e.,  of  this 
physical  organism  which  is  only  dissolved  in  physi- 
cal death,  and  which,  instead  of  being  annihilated,  is 
to  be  sanctified;  comp.  1  Cor.  vi.  20;  1  Thess.  v.  23  ; 
Rom.  xiii.  14. — P.  S.].  As  "  the  old  man  "  is  the 
pseudo-plasmatic  phantom  of  man,  so  is  "  the  body 
of  sin  "  the  phantom  of  a  body  in  man  consisting 
of  his  whole  sinfulness ;  and  so,  further  on,  is  the 
body  of  death  (chap.  vii.  24)  the  phantom  of  a  cor- 
poreal power  of  death  encompassing  man.  It  is  re- 
markable that  most  of  the  later  expositors  (with  the 
exception  of  Philippi,  p.  210  ff.)  reject  the  construc- 
tions that  are  most  nearly  correct,  to  substitute  for 
them  others  which  are  dualistic. 

1.  Figurative  explnin&tions.    Sin  under  the  j^^fwr* 
of  a  body. 

a.  The  totality  of  sin  (Origen,  Grotius).     [Chry- 
sostom  :  /}  6?.6yJ.?i^0i;  d/nafJTia.     Calvin  ;    "  Corpus 

tisehen  Scheinbilde  der  Mfnscherwalur  uvd  Menfchevgrstall 
gewrirden  ist."  In  like  manner  he  explains  "the  body  of 
death,"  vii.  24,  and  "  the  law  m  the  members,"  vii.  23,  with 
reference  to  the  physiological  and  mcdic:il  docti-ine  of  plasma 
and  pseudo-plasma,  as  if  Paul  had  by  intuition  anticipated 
modern  science.— P.  S.l 

*  [The  TToAaibi  ai/flpuTros  is  the  <7ap{  personified,  or  the 
eya>  <rapKiKos,  chap.  vii.  14,  18—?.  <■.,  the  fallen,  sinful  na- 
ture before  regeneration,  in  opposition  to  the  koh'os,  or 
veoi  avOpuino^,  or  the  Kaivri  ktiVis,  the  renewed,  regenerated 
man;  Col.  iii.  9,  10;  Eph.  iv.  22-24;  2  Cor.  v.  17.  The 
teiTU  moH  is  used  because  sin  controls  the  whole  personal- 
ity, as,  on  the  other  hand,  regeneration  is  a  radical  change 
of  the  whole  man  with  all  his  faculties  and  dispositions. 
The  phrase,  Ihr  old  man,  the  mini  of  sin,  is  traced  to  rabbin- 
ical oiiain  by  Scbottgen,  Bloomfield,  Stuart ;  but  the  pas- 
sage quoted  by  Schiittgen  from  the  comparatively  recent 
Sulun-clwdash  (first  published  in  1599)  has  a  different  mean- 
ing, according  to  Tholuck,  p.  287.  The  Talmud,  however, 
calls  pioselyteft  "  new  creatures,"'  and  says  of  them  ■  "tin  y 
became  as 'little  children;"  sec  Schottgi-n,  Hnr.i.  p.  328, 
704  f.  ;  Wetstein  and  Meyer  on  2  Cor.  v.  17.  Meyer 
says  :  "  The  form  of  the  expression  (Kiuvt)  ktiVis)  is  r:ib-< 
binical ;  for  the  Rabbins  considered  a  convert  to  Judaism  at 
riTTn  n^">3."  The  Christian  idea  of  the  TroAiyyei/^o-ioi 
of  course,  is  far  deeper." — P.  S.] 


204 


THE   EPISTLE   OF   PAUL   TO   THE   ROMANS. 


pfecati  non  earnem  et  ossa,  xed  massam  desiffnat." 
More  accurately  :  Sin  is  personified  as  a  living  organ- 
ism with  ni;my  inenilicrs  (vices),  which  may  be  put 
to  lieath.  So  riiilippi :  "  Z>t>  jla.i.^e  ikr  Siiml'  al.i 
gegliederier  Ortfanixmui."  lUooniiiukl :  "  7'e  aUnta 
tTs  aituuTin^  is  tlie  same  with  6  nahu'o^  avOfjoi- 
TTos",  anif  means  that  sin  is  a  body  consisting  of  many 
particuhir  members  or  vices,  an  imperiuin  in  impe- 
no."— 1'.  S.] 

6.  Tlie  nature  or  substance  of  sin  (Schiittgen). 

c.  Tlie  figure  of  sin  with  reference  to  the  figure 
of  the  crucitLxion  (Calov.,  Wolf,  and  others). 

d.  "  The  tendency  of  alienation  from  God  and 
oonformitv  to  tlie  [ileasures  of  the  world "  (J. 
Miiller,  and  others;  Tholuck,  p.  290). 

e.  More  strongly :  The  whole  man  in  his  de- 
parture from  God  ;  the  nntund  man  (Augiistin, 
Luther,  Calvin  [Hodge  :  "  Tlie  body  of  sin  "  is  only 
another  name  for  "  the  old  man,"  or  rather  for  its 
concrete  form]  ). 

f.  Ueduced  to  a  minimum  :  Bad  habit  (Pelagius). 

2.  Literal  explanations  : 

(I.  The  flesh  as  flesh  of  sin,  <r«()i  aua^Tt'ai,-  (Ro- 
senmiilier). 

b.  "  The  body  belonging  to  the  principle  of  sin, 
the  body  ruled  by  sin."  The  old  nmn  had  such  a 
body,  and  this  mlifia,  as  far  as  it  is  a  body  of  sin, 
Bhould  be  completely  destroyed  by  crucifixion  with 
Christ"  (Meyer).  An  utter  confusion  of  the  figura- 
tive and  literal  construction.  [Winer,  Grainm.,  p. 
177  :  the  body  which  belongs  to  sin,  in  which  sin 
has  its  existence  and  dominion,  almost  the  same  with 
(Toiiin  T/7^-  (Taozd,-,  Col.  i.  22.  Similarly  Alford,  after 
De  Wette :  the  body,  which  belongs  to  or  servos  sin, 
in  which  sin  rules  or  is  manifeoted,  =  ret  /<*/.»/,  ver. 
13,  in  which  is  6  rouoc  t^s'  a/ntQTiai;,  vii.  23. 
Wordsworth  :  the  body  of  sin  is  our  boily,  so  far  as 
it  Is  the  seat  and  instrument  of  sin,  and  the  slave 
of  sin.— P.  S.l 

c.  The  body  as  aiTuia  tTk  ffaoxo,-,  and  the  latter 
the  scat  of  sin  (Sender,  iJsteri,  Rdckert,  Ritschl, 
Rotho,  Hofmann  ;  see  Tholuck,  p.  29(i).* 

3.  The  anti-dualistic  expositors,  who  interpreted 
this  (T("//<rt  as  the  real  body  or  the  natural  man,  were 
compelled  to  render  improperly  the  xaTa(>'/r;Ori,  as: 
evacuarefnr,  might  be  made  inoperative  and  power- 
less. [Tertullian,  Augii-itin;  also  Stuart  and  IJarnes: 
might  lie  deprived  of  elKciencv,  power,  life.  Alford  : 
rendered  powerless,  annulled,  as  far  as  regards  ener- 
gy and  activity. — P.  S.] 

That  henceforth  we  should  not  be  slaves 
to  sin.  [C.il\"in:  "/i/i'-)«  ahntilionix  /i«/a<."]  Sin 
is  regarded  as  the  C'liitrolling  jiowcr  (sec  ver.  IC)) ; 
John  viii.  -14.  If  this  power  is  to  be  broken,  the 
body  of  sin  must  be  crucified.  The  reason  for  this 
is  given  in  what  follows.  [toTi  iifixtn  Aoi'ltrnv 
tjiiuii  tri  nnruiTirc  is  a  more  concrete  expression  of 
the  aim  than  the  preceding  clause,  i-'i-re  xara^jytjOfi, 
K.T.;..     See  Winer,  p.  r)69.— P.  S.l 

Ver.  7.    For  he  that  hath  died  is  acquitted 

from  sin.  ['(}  yno  n  ;t  o ')  n  r  mv  <)  i  i)  i  x  <t  im  T  ct  i 
(tni)  t7;i;  ft /(«()  t  ('«>,• ;  eomp.  1  Peter  i v.  1:  on 
6  nnfyiov  fv  (Trtoxi,  ninai'Tui  umtitrid^.  The  in- 
t>rpretations  of  this  passage  ilejieml  upon  the  mean- 
ing of  n7Tof>afii>v,  whether  it  Ls  to  be  tiken   in  a 

•  [Tholu'-k  takoH  VM/xa  In  tho  lifornl  (i<>nHo.  Imt  viewed 
VI  thf  f'-'i/  anil  iiiffiii  of  <<iii  (p.  S0^),  jind  onterii  in  tlii«  con- 
nection into  n  full  (liitfiMMion  of  tin?  ine.minn  of  c<ip(,  and 
ita  rolatloD  to  nin,  p.  20fi  tf.  ;  but  llio  propi-r  jpliii-i>  for  n 
bihlioo-p»yoholo(fii«l  ('xcur-tus  on  aap(,  <7w^a,  ^X^'  •^''*> 
r^i/fM,  til  chnp.  vii.     Suo  below.— I*.  ^.J 


physical,  or  in  a  moral  (legal),  or  in  a  .spiritual  (mys- 
tic) sense — P.  S.]  The  chief  and  only  question 
here  is  not  ethical  dying,  or  tiying  with  Christ  (Enis- 
mus,  Calvin,  Cocceius,  bengel,  Olshausen  [De  Wette, 
Philippi],  and  others.  And  the  reason  for  this  is, 
first,  becau.se  justification  must  not  be  regarded  as 
the  consequence,  but  the  cause  of  the  ethical  dying 
with  Christ.  Secmui,  because  not  merely  the  being 
justified  or  freed  from  sin  should  be  pnjved,  in  and 
of  itself,  but  the  being  justified  or  freed  from  sin  by 
death.  An  Ciirlier,  already  present,  universal,  moral, 
and  theocratical  law  of  life  is  thus  used  to  illustrate 
the  new,  religious,  and  ethical  law  of  life  in  Cliiis- 
tianity,  in  the  same  way  that  chap.  viL  1-6  has  refer- 
ence to  such  a  law.  Tiie  univer>al  principle  which 
the  Apostle  makes  his  groundwork  here  in  the  figura- 
tive expression,  is  the  word  in  ver.  23  :  The  najet 
of  sin  is  death.  The  Grecian  and  Roman  form  of 
this  antithesis  was  :  by  execution  the  offender  is  jus- 
tified and  separated  from  his  crime  (Aletha-us,  Wolf, 
and  others).  The  theocratic  form  was  the  same 
decree  of  death  for  sin,  according  to  Gen.  ii.  17  ; 
ix.  G  ;  Lev.  xxiii.  1  fl".  The  sinner  who  was  made  a 
curse-otl'ering,  Clierem,  was  morally  destroyed  in  a 
symbolical  sense,  but,  at  the  same  time,  his  guilt 
also,  as  well  as  his  life  of  sin,  was  destroyed  in  a 
symbolical  sense.  According  to  Gen.  ii.  17,  the 
same  thing  held  good  of  natural  death,  not  so  far  as 
it,  as  a  momentary  power,  put  an  end  to  the  sinner's 
present  life  (Chrysostom,  and  others),  but  rather  be- 
cause it  made  a  penal  sull'ering  extending  into  eternity 
(Slieol)  the  punishment  of  sin.  All  these  modifica. 
tions  are  grouped  in  the  primitive  law  :  death  is  the 
wages  of  sin  ;  and  this  is  the  law  which  the  Apostle 
makes  the  image  of  the  Christian  law  of  life.  The 
Christian  dies  to  sin  by  being  crucified  with  Christ. 
Now,  the  being  justified  does  not  mean  here  justifica- 
tion by  faith  in  itself  (although  d\=ihg  with  Christ  is 
connected  therewith),  but  justification  as  a  release 
from  sin  by  the  death  of  the  sinner  himself  Be- 
cause Meyer  ignores  the  comjilete  Old  Testament 
idea  of  death,  he  attacks  the  statute  of  Jewish  the- 
ology :  death,  as  the  punishment  of  sin,  atones  for 
the  guilt  of  sin.  He  explains  the  Apostle's  decla- 
ration thus :  "  He  is  made  a  t)ixaio^  by  death,  not 
as  if  he  were  nosv  free  from  the  guilt  of  his  sins 
committed  in  life,  but  so  far  as  he  sins  no  more." 
The  explanation  of  ethical  death  with  C'hrist  (Rothe, 
Phili|ipi,  and  others  already  mentioned)  heie  makes 
what  is  to  be  proved  the  proof  itself  (as  Meyer  prop- 
erly remarks).  Meyer  refers  the  passage  to  physical 
death  as  exit  from  the  present  life — a  view  in  wliicli 
regard  is  not  paid  to  penal  suftVring.*  Better  than 
this  is  the  view  :  As  activity  ceases  in  the  dead,  and 
sin  with  it,  so  should  it  also  be  with  you  who  havo 
died  with  Christ  (Theodoret,  MeLanchthon,  (Jrotius). 
l{ut  there  is  the  same  iiiadequateness  of  the  com- 
parison. Tholuck's  exposition  is  utterly  untenable 
(with  reference  to  Calvin,  Bengel,  Spener,  and  oth- 
ers), that  sin  .iliould  hei'c  be  regarded  as  a  credittir 
who  has  just  claims  on  man,  &c.  ;  for,  while  a  debtor 
is  relca.sed  by  death  from  his  creiiitor,  there  is  by  no 
I  means  a  diKantvaOai,  of  the  debtor  from  his  debuf 

♦  1  Meyer's  view  U.  that  lie  wlio  is  pbysiciilly  dead  is  free 
\  from  nin,  biTna-<e  he  l.t  frt»e  from  tlie  body,  the  ^cnt  of  niii. 
j  Itut  tlii<,  ns  I'liilipi'i  remarks,  is  contrary  to  the  biblioiil 
'  and  rniiline  nntliropoloi^y. — 1'.  8.] 

f  (We  add  tin-  viiws  of  leadinL'  Enfflish  and  American 

coninientHtors  :  Scott,  MaekniKht,  and   llodtjo:   Ilo  who  ia 

di-ad  M>iih  Cli.isl  i.i  freed  honi  the  tniilt  and  punishnienl  of 

fin  by  justification.     Sfuaii  and   Harncs  :    The  .\jio!<t:c  aiv. 

\  pliutt  a,  common  Jewish  proverb  concen  ing  physical  dtatn. 


CHAPTER  VI.   1-11. 


205 


Ver.  8.    Novr  if  we  died  with  Christ,  &c. 

[  £  t  d  i  a  7T  (  0-  civ  0  f(  f  V  a  v  v  X  (j  tO"  t  w  ].  di 
announces  the  transition  to  the  new  thought,  that 
bL-lievci-s,  having  died  with  Christ,  would  also  live 
with  Him.  But  this  is  not  a  mere  conclusion  from 
tlie  being  dead  to  the  new  life  ;  the  accent  rests  on 
the  qualification  jvUk  Christ,  because  Christ  lives. 
As  we  are  dead  with  Ciirist  in  His  death,  in  its  pro- 
foundest  meaning  and  effect — which  death  comprises 
the  separation  from  tlie  entire  old  world,  and  its  sin 
and  vanitj- — so  do  we  believe  that  w^e  shall  also 
live  with  him  ^^mard'o/ufvori.  v.ai  avvLtj- 
aoitf  V  aliTbi  ]  in  the  supremely  highest  and  most 
intense  life — which  life  is  eternal,  and  is  an  eternal 
life.  Meyer  emphasizes  simply  the  inference  from 
tlie  ethical  death  with  Christ  to  ethical  participation 
in  the  new  and  enduring  life  of  Christ.  He  is  much 
in  error  in  excluding  here  [with  Philippi]  the  idea 
of  the  Christian's  future  share  in  the  blessedness  of 
the  glorified  Saviour  (see  chap,  viii.),  as  Origen, 
Chrysostom,  Grotius,  Reiche,  and  others  are  in  con- 
fining (H'ttjffofifv  to  the  future  life.  Rosenmiiller, 
Thohick,  and  others,  have  properly  comprised  both 
these  elements ;  yet  the  chief  emphasis  rests  upon 
the  assurance  of  the  new  ethical  life  as  implying  the 
full  freedom  from  all  sin  in  the  fellowship  of  Christ. 
Tholuck,  with  Erasmus,  Calvin,  and  others,  empha- 
sizes once  for  all  [Iqcknat,  ver.  10]  as  an  eternal 
destination  to  new  life.  This  destination  is  commen- 
surate with  the  certainty  of  being  dead  with  Christ. 
Yet,  granting  full  force  to  the  conclusion,  it  is  still 
an  object  of  faith  {ni-(TTfvo,i(tv),  which  rests  mainly 
on  Christ  as  the  risen  One.  (Different  interpreta- 
tions of  nKTTfvofitv:  Confidence  in  Divine  assist- 
ance, Fritzsche ;  in  the  Divine  promise,  Baumgarten- 
Crusius  ;  in  God  as  the  Finisher  of  the  commenced 
work  of  grace,  Philippi  [comp.  1  Thess.  v.  24 ;  2 
Thess.  iii.  3  ;  2  Tim.  ii.  11]  ). 

Ver.  9.  Knowing,  &c.  From  faith  in  the  risen 
One  there  arises  the  certain  knowledge  that  hence- 
forth He  can  never  die  ;  because  He  could  die  but 
once,  inasmuch  as,  witli  the  guilt  of  sin.  He  had 
assumed  also  the  judgment  of  death.  [Alford : 
Death  could  not  hold  Him,  and  had  no  power  over 
Him  further  than  by  His  own  sufferance  ;  but  power 
over  Him  it  had,  inasmuch  as  He  died.  Meyer :  The 
xi'ptn'ifn'  of  death  over  Christ  was  decreed  by  God 
(ver,s.  8-10),  and  brought  about  by  Clirist's  voluntary 
obedience  (Jolm  x.  18  ;  Matt.  xx.  28).  The  convic- 
tion that  Christ  lives  for  ever  furnishes  the  ground 
and  support  to  our  own  life-union  with  Him.] 

Ver.  10.  For  in  that  he  died,  or,  the  death 
w^hich  he  died.  The  expression,  o  ani&avtv, 
may  mean :  as  far  as  His  death  is  concerned  (Winer) ; 
or,  as  far  as  the  death  which  He  died  is  concerned 
(De  Wette) ;  or  that  wh  ch  He  died,  so  that  o  is 

to  one  who  is  epirihially  dead  as  to  sin— t.  e.,  he  must  be- 
come free  of  its  influence.  Bloomfield  :  He  whose  corrupt 
nature  has  been  crucified  with  Christ  is  freed  from  its  power 
and  slavery.  Alford  :  As  a  man  that  is  dead  is  released 
from  guilt  and  bondafre  among  men  :  so  a  man  that  has 
died  to  sin  is  acquitted  from  the  guilt  of  sin  and  released  of 
its  bondafre,  so  that  sin  (personified)  has  no  more  claims  on 
him,  either  as  a  creditor  or  as  a  master,  c;\nnot  detain  him 
for  debt,  nor  sue  him  for  service.  Forbes  combines  the 
view  of  letral  freedom  from  tlie  guilt  of  sin  (Fraser,  Ral- 
danc)  with  the  interpretation  of  spiritual  freedom  from  the 
power  and  dominion  of  sin.  "  It  is  to  sin  as  a  whole,  to  its 
power  as  well  as  to  its  guilt,  that  the  believer  has  virtually 
died  in  Christ  as  his  representative  and  substitute."  All  is 
already  objectively  accomplished  in  Christ,  yet  remains  to 
be  realizetf  sulijectively  in  the  believer's  individual  experi- 
ence, which  will  not  be  completed  till  after  the  literal  death 
■^  the  body.— P.  8.] 


viewed  as  the  subject  [or  ratlier  as  the  accusative  of 
the  object ;  comp.  Gal.  ii.  20  :  6  f)£  vTv  u7j. — P.  S.]. 
We  prefer  the  last  exposition,  but  do  not  refer  the  6, 
with  Benecke  (after  Ililarius,  and  others)  to  the  mor. 
tal  part  of  Christ  [that  which  died  in  Christ],  but 
to  Christ's  great  and  unexampled  experience  of 
death.  All  his  dying  was  abhorrence  of  sin,  induced 
by  sin,  directed  against  sin. — Unto  sin  he  died 
\_rn]  a/ia^Tia*  ani&avfvl.  Explanations: 
ad  ezptanda  peccata  (Grotius,  Olshausen) ;  or,  ad 
expianda  et  toUenda  p  (Tholuck  [Reiche,  Fritzsche], 
Philippi) ;  [or,  to  destroy  the  power  of  sin  (Chry- 
sostom,  Beza,  Calvin,  Bengel,  Ewald]  ).  Indefinite 
reference  to'  death  (Rlickert,  De  Wette  [Alford],  and 
others).  Meyer :  His  death  paid  the  debt  to  sin, 
and  now  it  can  have  no  more  power  over  Him. 
Hofmann  :  With  His  death,  all  passive  relation  to 
sin  has  ceased.  Certainly  the  parallel  in  ver.  11 
\yiy.(Jol<(;  T'Jj  a//a(>T<'a]  seems  to  require  a  similar 
rendering.  Yet  we  must  not  merely  bring  out 
prominently  the  repulsiveness  of  sin  to  the  life  of 
Jesus,  but  rather  the  repulsiveness  of  His  life  to 
sin — which  repulsiveness  was  consummated  in  Hia 
death.  Both  together  constitute  the  absolute  sepa- 
ration. 

Once  [tiy«7ra|].  Once  for  all.  [The  one 
sacrifice  on  the  cross,  as  the  sacrifice  of  the  infinite 
Son  of  God,  has  infinite  value  both  as  to  extent  and 
time,  and  hence  excludes  repetition ;  comp.  Heb. 
vii.  27;  ix.  12,  26,  28;  x.  10;  1  Pet.  iii.  18.— P.  S.] 

But  in  that  he  liveth,  or,  the  Life  that  he 
Jiveth  [o  (5fc  ct],  tfj  rm  &ff)].  All  His  life, 
His  whole  glorious  life',  is  for  God.  As  His  death 
consisted  wholly  in  the  ethical  reaction  against  sin, 
so  His  life  consists  wholly  in  consecration  to  God, 
His  honor,  and  His  kingdom.  [Christ's  life  on  earth 
was  also  a  life  for  God,  but  in  conflict  with  sin  and 
death,  over  which  He  triumphed  in  the  resurrection. 
— P.  S.]  Theophylact's  view  is  wrong :  by  the 
power  of  God. 

Ver.  11.  Thus  reckon  ye  also  yourselves 
(account  yourselves)  dead  indeed  unto  sin 
[Ol'iTO)?  v.ai  VftfTi;  loy  1^.(0  St  iavtovi;  vf- 
y.Qovt;  fiev  rfj  a/ta^r/a].  A  loyitiaOai,  of 
Christ  does  not  stand  as  a  parallel  to  '/.oyi'daOi 
(which  is  imperative,  and  not  indicative,  as  Bengel 
would  have  it).f  It  should  rather  be  derived  from 
the  meaning  of  the  death  of  Christ,  according  to 
ver.  10. 

But  alive  unto  God  in  Christ  Jesus  [hv  Xq. 
'7;;r7.].  That  is,  in  fellowship,  or  living  union  with 
Him  (not  merely  through  Him).;]:  It  refers  not 
simply  to  living  to  God  (Riickeit,  De  Wette  [Al- 
ford] ),  but  also  to  being  dead  to  sin  [Reiche,  Mcy. 
er].  The  loyi^KjO-t  requirus  of  Christians  that  they 
should  understand  what  they  are  as  Christians,  as 
members  of  Christ,  according  to  the  duties  of  com- 
mon fellowship  (Tholuck,  Philippi) ;  but  not  that 
they  should  attain  to  this  condition  by  moral  effort 


*  [The  dative  of  reference  or  relation  ;  in  point  of  fact, 
in  the  case  ol  a/otapria  it  is  the  Dolivus  incnmwodi,  or  dtlri- 
maiti ;  while  in  the  next  clause  tu  9ea>  ie  the  Dat.  com' 
modi.— P.  S.] 

t  [The  indicative  would  rather  require  :  ou'tco  koI  iinels 
\oyii6iJ.i9a,  instead  of  the  second  person.  Alford  is  quits 
mistaken,  when  he  says  :  "Meyer  only  holds  it  to  be  iii' 
dica'.ivi'."  Meyer,  on  the  coi  trary,  takes  XoyiieaOi  to  be 
the  imperative,  in  harmony  with  the  hortative  character  ol' 
what  follows.— P.  S.l 

X  [Meyer  :  ev  X.  'I.  is  not  per  Christum  (Grotius, 
Fritzsche,  o/.),  but  denotes  the  element  in  wlu'ch  the  being 
dead  and  being  alive  holds.  Comp.  Winer,  Gramm.,  p.  361 
-P.  S.]  ^ 


206 


THE   EPISTLE   OF  PAUL  TO   THE   ROMANS. 


(Baur).  That  is,  Christian  life  proceeds  upon  the 
believing  piesuppositiou  of  our  completion  in  Christ ; 
but  this  completion  is  not,  reversely,  brought  to  pass 
by  a  moral  eflbrt.  Of  course,  tiie  telic  completion 
then  meets  the  principial  completion  as  the  goal  of 
effort. 

DOCTBINAL  AND    ETHICAL. 

1.  Pee  the  Preliminari/  7?c»inrAs  on  chaps,  vi.- 
viii.,  and  the  inscription  to  tlie  present  section,  chap, 
vi.  1-11. 

2.  On  chap.  vi.  1.  The  false  conclusion  which 
anomianisin  has  ever  derived  from  the  fact  that  sin, 
in  its  complete  development,  occasions  a  still  more 
glorious  revelation  of  grace,  rests  on  the  erroneous 
supposition  tiiat  the  ethical  and  organic  relation  on 
both  sides  is  a  purely  natural  relation,  which  justifies 
to  an  altogether  passive  conduct  in  religions  and 
moral  things.  This  anomianism  appears  in  Inilian 
heatliendom,  as  well  as  in  modern  liumaTiitarianism, 
chiefly  in  a  pantheistic  form.  Ihit  in  Christian  re- 
ligiousness it  appears  only  sporadically  in  this  form  ; 
yet  mostly,  on  the  other  hand,  in  dualistic  forms. 
This  is  as  much  as  to  say,  tliat  if  the  flosli  be  in- 
dulged in  its  sphere,  the  spirit  will  likewise  maintain 
the  iuscendency  in  its  sphere ;  or,  grace  will  over- 
come sin,  and  the  like.  But  in  every  form  this  ano- 
mianism is  to  the  Apostle  an  object  of  religious  and 
moral  abhorrence,  wiiich  he  expresses  by  /lij  yirmrn. 
He  o|>po3es  this  false  conclusion  t)y  the  truth  of  the 
relation  according  to  which  the  whole  of  Christianity 
is  rooted  in  a  thoroughly  religious  and  moral  act — 
the  deatli  of  Jesus. 

3.  Baptism,  in  its  full  meaning,  is  a  dying  with 
Christ,  which  is  potentially  groimded  in  the  dynamic 
meaning  of  His  dying  for  all  (2  Cor.  v.  14),  and  is 
actually  realized  in  the  dynamical  genesis  of  faith. 
It  follows  from  this  that  it  is  not  only  a  ])artial  puri- 
fication of  the  living  sinner,  but  his  fundamental 
purification  by  a  spiritual  death  and  burial ;  tliiit, 
further,  it  not  merely  represents  sensibly  an<l  .seals 
the  single  parts  and  acts  of  the  Christian  life,  but  its 
whole  justification,  in  all  its  parts ;  and  therefore 
that  it  is  available,  operative,  and  obligatory  once 
for  all.  It  follows,  finally,  that  baptism  is  not  sim- 
ply an  ecclesiastical  act  performed  on  the  individual, 
when  the  individual  is  passive,  but  an  ethical  cove- 
nant-transaction between  Christ  and  tlie  one  who  is 
baptized  ;  wherefore  even  the  baptism  of  children 
presupposes  in  the  family,  the  parents,  or  the  spon- 
sors, 11  spirit  of  faith  whicli  represents  and  encom- 
passes the  child. 

From  all  this  it  will  be  seen  how  very  much  bap- 
tism is  ohscure(l  and  desecratetl  by  regarding  it  either 
as  a  mere  ceremony  which  certifies  the  Christian  life 
of  the  person  baptized,  or,  on  the  otiicr  hand,  as  a 
(mesided  and  magical  act  which  is  supposed  to  create 
the  Christian  life. 

[In  opposition  to  the  low  and  almost  rationalistic 
views  now  prevailing  in  a  large  part  of  I'rotestant- 
tam  on  the  meaning  and  imjiort  of  Christian  bafitisii, 
it  may  be  well  to  refer  to  the  teaching  of  the  sym- 
bols of  the  Ueformation  down  to  tlie  Westminster 
Btandards,  and  of  the  older  divines,  which  is  far  deep- 
er. Take,  for  instance,  the  Westminster  (Jimfeiision 
of  Failk  (chap,  xxviii.):  "  Haptisni  is  a  sacrament 
of  the  New  Testament,  ordaine(i  l)y  Jesus  Christ,  not 
only  for  the  solemn  admission  of  the  jiarty  bapliied 
into  the  visible  Church,  but  also  to  be  vmto  liim  a 
sign  and  seal  of  the  covenant  of  grace,  of   his  in- 


grafting into  Christ,  of  regeneration,  of  remission 
of  sins,  and  of  his  giving  up  unto  God,  through 
Jesus  Christ,  to  walk  in  newness  of  life."  (Conip. 
the  Larger  Caterhmn,  Qu.  105,  and  Shorter  Cote* 
c/iism,  Qu.  94).  Calvin  says :  "  In  treating  the  sao 
raments,  two  things  are  to  be  considered  :  the  sign 
and  the  thing  signified.  Tluis,  in  baptism,  the  sigr 
is  water;  but  the  thing  signified  is  the  cleansing  of 
the  soul  by  the  blood  of  Christ,  and  the  mortifica- 
tion of  the  flesh.  Both  of  these  things  are  com- 
prised in  the  institution  of  Christ ;  and  whcreaa 
often  the  sign  appears  to  be  ineffectual  and  fruitless, 
that  comes  through  men's  abuse,  which  does  not 
annul  the  nature  of  the  sacrament.  Let  us  learn, 
therefore,  not  to  tear  apart  the  thing  signified  from 
the  sign  ;  though,  at  the  same  time,  we  must  be  on 
our  guard  against  the  opposite  fault,  such  as  prevails 
amcnig  Papists,  For,  failing  to  make  the  needful 
distinction  between  the  thing  and  the  sign,  they  stop 
short  at  the  outward  element,  and  there  confidently 
rest  their  hope  of  salvation.  The  siglit  of  the  water, 
accordingly,  withdraws  their  minds  from  Christ's 
blood  and  the  grace  of  the  S[)irit.  Not  reflecting 
that,  of  all  the  blessings  there  exhibited,  Christ  alone 
is  tlie  Author,  they  transfer  to  water  the  glory  of  His 
death,  and  bind  the  hidden  energy  of  the  Spirit  to 
the  visible  sign.  What,  then,  must  be  done  ?  Let 
us  not  separate  what  the  Lord  has  joined  together. 
We  ought,  in  baptism,  to  recognize  a  spiritual  laver; 
we  ought  in  it  to  embrace  a  witness  to  the  remission 
of  sins  and  a  pledge  of  our  renewal ;  and  yet  so  to 
leave  both  to  Christ  and  the  Holy  Spirit  the  honor 
that  is  theirs,  as  that  no  part  of  the  salvation  be 
transferred  to  the  sign." — Dr.  John  Lillie,  in  liis  ex- 
cellent posthumotis  Lectures  on  the  LJpisfles  of  Peter 
(New  York,  18ti9,  p.  252),  in  commenting  on  1  Peter 
iii.  21,  remarks  :  ''  But  what,  you  will  ask,  is  bap- 
tism, then,  a  saving  ordinance  ?  Certainly  ;  that  is 
just  what  Christ's  Ajjosile  here  affirms.  Xor  is  this 
the  oidy  place,  by  any  means,  in  which  the  New  Tes- 
tament speaks  of  baptism  in  a  way  that  would  now 
offend  many  good  people,  were  it  not  that  the  per- 
])lexing  phraseology  is  unquestionaljly  scriptural. 
Kecollect,  for  instance,  Peter's  own  practical  applica- 
tion of  his  penteeostid  sermon :  '  Repent,  and  be 
baptized,  every  one  of  you,  in  the  name  of  Jesus 
Christ,  for  the  remission  of  sins.'  And  so  Ananias 
in  Damascus  to  the  humbled  jH^rsecutor ;  '  Arise, 
and  be  baptized,  and  wash  away  thy  sins.'  Paul, 
too,  expressly  calls  baptism  '  the  laver  of  the  water' 
by  which  Christ  pm-ifics  His  Church  ;  and  again, 
'  the  laver  of  regenenition  '  by  which  (Jod  .saves  us. 
Frcfpiently,  also,  he  represents  it  as  that  by  which 
We  are  united  to  Christ,  and  made  partakers  of  His 
death  and  resurrection.  Nay,  Christ  Himself,  in 
sending  forth  His  gospel  among  all  nations,  named 
l)aplism  as  one  condition  of  salvation.  We  need 
not,  then,  hesitate  to  call  it  a  saving  ordinance.  But 
how  does  it  save?  Just  as  any  other  ordinance 
saves — not  through  any  inhen'nt  virtue  of  its  out- 
wanl  signs  aiul  processes,  Ijut  solely  as  it  is  a  chan- 
nel for  the  communication  of  Divine  grace,  and  used 
in  accordance  with  the  Divine  intention.  On  the 
one  hand,  while  grace  is  ordinarily  dispensed  througli 
ordinances,  it  is  not  confined  to  them,  God  being 
ever  higher  than  His  own  appointments,  and  acting, 
when  it  so  pleases  Him,  indepeiulently  of  them  alio. 
pether.  And,  on  the  other  hand,  there  must  be  on 
tlie  part  of  man,  besides  the  oliservance  of  formsj 
preeept,  a  yielding  ot  his  whole  nature  to  the  quick* 
ening  and  transforming  infl  lencc.     Take  for  an  ex> 


CHAPTER  VI.    1-11. 


207 


ample  that  greatest  ordinance,  the  Word  of  God. 
It  '  is  able,'  says  James  (l  21),  'to  save  your  souls.' 
But  how  ?  Not  simply  as  it  is  preached,  or  heard, 
or  read.  That  it  may  be  '  the  power  of  God  unto 
salvation,'  it  must  first  be  accompanied  with  the 
*  demonstration  of  the  Spirit,'  and  then  '  received 
with  meekness,'  and  so  become  the  ingrafted  word. 
It  is  not  the  foolishness  of  preaching  that  saves  ;  but 
'  it  pleases  God  by  the  foolishness  of  preaching  to 
save  them  that  believe.'  Now,  just  so  with  baptism  : 
equally  with  the  gospel  itself,  it  is  a  Divine  institu- 
tion, whereby  God  ordinarily  dispenses  His  grace. 
But  its  whole  efficacy  is  due  to  that  grace  of  God, 
and  to  our  fitting  reception  and  use  of  the  rite — not 
to  its  mere  external  administration,  by  whatsoever 
priestly  or  apostolic  hand." — P.  S.] 

4.  According  to  the  Apostle,  the  burial  as  well  as 
the  dralh  of  Christ  is  represented  in  the  meaning 
and  effect  of  baptism.  But  as  the  burial  of  Christ 
not  only  seals  His  death,  but  also  brings  to  pass  the 
mysterious  form  of  His  transition  to  new  life,  so  is 
it  also  with  the  world's  renunciation  of  the  secret 
inward  life  of  the  Christian,  which  develops  from  a 
germ  in  mysterious  growth,  and  is  hid  with  Christ  in 
Ood.  (For  fuller  information  on  being  baptized  into 
the  death  of  Christ,  see  Tlioluck,  p.  280,  and  Phi- 
lippi,  p.  206.) 

5.  Christianity  is  not  only  a  new  life,  but  a  new- 
ness of  life — a  life  which  never  grows  old,  but  has 
ever  a  more  perfect  and  imperishable  renewal.  But 
as  the  resurrection  of  Christ  rests  on  a  deed  of  the 
gloTii  of  the  Father,  so  is  it  with  the  new  birth  of 
the  Christian.     See  the  h'xeg.  Notes. 

6.  Although  believers  are  so  intimately  connect- 
ed or  grown  together  in  a  living  organism  as  to  ap- 
pear to  be  living  on  the  same  vine  or  the  same 
branch,  they  are  nevertheless  not  grown  together  in 
the  form  of  natural  necessity.  While  unchurchly 
and  unhistorical  sectarianism  ignores  the  organic 
internal  character  and  historical  structure  of  the 
Christian  communion,  hierarchism,  on  the  other 
hand,  disregards  its  ethical  and  free  inward  charac- 
ter. The  life  of  Christ  is  repeated  and  reflected, 
after  His  death  and  resurrection,  in  His  image — the 
Church  ;  but  not  in  the  sense  that  it  is  quantitative- 
ly a  supplement  or  substitute  for  Him,  but  that  it 
completely  unites  itself  qualitatively  with  Him  as  its 
living  head.  Because  the  Christian  suffers  death  in 
Christ,  rises,  and  is  justified,  Christ,  as  the  crucified 
and  risen  One,  lives  in  him.  (See  chap.  viii.  29 ; 
Eph.  i.  4  ;  Col.  i.  22,  23,  24  ;  ii.  11  ;  iii.  1,  &c.) 

7.  The  Apostle's  doctrine  of  the  old  man,  the 
body  of  sin,  the  body  of  death,  the  lavj  in  the  mem- 
bers, &c.,  shows  a  divinatory  anticipation  of  the  idea 
of  the  pseudo-plasmas,  which  has  first  appeared  in 
the  modern  science  of  medicine.  The  old  man  is 
not  the  real  man,  nor  the  natural  man,  but  sin, 
which  has  pervaded  man  as  tlie  plasmatic  phantom 
of  his  nature,  and,  as  an  ethical  cancer,  threatens  to 
consume  him.  (On  the  various  tlieological  interpre- 
tations of  the  old  man,  see  Tlioluck,  p.  287.  For  a 
more  complete  interpretation  of  Paul's  pseudo-plas- 
matic  ideas,  see  Exeg.  Notes  on  chap.  vii.  24.) 

8.  Those  who  designate  the  real  body  of  man  as 
the  source  of  sin,  abolish  the  real  idea  of  sin.  E^^n 
the  expression,  tbat  the  body  is  not  the  source,  but 
the  seat  of  sin,  ia  not  correct  in  reference  to  the  ten- 
dency of  the  wicked,  and  is  only  conditionally  cor- 
rect in  reference  to  the  life  of  the  pious,  in  whom 
Bin,  as  sinfulness,  as  a  tempting  propensity  in  the 
bodily  part  of  the  being,  has  its  seat,  and  will  con- 


tinue  to  have  its  seat,  until  the  old  form  of  the  body 
is  laid  off'. 

9.  On  being  free  from  the  debt  of  sin  by  death, 
see  the  Uxeg.  Notes.  Death  removes  guilt— a  defi. 
nition  which  may  be  further  formularized  thus  :  the 
kind  of  death  corresponds  as  justification  to  the  kind 
of  guilt ;  the  depth  of  death  corresponds  to  the 
depth  of  guilt.  Therefore  the  death  of  Christ  ia 
the  potential  justification  of  humanity,  because  it 
plunged  the  absolutely  guiltless  and  holy  life  into 
the  absolute  depth  of  the  death  of  mankind. 

10.  On  the  expression  body  of  sin,  in  ver.  6, 
compare  the  elaborate  discussion  by  Tholuck,  p.  288 
ff.  Likewise  the  same  author,  on  ver.  9,  or  the  re- 
lation of  Christ  to  death  ;  p.  306. 


HOMILETICAIi  AND  PEACTICAl,. 

On  the  relation  of  sin  and  grace :  1.  It  is  true 
that  the  more  powerful  sin  is,  the  more  powerful  ia 
grace  also ;  but  it  cannot  be  inferred  from  this,  2. 
That  we  should  continue  in  sin.  But,  3.  We  should 
wish,  rather,  not  to  Uve  in  sin,  to  which  we  died 
(vers.  1,  2). — To  what  would  continuance  in  sin  lead? 
1.  Not  to  grace,  for  he  who  sins  wilfully,  trifles  with 
grace ;  but,  2.  To  the  terrible  looking  for  of  judg. 
ment  and  fiery  indignation,  which  shall  devour  the 
rebellious  (vers.  1,  2).  Heb.  x.  2fi.— Of  Christian 
baptism.  1 .  What  is  it  ?  a.  a  baptism  into  Clirist ; 
6.  a  baptism  into  the  death  of  Christ.  2.  Of  what 
service  is  baptism  to  us  ?  a.  We  die  and  are  buried 
by  it  in  repentance  ;  b.  we  are  raised  by  it  in  faith 
(vers.  3,  4). — By  baptism  we  enter  into  a  double 
communion  with  Christ :  1.  Of  His  death  ;  2.  Of 
His  resurrection. — Christians  are,  1.  Companions  ia 
the  death  of  Christ ;  but  also,  2.  In  His  resurrec- 
tion (ver.  5). — The  crucifixion  of  our  old  man :  1. 
The  manner  and  fbim  of  the  old  man  ;  2.  his  cruci- 
fixion.— The  glorious  immortality  of  Christ :  1.  Its 
foundation  ;  2.  Its  importance  to  us  (vers.  8-10). — ■ 
We  .<hould  reckon  ourselves  dead  in  relation  to  sin, 
but  alive  in  relation  to  God  ;  that  is,  1.  We  should, 
by  faith,  be  ever  taking  our  stand-point  more  per- 
fectly in  Christ ;  and,  2.  First  of  all  in  His  death, 
but  also  in  His  life  (ver.  11). 

Stakke  :  The  suffering  and  death  of  a  Christian 
are  not  to  destruction,  but  a  planting  to  life. 

HF:DI^GFR :  Under  the  grace  of  God  we  are  not 
permitted  to  sin. — Mtller  :  Life  and  death  cling  to- 
gether ;  the  more  the  old  dies  and  goes  to  ruin,  the 
more  gloriously  does  the  new  man  arise. — Either  you 
will  slay  sin,  or  sin  will  slay  you. — Where  faith  ia 
there  is  Christ,  and  where  Christ  is  tliere  is  life. 

Gerlach  :  The  baptism  of  Christians  is  a  bap. 
tism  into  Christ's  death  ;  that  is,  into  the  complete 
appropriation  of  its  roots  and  fruits. 

Besser  :  Paul  places  the  gift  of  baptism,  first, 
and  connects  with  it  the  duty  of  the  "one  baptized. 

Heubxer  :  Recollections  of  our  former  covenant 
of  baptism  :  1.  What  has  God  done  for  us  in  bap. 
tism  ?  2.  What  have  we  to  do  in  consequence  of 
baptism  ? — Thomasius  :  The  power  of  baptism  in  ita 
permeation  of  the  whole  Christian  life. — Florky; 
We  are  baptized  into  the  death-  of  Christ.     Namely; 

1.  Upon  the  confession  that  He  died  for  us ;  2.  On 
the  pledge  that  we  should  die  with  Him  ;  3.  In  the 
hope  that  we  shall  live  by  Him. — Harlkss  :  The  ini. 
pediments  to  Christian  life  :  1.  The  pleasure  of  life, 
which  is  terrified  at  evangelical  preaching  on  death  ; 

2.  The  dulness  and  unbelief  of  spiritual  death,  which 


208  THE   EPISTLE   OF   PAUL   TO   THE   ROMANS. 


is  terrified  at  evaDpoliciil  preachinp  on  life ;  while 
yet,  reversely,  3.  The  pleusiiie,  power,  and  pious 
con(hiet  of  the  Christian  rests  upon  the  death  which 
he  has  di»d  for  newness  of  life. 

[SiiEKLocK :  As  the  death  of  Christ  was  not  barely 


is  to  his  former  divei-sions.  As  natural  death  c:itj 
off  all  coniniuiiication  with  life,  so  must  ganetifica- 
tion  in  the  soul  cut  off  all  eonimunieation  witli  sin. 
— Mack.mout  :  We  should  daily  recollect  our  bap- 
tism, and  be  stirred  up  by  it  to  every  religious  aci 


a  natural  death,  a  separation  of  soul  and  body,  but  and  thoufjlit  j)ossible,  for  it  is  this  that  sets  before 
a  sneriliee  for  sin,  to  destroy  the  donutiion  ot  it,  so  us  the  death  and  resurrection  of  Christ. — Clahkk  : 
our  dyinj;  to  sin  is  the  truest  confin-mity  to  the  death  The  sacritieial  death  of  Christ  is  the  soil  in  wliiuh 
of  Christ ;  and  as  we  must  consider  His  resurrection  j  believers  are  planted,  and  from  which  they  derive 
as  His  living  to  God  ami  advancement  into  His  spir-  their  life,  tiieir  fruitfulness,  and  their  final  glory. — 
itual  kingdom,  so  our  walking;;  in  newness  of  life  is  i  HonOB  :  It  is  those  who  look  to  Christ  not  ordy  for 
our  conformity  to  His  resurrection,  and  makes  us  pardon,  but  for  holiness,  that  are  successful  in  sub» 
true  sidijects  of  His  spiritual  kingdom. — Hk.nky:  duing  sin;  the  legalist  remains  its  slave.  To  be  in 
As  natural  death  brings  a  writ  of  eiise  to  the  weary,  Christ  is  tlie  source  of  the  Christian's  life;  to  be  like 
80  must  we  be  dead  to  all  the  sins  of  our  former  Clirist  is  the  sum  of  his  excellence ;  to  be  with 
rebellious  life.  We  must  be  ius  indilferent  to  the  Christ  is  the  fulness  of  his  joy. — J.  F.  H.] 
plciwures  iuid  delights  of  sin,  as  a  man  that  is  dying  ' 


Tiiinn  Section. —  Tlic  principial  freedom  of  Christians  from  the  service  of  sin  to  death,  and  their  actrtal 
departure  thcrefroiii  and  entrance  into  the  Service  of  ri(jhtconsness  unto  life  bi/  the  power  of  the  death 
of  Jesus.  {Jielicvcrs  should  live  in  the  consciousness  that  they  are  dead  to  sin,  jiiat  as  even  the  slave 
is  freed  by  death.) 

Chap.    VL   12-23. 

12  Let  not  sin  therefore  reign  in  your  mortal  body,  that  ye  should  obey  it  in 

13  [omrt  it  in]  '  the  lusts  thereof.  Neither  yield  ye  [Nor  render]  '^  your  members 
as  instruments  ["»•  '\veaj)ons]  of  imrighteousness  unto  [to]  ^  sin  :  but  yield  [ren- 
der] yourselves  unto  [to]  God,  as  those  that  are  alive  [as  being  alive]  *  from  the 
dead,  and  your  members  as  instruments  \<>r  weapons]  of  righteousness  luito  [to] 

14  God.  For  sin  shall  not  have  dominion  over  you  :  for  ye  are  not  under  the 
\omU  the]  '  law,  but  under  grace. 

15  What  then  ?    shall  [may]  °  we  sin,  because  we  are  not  under  the  [omit  the] 

16  law,  but  under  grace  ?  God  forbid.  [Let  it  not  be  !]  Know  ye  not,  that  to 
whom  ye  yield  yourselves  servants  to  obey,  his  servants  ye  are  to  whom  ye 
oV)ey  ;  whether  [either]  of  sin  unto  death,  or  of  obedience  unto  righteousness? 

17  But  God  be  thanked  [thaidcs  to  (4od],  that  ye  were  the  servants  of  sin,  but  ye 
have  \"mu  have]  obeyed  from  the  heart  that  form  of  doctrine  [teaching]  '  which 

18  was  delivered  you  [whereunto  ye  were  delivered;].'     Being  then  [And  being] 

19  made  free  from  sin,  ye  became  the  servants  of  righteousness.  I  s[)eak  after  the 
manner  of  men  because  of  the  infirmity  of  your  tiesh  :  for  as  ye  have  yielded 
[rendered]  your  members  [rr.s*]  servants  to  uncleanness  and  to  iniquity  unto 
ini'iuity;  even  so  now  yield  [render]  your  members  [a«]  servants  to  righteous- 

20  ness  unto  holitu^ss  [<>r  sajictiHcatiun]."      For  when  ye  were  the  \j>mu  the]  servants 

21  of  sin,  ye  M^ere  free  from  [as  regards]  righteousness.  Wliat  fruit  had  ye  tlion 
ill  tliose  things  whereof  ye  are  now  asliamed  ?  [What  fruit  had  ye  then  there- 
fore ?     Things  whereof  ye  are  now  ashamed;]'"   for  "  the  end  of  those  things 

22  is  death.  But  now  being  [having  been]  made  free  from  sin,  and  become  ser- 
vants to  God,  ye  have  your  fruit  unto  holiness  [o,-  sanctificatiou],  and  the  end 

23  everlasting  life.  For  the  wages  of  sin  is  death  ;  but  the  gift  of  God  is  eternal 
life  through  Jesus  Christ  [in  Christ  Jesus]  "  our  Lord. 


•  Ver  12.— (The correct  rending  seems  to  ho  :  vtraKoiicii'  rott  iniSvtiiai.^  avrod,  found  in  N.  A.  B.  C,  mnny 
•unrivcH,  modt  versions  nnd  fathiM-s  ;  adopted  by  Litcliniimn,  'nHChciulorf,  Meyer,  Alford  H  tiL  Oriesbiich,  on  in.su(n.'iont 
autliority,  nmitfl  nil  after  iivaKovttv.  I).  J;,  insert  airrn,  omittin);  the  ro.st.  ('.'■>.  K.  L.,  some  fiirlbcr  insrrt  airrfi  iv 
before  rait  ^ir 1 9 vjuia if .  So  lire;  hence  tl  in  of  the  K.  V.  All  these  vari.itioi.s  are  accounted  for  by  Meyer,  who 
■ujiposcs  that  ouTp  waH  added,  first  hh  a  ni^trpinal  ghifMi,  to  direct  attention  to  ein  as  the  source  of  "the  lusts,"  then  in- 
C«r])Oi'ated  in  the  text,  and  HubseijUent  clianpfh  made  to  avoiil  confUhioM. 

*  Ver.  1.1. —[The  idea  of  military  servke  found  in  napiariyr*  i*  better  exprosaod  by  render,  Bincc  yMl  impIlM 
a  previous  rcsistiUDcc,  not  found  in  the  Apostle's  thought. 


CHAPTER  VI    12-23. 


20i) 


•  Vcr.  13. — [To  is  the  better  rendering  of  the  simple  datives  here,  as  in  ver.  19.  Unio  has  a  telic  force,  which  makei 
it  equivalent  to  tit.    This  distinction  is  presei-ved  in  vcr.  19,  but  lost  sight  of  liy  the  English  translators  here. 

••  Ver.  13. — [As  beitig  olive  from  the  dead  (Amer.  Hible  Union)  is  a  good  veision  oi  iiafl  ex  veKpiov  ^iovTat', 
brt  the  paraplirase  of  Alford  :  as  alive  Jrom  hnvuig  bteii  dead,  cohvoys  the  full  meaning.  Still  better  is  the  Eevision  bj 
Fi^e  Anglican  OlcrgymeQ  :  as  those  thof  were  dead,  and  arc  olive. 

^  Ver.  14. — [The  ai-tide  of  the  E.  V.  is  not  only  unnecessary,  since  the  Greek  phrase  is  iino  vofiov,  but  perhc^)! 
inconcct ;  for  the  reference  may  be  to  "  l;iw  "  in  general,  rather  than  to  "  the  (Mosaic)  law."    So  in  ver.  15. 

'  Vcr.  15.— [The  reading  aixaprriir o y-tv  (Rer.)  is  weakly  supported.  N-  A.  B.  C.  D.  E.  K.  L.,have  aixapTr)ffu)fi.€v; 
odopted  by  L:iclimann,  Tischendorf,  Jleyer,  and  others.    This  is  the  delibtrative  subjunctive  ;  hence  :  "may  we  bin." 

'  Vcr.  17. — ['l\oching  is  preferable  to  doctrine.     See  Exig.  A(.tis. 

^  Ver.  17. — ['To  which  ye  were  delivtreti,  eis  ov  n apeS6dr)Te ,  is  literal,  and  corresponds  with  the  figuie  implied 
in  TUTTOv. — The  full  stop  of  the  E.  V.  is  unnecessaiy,  as  the  next  verse  is  closely  connected  with  this  one.  The  form 
of  vor.  18  is  altered,  to  make  this  connection  more  obvious. 

'  Ver.  19. — [ 'Ay  laff/u.  o  V  may  mean  holnici^s,  HeiligkeH,  or  sanctrficalinn,  EeiUguvg.  Bengel,  however,  discrimi- 
nates between  oyioTrjs  and  ayiaff/ads,  the  former  "holiness,"  the  latter  "sanctification."  See  i.  4,  p.  62,  and  Extg. 
Hotes,  where  Lange  contends  for  the  latter  meaning  here  (against  Meyer). 

1"  Ver.  21. — [Lange  adopts  the  punctuation  of  Lachmaun,  Grieshacb,  and  many  others,  placii.g  the  interrogation 
after  Tore,  ai  d  making  what  follows  tl.e  answer.  A  gieat  array  of  authorities  can  be  cited  in  support  of  each  way  of 
pointing,  but  this  seems  to  give  a  better  sense  to  icapTrds.     Comp.  Alford  in  loco. 

"  Ver.  21.— [X^.  B.  D.  F'.,  Lachmann,  Meyer,  Alford,  insert  /xe'v  before  yap.  "Wordsworth  does  not  insert  it  in 
his  text,  but  favors  it  in  his  notes.  It  is  omitted  by  N'.  A.  C.  D'.  K.  L.  It  seems  more  probable  that  it  was  carelessly 
omitted  by  some  transcribers  than  inserted  for  any  special  rea>on. 

^^  Ver.  23. — [The  E.  V.  again  loses  the  point  of  the  closing  phrase,  by  rendering  iv,  through.  The  life  is  em 
phatically  iji  Christ  J'esus  mir  Lord.    Ilence  perhaps  Xpto-T<p  'Irjaov. — B.] 


EXEGETICAIi  AJSTD  CBITICAL. 

Ver.  12.  Let  not  sin  therefore  reign  [Mtj 
ovv  fiaffokfuito)  i]  a.fiaQria,\  The  Apostle 
conducts  the  following  discussion  in  a  hortatory 
manner,  but  without  actually  "  entering  the  sphere 
of  exliortation,"  a.s  Tholuck  thinks.  [The  negative 
part  of  the  exhortation,  vers.  12,  13,  corresponds  to 
»'f>;((Oi'i,'  /(iv  T-Jj  a/iafiTin,  ver.  11  ;  the  positive  part, 
a/./a  /ic(()a(Trt'i(TaTf,  vcr.  13,  answers  to  LMVTctt;  ()e 
riT>  &n7).  So  Meyer,  Philippi,  Alford,  Hodge,  &c. — 
P.  S.]  In  a  didactic  respect  he  teaches  that  believ- 
ers, by  their  transition  from  a  state  under  the  law  to 
a  state  under  grace,  a^e  first  properly  qualified  and 
pledged  to  the  service  of  righteousness,  but  are  not 
free  for  the  service  of  sin.  That  is,  tlie  true  eman- 
cipation from  outward  legalism  leads  to  ait  inward 
and  free  legalism,  but  not  to  Antinomianism.  The 
ovv  indicates  that  ver.  11  shall  be  elaborated.  But 
as  the  previous  section  has  shown  wliat  is  conform- 
able to  the  sfate  of  grace  in  itself,  the  present  section 
dhows  what  is  according  to  freedom  from  the  hard 
service  of  sin,  which  was  presupposed  by  bondage 
under  the  law.  Let  not  sin  now  reign  (imp.).  The 
true  sovereign  command  of  grace  is  opposed  to  the 
fahe  sovereign  command  of  sin,  which  is  still  pres- 
ent as  a  broken  power  (Luther :  Observe  that  holy 
people  still  have  evil  lusts  in  the  flesh,  which  they 
do  not  follow).  Tholuck  :  "  Philippi  and  Meyer 
correctly  remark,  that  the  Apostle  does  not  express- 
ly make  any  concessions  to  the  conciipuceidia  [t/rt- 
•fliyd'an;]  ;  yet  his  admonition  does  not  extend  any 
farther  than  that  lust  must  not  become  a  deed.  Sin 
is  represented  as  ruler  in  the  body,  which  ruler  is 
served  by  the  fiO.ri  as  organs."  Tliat  is,  however, 
as  the  one  who  has  been  the  ruler ;  and  the  methods 
are  at  the  same  time  given  for  destroyuig  the  lusts 
of  the  flesh,  that  they — by  the  life  in  the  Spirit, 
■which  also  changes  the  members  into  instruments 
of  righteousness — should  not  only  be  continually 
ignored,  but  also  annulled.  [Alford,  in  opposition 
to  Chrysostom,  who  lays  stress  on  ^aathvino,  says: 
"  It  is  no  matter  of  comparison  between  reigning 
and  indwelling  mei-eli/,  but  between  reigning  and 
bein/f  deposed.'''' — P.  S.] 

In  your  mortal  body  [Iv  rm  &vi^roi  r /< i'l v 
a 0) /I art,}.  The  ai7)/(a.  as  QvrjTov  must  be  distin- 
guished, on  the  one  hand,  from  the  ai7)fia  t^c;  «//a^- 
t/ck;  of  ver.  6,  and,  on  the  other,  from  the  am/ict 
vfy.oov  of  chap.  viii.  10.  The  ami>a  r'ji;  ci/iaQr.  is 
the  pseudo-plastic  apparent  body  of  the  old  man, 
14 


and,  a-s  the  sensual  aide  of  all  sinfulness,  is  devoted 
witli  it  to  destruction.  The  body  is  a  am/ia  riy.^ov 
so  far  as  it  no  more  asserts  itself  as  a  second  prin- 
ciple of  life  with,  or  even  superior  to,  the  principle 
of  the  Spirit,  but  yields  itself  purely  to  the  service 
of  the  Spirit.  But  a  ai7i/ia  OviiTov  is  the  body  so 
far  as  it,  as  the  sensual  organism  of  the  eartldy  ex- 
istence, has  living  organs,  which  shall  be  purified 
from  the  former  service  of  sin  and  transferred  to  the 
service  of  righteousness.  The  cw/'ct  as  a  false  prin- 
ciple is  destroyed ;  the  (ji7uict  as  a  secondary  prin- 
ciple is  dead,  absolutely  helpless ;  and  the  am/ia  as 
the  organ  of  the  spiritual  principle  is  transformed 
into  instruments  of  righteousness.  It  is  cnlled  mor- 
t  J,  because  its  earthly  propensity  is  toward  sin  and 
death,  and  it  must  be  compulsorily  brought  into  the 
service  of  righteousness,  ar.d  exercised  as  for  a 
spiritual  military  service  in  antithesis  to  the  body  of 
the  resurrection,  which  will  be  the  pure  power  and 
excellence  of  righteousness.  Meyer  is  therefore  cor- 
rect in  rejecting  the  interpretation,  that  ^iv/ror  is 
the  same  as  vi/.(j6v  (dead  to  sin  ;  Turretin,  Ernesti, 
and  others). 

But  it  may  be  asked,  For  what  purpose  is  the 
adjective  flvijTov? 

1.  Calvin :  per  contemptum  vocat  mcrtaJe  \ui 
doceat  iotam  hominis  naturam  ai  mortem  d  ezitium 
inclinare'].  Kollner :  It  is  dishonorable  to  make 
the  spirit  subject  to  this  frail  body. 

2.  Grotius  :  De  vita  altera  cogitandum,  nee  for' 
midaniios  lahores  hand  sane  dinturnos.  [Chrysos- 
tom, Theodoret,  Reiche,  likewise  suppose  that  the 
word  reminds  us  of  the  other  life,  and  of  the  short- 
ness of  the  conflict. — P.  S.] 

3.  Flatt :  Reminder  of  the  brevity  of  sensual 
pleasure.     [Comp.  Theophylact]. 

4.  Meyer,  obscurely :  It  is  absurd  to  make  sin 
reign  in  the  mortal  body,  if  the  Christian  is  dead  to 
sin  and  alive  to  God. 

5.  Philippi :  To  call  to  mind  that  the  wages  of 
sin  is  death.  [Philippi  takes  (7w/(«  '^^  opposition  to 
nvfvfia.^ 

6.  Tlioluek,  with  Bullinger  and  Calixtus :  Be. 
cause  sensual  enticements  are  regarded  as  insepara- 
ble  from  the  present  sensuous  organism,  &c. 

[7.  Photius,  Turretin,  Ernesti :  Svtjrov  is  figui. 
tively  =  dead  ;  i.  e.,  corrupt  (in  which  sense  vfx^io? 
is  often  used).] 

In  all  these  definitions  the  relative  dignity  and 
estimate  of  the  "  mortal  body,"  which  are  definitely 
declared  in  ver.  13,  are  not   regarded ;    the  '^»m« 


210 


THE   EPISTLE   OF   TAUL   TO   THE    ROMANS. 


members,  which  until  then  had  been  instruments  of 
unrightcoiiBness,  honcefDrth  being  in.struments  of 
righteousness.  Tiie  organism  of  earthly  existence 
and  action,  wiiieh  has  become  mortal  by  sin,  is  natu- 
rally an  organism  for  tlie  service  of  the  spirit.  By 
the  dominion  of  sin  in  it,  its  morality  became  still 
more  intense  ;  but  by  the  normal  sulyection  of  sin 
to  the  service  of  the  Spirit,  it  shall  be  brought  with 
it  on  the  course  toward  everlasting  life  (ver.  22). 

That  ye  should  obey  the  lusts  thereof 
[ii'i;  TO  I'  7ia/.ii  rn-v  rait;  i  n  t. ')  i'/(  iat.i;  ar- 
Tor].  According  to  the  sense,  we  must  supply 
i'.««s  to  I'TTaxoi'ti-v  To  the  end  that  ye  obey  its 
lusts.  Even  if  the  body  were  holy,  its  impulses 
would  have  to  be  subject  to  the  dominion  of  the 
spirit ;  much  more  must  they  be  subject  to  the  spirit, 
Bince  they  are  diseased,  irritable,  excitable,  and  in- 
clined to  self-assertion  and  demoniacal  self-distrac- 
tion. 

Ver.  13.  Nor  render  your  members  \_Mfi 
7if(>t.(TTa.vtTt  TO,  fii'/.t]  vfti')v\  Without  doubt 
na{)i.(JTuvnv  has  reference  here  to  enlistment  or  de- 
livery for  military  service.  The  Apostle  is  writing 
to  Rome,  the  metropolis  of  military  all'airs,  and  there- 
fore derives  his  figure  from  Roman  customs  (comi). 
chap.  xiii.  12);  just  as  he  admonishes  the  Corinthi- 
ans by  expressions  that  call  up  the  Isthmian  games 
(1  Cor.  ix.  24),  and  speaks  to  the  spiritual  city  of 
Ephesus  concerning  the  battle  with  spirits  (Ei)h.  vi. 
11,  12).  Sin  is  already  distinguished  as  the  false 
fianihi'.:,  who  causes  the  false  summons  to  be  pi'o- 
Uiulgated  that  the  members  shall  be  ordered  into  his 
warfare  against  righteousness.  —  Your  members. 
If  the  body  hiis  ceased  to  be  an  independent  prin- 
ciple, only  its  members  come  into  consideration  (in 
the  good  sense  of  the  principle  :  Divide  ct  iin  era). 
According  to  Enismus,  Philippi,  and  others,  the  in- 
tellectual forces  and  activities  (perception,  will,  uii- 
derstiinding)  are  included  in  the  term.  According 
to  Meyer,  only  the  physical  members  are  meant  (the 
tongue,  hand,  foot,  eye,  &c.),  "  for  which,  however, 
intellectual  action  is  a  necessary  supposition.  The 
physical  members  are  plainly  meant  as  organs  ami 
symbols  of  ethical  conduct  (dilferent  from  the  [)seudo- 
pla.smatic  members  ;  Col.  iii.  5). 

As  weapons  [or  instruments]  of  unright- 
eousness [tin '/.a  « (W  X  /  rt  (,■  ].  >ieyer  says,  of 
immoru/iti/.  But,  in  war,  jx'ople  contend  for  the 
right  or  the  wrong ;  therefore  the  expression  «r)tx/a 
must  be  strictly  retained. — "''07r/a,  according  to  the 
Vulgate,  Tlieod(jret,  Luther,  Calvin,  Hengel,  and 
Meyer:  weapons.  Calixtus  and  I)e  Weite  [Stuart, 
Reicho,  Ilodge,  Ewald,  Alford],  on  the  other  iiand  : 
instruments.  The  former  construction  can  by  no 
means  be  favored  by  appealing  to  the  fact  that  the 
(Jarri/'.ivn.v  suggest.s  warriors  in  service,  for  the  trope 
is  already  obliterated  (V)  in  that  term  ;  but  it  is 
favored  by  the  consideration  that  the  Apostle  also 
claewliere — when  he  uses  o/r/.a  in  the  ethical  sense — 
ctnplovs  it  in  tiie  meaning  of  'weapons;  '  Rom.  xiii. 
12  ;  2' Cor.  vi.  7  ;  x.  4  "  (Tlioluek).  [Meyer  insists 
that  i'l/rht,  while  so  frecpicntly  used  in  the  sense  of 
inttrument-i  by  classical  authors,  is  never  thus  used 
In  the  New  Testament. — R.] 

To  sin  [t^  a/ia(tTi(t'].  Personified  a.s  the 
prcsuir.|nively  false  ruler  (see  chap,  v.  12  If.). 

But  render  yourselves  [  ri / / «  nn^ianTt':- 
oixTf  /  ft  I'T  <)  I'l;  ).  We  must  observe  here  a  double 
antithesis;  first,  iJie  aorixt.  nH(i<tari](T(irt  in  oppo- 
sition to  the  previous  present,  naiirifiT<'iyfrt\  second, 
•iai'Tot'c  in  connection  with  the  following  mui  tu 


/(fV.;/,  in  opposition  to  the  previous  to,  /iV.i).  Both 
are  quite  in  harmony  with  the  antithesis.  For  be» 
lievers  have  alrciidy  fundamentally  placed  themselves 
as  such  in  the  .service  of  righteousness,  and  in  com- 
plete unity  with  the  centre  of  their  life,  while  the 
man  in  the  op[)Osite  service  of  sin  yields  his  mem- 
bers individually  to  a  foreign  power.  At  all  events, 
the  Christian,  as  the  scivant  of  sin,  would  be  led 
into  the  contradiction  of  wishing  to  remain  free  him- 
self while  he  placed  his  meiribers  at  the  service  of 
sin.  On  the  aorist  nafjaarijiTuTf.,  comp.  Winer,  p 
293  ;  and  Tholuck,  p.  311.  (It  denotes,  "  according 
to  Fritzsche,  what  happens  in  the  moment ;  accord- 
ing  to  Meyer,  tiiat  which  occurs  forthwith  ;  and  ac- 
cording to  Philippi,  that  which  appears  once  ;  "  Tho- 
luck). Tholuck  does  not  attach  importance  to  the 
difference  between  the  aorist  imperative  and  the 
present  imperative,  since  he  concurs  with  those  who 
disregard  the  temporal  reference.  We  liold,  with 
Ilerm.  Schmidt  {De  unperativis  ;  Wittenberg,  1833) : 
"  The  imperative  present  commands  to  occupy  o/e's 
self  with  so)iiethitig ;  the  imperative  aorist,  to  accom- 
plish nomethinc/.^^  We  add  to  this  :  That  something 
already  under  consideration,  or  already  undertaken, 
must  be  carried  through,  [The  greater  deliniteness 
imidied  in  the  aorist  must  not  be  lost  sight  of,  what- 
ever view  be  adopted. — R.] 

As  being  alive  from  the  dead  [wt;  ex  v*- 
x()ioi'  u<"))'T«t;.  The  on;  does  not  introduce  a 
figm-e,  but  means  rather  (comp.  ver.  11):  regarding 
yourselves  an  those  who  are  alive,  almost  =  xince 
you  are.  The  phrase  is  a  condensed  description  of 
the  state  of  iai'Toi's.  While  the  reference  is  un- 
doubtedly ethical,  yourselves  must  be  taken  in  its 
widest  meaning — body,  soul,  and  spirit;  and  the  im- 
plication is,  that  the  whole  man  was  once  dead  t« 
sin  (not  to  sin,  as  ver.  11),  but  now  is  alive;  hence 
the  pertinence  of  the  exhortation.  The  reference 
to  a  field  of  battle  is  extiemely  doubtful,  since  it  in- 
troduces a  new  figure  so  soon  after  vers.  2-11. — R.] 
Meyer:  Those  who,  from  dead  persons,  have  become 
living.  AVe  assume  the  figure  of  a  field  of  battle. 
The  Christians  lay  there  as  dead  or  slain  persons,  and 
from  dciul  persons  they  became  alive  ;  therefore  they 
can  and  should  go  over  to  the  banner  of  righteous- 
ness. 

And  your  members  [x«t  t«  niltj  vfitTip. 
Hodge  paraphrases  and:  and  especially;  but  xat 
seems  to  have  an  inferential  force  here. — R.l  Be- 
cause they  have  become  themselves  the  warriors  of 
God,  they  must  also  regard  their  members  as  God'j 
weapons,  the  weapons  of  righteousness  for  God.* 

Ver.  14.  For  sin  shall  not  have  dominion 
over  you  \  u  n  ct^>T  In  y«(i  !'ft<7iv  or  xriiifr- 
an].  The  future,  according  to  Melanehthon  :  (/«/- 
cixsiina  consolaiio  ;  erroneously  regarded  by  Roseiv 
miiller,  Flatt,  and  others,  as  imperative.  If  we  were 
to  distinguish  between  the  expression  of  confident 
supposition  (Calov.  and  De  Wettc)  and  consoling 
prondse  (Chrysoston),  Grotius,  and  Tholuck),  wo 
would  prefer  the  former  meaning,  since  the  predomi. 


♦  [The  Oeiinan  commentators  jrcncrnlly  take  the  second 
T<j»  ©e<p  no  d•l^  eiimmnii,  and  render  fiir  Ontl.  They  r<1- 
viince  no  Hjierinl  reason  for  it.  This  view  tinneoessarily 
(listurlis  the  jmrallclism  of  the  claum's,  since  tlio  scpond  tu 
Orip  is  in  Bfrict  verlinl  omtnist  vnih  rfj  onapria.  The  first 
Tcy  #((jj  is  un(l<>iil>t('<llv  the  simple  dntive  after  jropi<rTi)(roTf, 
hut  as  the  same  verh  iiiiiHt  ho  suiiplied  In  tliis  cliiuwe,  it 
wema  iinnereKsiiry  to  Fuhstituto  any  other  repiraeii  hero. 
We  render  In  Ont'l  in  hoih  chiunes  ;  the  more  ciintidenlly, 
sin(x>  llie  second  ohiuse  is  hut  n  particulnrization  of  the  flrst| 
to  airr)-  out  tho  antithesis.    Comp.  Stuart,— R.] 


CHAPTER  VI,    12-23. 


211 


nant  train  of  thought  throughout  is  didactic ;   yet 
the  latter  is  also  included. 

For  ye  are  not  undei  \avr  [01/  yuQ  iffxf 
VTTo  i'b/(Ov].  Notwithstanding  the  preceding 
declaration  in  chap.  v.  20,  the  expression  continues 
to  be  an  oxymoron,  since  the  law  is  recognized  as  a 
Darrier  to  sin.  The  sense  is  :  freedom  from  the  law 
gives  you  so  little  freedom  to  sin,  that  it  is  only  by 
the  exercise  of  grace  upon  you  that  your  freedom 
from  sin  has  begun.  [Meyer :  "  Were  they  under 
the  law,  Paul  could  not  have  given  this  promise  {i.  e., 
in  the  preceding  clause),  for  the  law  is  the  strength 
of  sin  (1  Cor.  xv.  56),  multiplies  sin  (v.  20),  in 
which  aspect  he  intends  to  explain  it  furtner  in 
chap,  vii."  Laiv  is  here  used  in  its  widest  significa- 
tion.    See  Hodge. — R.] 

Under  the  dominion  of  grace  [vno  /d^iv^, 
which  operates  as  an  inward  and  new  principle  of 
life ;  while  the  law,  as  such,  confronted  the  inward 
life  only  as  an  outward  demand — threatening,  arous- 
ing, and  casting  down  ;  and  in  this  form  it  presup- 
posed the  dominion  of  sin.  Bondage  under  the  law 
betokened  bondage  under  sin,  without  being  able  to 
remove  it ;  but  it  is  removed  by  the  dominion  of 
grace,  which  has  become  an  inward  law  of  life. 
[The  general  idea  undoubtedly  is :  "  Ye  are  not 
under  a  hyal  dispensation,  but  a  pracious  one  " 
(Stuart) ;  yet  the  whole  context  forbids  the  ex- 
clusive reference  to  the  method  of  justification. 
"  Grace  "  is  here  used  in  its  widest  sense  ;  "  the  Di- 
vine grace,  shown  in  Christ,  is  the  power  under 
which  ye  stand  "  (Meyer),  and  which  assures  that  ye 
shall  not  be  under  the  dominion  of  sin. — "  Gratia 
non  solum  peccaia  diluit,  sed  ut  non  peccetnus  facit " 
(Augustine). — R.] 

_  Ver.  15.  What  then?  May  we  sin  [Tl 
ovvf  ait  a(iT?'j  IT  (I)  fifv .  See  Textual  JVoie^. — R.]. 
According  to  Riickert,  Meyer,  and  others,  a  new  sec- 
tion should  commence  here  ;  which  Tholuck  is  right 
in  opposing.  The  unity  of  the  following  with  the 
foregoing  is  the  fundamental  thought :  freedom  from 
sin.  Also  the  reference  to  the  members  continues 
throughout  what  follows  (ver.  19).  There  is,  however, 
a  modification.  Down  to  ver.  14  the  antithesis  was 
rather  an  ethical  demand  ;  but  now  a  religious  con- 
firmation predominates.  There,  the  new  life  was 
contrasted  witii  the  old  as  a  vohmtary  entrance  into 
the  military  serin.ce  of  righteousness  over  against 
the  wicked,  mercenary  service  of  sin  ;  here,  the 
Apostle  (speaking  according  to  human  analogy)  pre- 
sents the  ol)ligation  of  a  new  service  in  contrast  with 
the  old  service.  In  the  present  verse  Paul  therefore 
brings  out  prominently  the  fearful  consequence  of 
the  impure  Antinomian  view  of  the  state  of  grace, 
in  order  to  condemn  it  forthwith.  To  this  earnest 
rejection  of  a  horrible  consequence,  arising  so  fre- 
quently in  ancient  and  modern  times,  the  conjunc- 
tive afia()rii(7if>fifv  corresponds  better  than  the 
future.  [Dr.  Hodge  well  remarks :  "Such  has  been 
the  objection  to  the  doctrines  of  grace  in  all  ages. 
And  the  fact  that  this  objection  was  made  to  Paul's 
teachings,  proves  that  his  doctrine  is  the  same  with 
tliat  against  which  the  same  objection  is  still  urged." 
This  couf-ideration  should  also  prevent  any  limitation 
of  "  grace  "  to  justification.  —  On  />  ij' yiroiro, 
see  iii.  4,  Textiuill^ote  ^,  p.  112 ;  comp.  C'omtn.  Gal., 
p.  49,  foot-note. — R.] 

Ver.  16.  To  whom  ye  yield  yourselves. 
With  the  know  ye  not,*  the  Apostle  points  to  the 

*  [Stuart :   "  I  take  it  for  granted  that  ye  know  and 


analogy  of  a  principle  of  civil  law  ;  but  he  gives  the 
application  in  the  same  sentence  with  it.  To  whow 
you  once  voluntarily  gave  and  pledged  yourselves  foi 
obedience  [with  a  view  to  obedience ;  Alford]  aa 
servants  (slaves),  his  servants  ye  are,  and  him  ye 
obey  ;  be  it  a.s  servants  of  sin  unto  death,  &c.  Thug 
the  two  services  preclude  each  other,  since  the  mas. 
ters  deny  each  other  (Matt.  vi.  24).  According  to 
De  Wette,  Philippi,  and  Tholuck,  the  emphasis  rests 
on  t'<TTf ;  according  to  Meyer,  on  dov^.ot:  But  the 
actual  beiiiy  and  availing,  with  its  consequence,  ia 
plainly  the  principal  idea  here  ;  the  being  servants 
is  at  the  same  time  connected  with  it.  The  w  inait. 
is  explained  by  Reiche :  to  whom  you  have  to  obey. 
But  this  weakens  the  sense. 

[Either,  or.  The  disjunctive  I; rot  occura 
only  here  in  the  New  Testament.  It  lays  special 
emphasis  on  the  first  alternative  (Meyer).  "Either 
this  alone,  or  that ;  there  is  no  third  ;  "  Hartung,  ii. 
p.  356  f. — R.]  The  ijroi,,  a/',  a  strong  either,  or. 
Sin  is  personified  here  too.  But  the  vnaxori  is 
personified  in  opposition  to  it  as  the  naiia/.orj  (1 
Peter  1.  14) ;  and  this  is  a  beautiful  expression  for 
the  Christian's  freedom  in  his  obedience.*  Plainly, 
the  Apostle  here  makes  the  freedom  of  choice  pre- 
cede  the  servum  arbitriuin ;  according  to  ver.  17, 
the  former  was  bound  a  long  time  ago. 

Of  sin  unto  death  [«/( a^JTia?  tl<i  &(iva- 
TO  v.]  According  to  Fritzsche  and  Reiche,  physical 
death  is  meant ;  but  according  to  Meyer  and  Tho- 
luck (the  early  view  of  which  latter  was  that  it  is 
spiritual  death),  after  Chrysostom,  eternal  death  is 
spoken  of.  Meyer's  ground  against  the  acceptance 
of  physical  death  is,  that  it  is  not  the  consequence 
of  individual  sin,  and  cannot  be  averted  from  the 
fJor/ov  I'TTccxoTjC — an  argument  which  Tholuck  ac- 
cepts. But  how  could  this  occur,  if  there  were  not 
in  earthly  life  a  hundred-fold  gradations  of  physical 
death  ?  The  death  of  the  suicide,  for  example,  is 
not  to  be  explained  simply  by  the  fall  of  Adam. 
And  thus  spiritual  death  has  its  degrees  also.  There- 
fore liie  Apostle  speaks  of  death  in  general  (so  also 
Philippi ) ;  f  as,  according  to  1  Cor.  xv.,  his  thorn 
is  sin,  which  has  eternal  death  in  prospect.  Even 
the  forms  of  the  misery  of  sin  which  precede  death 
are  not  to  be  excluded. 

Of  obedience  unto  righteousness  [rTra- 
KOtjc;  fii;  dtxatoavv fjv.^  Meyer,  just  as  incor- 
rectly, presents  the  di/.aioa/vt]  as  the  Ji7ial  result 
for  the  servants  of  obedience,  in  contrast  with  ex- 
clusively eternal  death.     The  righteousness  of  faith 

believe."  Jo'wctt  paraphrases  thus :  "  Know  ye  not  that 
what  ye  make  yourselves,  ye  are  ? "  This  view  he  t;ikes  to 
avoid  tautoloej',  yet  this  seems  to  depart  from  the  Apostle's 
line  of  thought.— E.] 

*  [Forties  calls  attention  to  the  deviation  from  the  strict 
pnrallelifm  in  this  verse  :  "  of  ohidience  unto  righ/eousness," 
instead  of  "of  riphleousne^s  unto  life.'''  He  intimates 
that  thus  Paul  marks  this  distinction  :  To  sin  we  give  our- 
selves of  our  own  free  choice  and  power  as  bondsmen,  but 
we  cannot  of  our  own  free  choice,  and  by  any  effort  of  will, 
give  ourselves  to  the  service  of  righteousness ;  hence  all 
we  can  do  is  to  yield  ourselves  up  to  God's  grace,  to  save 
us,  as  servants  of  i^bidience,  for  or  unto  riuhteousness,  as  a 
"  gift  "  to  be  bestowed  upon  us,  and  inwrought  into  us  by 
His  Spirit.  He  also  notices  that  tlie  direct  expression  : 
servn)iis  In  righd'nusnei's  does  not  occur  until  ver.  19— the 
caution  being  attiibiitaVjle  to  anxiety  lest  such  an  expres- 
sion be  turned  to  legalistic  account. — E.] 

t  [De  Wette:  '■'■  Swndenelend  uberhcivpl."  So  Alford: 
"  The  state  of  misery  induced  by  sin,  in  all  its  awful  aspecti 
and  consequences."  The  wider  view  is  necessary,  since  the 
word  occuis  frequently,  in  the  remainder  of  tte  chapter  and 
in  chap,  vii.,  in  such  a  connection  that  a  limitation  is  un- 
fortunate. Meyer's  exegesis  is  hampered  throughout  bj 
his  view  of  davarot. — E.] 


212 


THE   EPISTLE   OF   PAUL   TO   THE   ROMAXS. 


18  certainly  assumed  here ;  but  the  "  uprightness 
wliidi  is  aiijmlfii'd  to  believers  in  the  jiul-jMuent  "  is 
gradually  developed  to  its  completion  fVoin  obedi- 
ence as  the  form  of  the  new  life.*  (On  the  con- 
Btruetion  of  this  verse  with  vers.  17,  18  [Kiickert 
and  Keiche],  by  which  ver.  16  is  the  propositio 
major,  ver.  17  the  tniri</r,  and  ver.  18  the  conclu- 
eion.     Comp.  Tholiick.)! 

Ver.  17.  But  thanks  to  God,  ice.  [/«^tq  <>« 
Tw  fduTt,  x.T./..].  It  may  be  asked,  whether  the 
first  proj)osition  is  a  mere  introduction  to  the  .second 
afi  the  principal  pr(>i)osition,  so  tliat  the  tliank.igiving 
refers  nicrily  to  obedience  ((Jrotius,  Estius,  and  otli- 
ere) ;  or  whether  the  tiianksgiving  refers  to  both 
propositions  (Meyer,  Tholuek).|;  Tholuck  says,  in 
favor  of  the  latter  view  :  "  Since  Tjjf  precedes,  and 
fiiv  is  wanting,  tjrt  must  be  read  with  all  the  more 
emphasis  ;  as  1  Cor.  vi.  11  :  y.ai  T«rTa  t/'v.%-  /^tj  ; 
Eph.  v.  8  :  Irt  ydii  noTf  (TxoTOi; ;  and  tlie  imme- 
diate oijject  of  tliiUiksgiving  is  that  this  time  of  the 
bondage  to  sin  is  past."  Evi<iently,  the  deliverance 
from  the  service  of  death  is  in  it.self  already  a  satis- 
factory ground  for  praise  and  thaidisgiving  ;  yea,  we 
naturally  thank  God  for  this  with  the  greatest  emo- 
tion (God  be  praised :  delivered  !),  although  this 
negative  side  of  salvation  cannot  be  regarded  as  sep- 
arate from  the  i>osiiive. 

But  ye  obeyed  from  the  heart  [vnTixov- 
auTf  «)t  ix  >!«of)('f<c].  They  were  oidy  con- 
ditionally voluntary  in  their  bondage  to  sin ;  but 
they  have  become  obedient  from  the  very  bottom  of 
their  heart. 

That  form  of  teaching  whereunto  ye  were 
delivered  [  f «'  i;  S  v  nafi  n)u  f)  tjr  f  t  r  tt  o  i'  ()  t  - 
dct/Tjq].  Tlie  simplest  solution  of  the  attraction 
fti;  hv  na()n).  is  n't  rvnto  T^i;  f)t.da-/..  m;  ov 
naoK)6f>t;Tf.^     E-xjilanations : 

1.  Christian  doctrine  in  general  (the  most  com- 
mon). Meyer  says  properly  to  the  contrary :  By 
this  the  expression  rvrroq  would  not  be  explained. 
Bezn,  indeed,  exidains  it :  A  seal  under  which  we 
are  placed  to  receive  its  impression,  j 

2.  The  doctrinal  form  of  the  gospel  according  to 
Paul,  in  opposition  to  anti-Paulinism  (De  Wette, 
Meyer,  and  others).^ 

3.  O-k-umenius,  Calvin,  and  others,  have  taken 
the  word  in  the  sense  of  the  ideal  which  the  doctrine 
holds  up.  For  a  still  more  untenable  explanation 
by  Von  Hengel,  see  Meyer. 

*  [I'rot  Stuart  here  also  confounds  fiifcaiooTinj  with  4i- 
Koiucrtc,  and  unfortunately  paraphriisrs  :  ob'duiv'-  which  i.i 
viilii  jii-i'ficiilinii.  Th  s  is  open  to  Icxirnl  as  well  as  tlu-o- 
loipcal  objections.    At*,  is  Buojective  (IJoflRe). — H.) 

t  [ITioluok  airrees  with  Meyer,  who  takes  ver.  16  as  the 
mnjor,  ver.  17  ns  the  miunr,  but  ropird.s  the  coiicliisiim  tm 
Bclf-cvi'lcnt,  ami  hence  not  l!xpres^od.  -R.I 

I  (So  I'hilipjii,  Hodjrf,  AlionI,  nnd  modpm  commenta- 
tors L't-nernlly,  takinK  the  fir?t  clnuse  a*  mi-nninK  :  ihni  il 
»'«  nvT.  Wonisworlli,  however,  flmls  here  "a  mode  of 
•''pcakiiii^,  where  a  bad  thine;  i*  repre«enti-d  as  rumparn- 
bvcly  good,  so  tliat  the  euperiority  of  what  is  rcmtrafti'd 
with  it  may  appear  more  clear."  Thia  seems  totally  irrelo- 
raiit.— K.l 

i  [Stuart  prefers  to  6nd  no  attraction,  since  vncueovtiv 
poveriis  the  nccusalive,  >iut  there  seem."  to  be  a  raodiflra- 
tion  of  the  meaning  in  such  cases.  (>n  the  fa°ammatlcal 
difliculty,  se«'  Meyer  in  loco,  Winer,  p.  15.'>. — U.] 

1  [Wordsworth  thus  cairies  out  the  metaphor  of  the 
vorso  :  "  You  readilv  obeyed  the  mould  of  ("liristiMn  Faith 
nnd  rractice,  into  wLich,  at  your  baptism,  you  were  poiirol, 
Bs  it  were,  like  soft,  ductile  and  fluent  metal,  in  order  to 
he  cant,  and  take  its  form.  You  obt>yed  fliis  mould  ;  you 
were  sot  riirid  uml  (ibstinato,  but  were  plastic  and  pliant, 
and  n-isumed  it  readily." — R| 

1  [AdoptiiiK  this  view  in  the  main,  wo  prefer  teiching 
to  dinlrine.  The  latter  is  more  al)stract,  tmt  the  ref-rcneo 
here  Rcems  to  be  to  definite  forms  of  iiutructlon.— K.J 


Tholuck  first  repudiates  the  presumption  of  anti> 
Paulinism.  Yet  it  does,  indeed,  come  into  consider, 
ation,  so  far  as  it  judaistieally  oljscured  the  PAuliuo 
doctrine  of  free  grace.  Tlioluck  is  then  in<  lined  to 
accept  the  exj)lanation  of  Btza,  and  says  "  that  it  id 
by  no  means  a  common  expression  '  to  be  delivered 
to  a  doctrine,'  even  if,  with  Chrysostom  and  Olshau- 
sen,  we  consider  at  the  .«ame  time  the  giddance  of 
God  as  the  active  factor."  But  the  Apostle  say.-,  in 
Gal.  i.  6,  what  he  holds  concerning  this  t\pe  of  doc- 
trine in  opposition  to  its  obscurations. 

God  himself  has  committed  them  to  this  school 
of  faith. 

y/a((f flofljjTf  is  not  middle  (Fritzsche),  but 
passive.  [Winer,  p.  245,  seems  to  justify  the  change 
to  the  active  form  which  the  E.  V.  adopts,  but  there 
is  a  good  reason  for  the  choice  of  the  pa.^sive,  viz., 
the  activity  of  God  in  committing  them  to  this  type 
of  teaching.  This  thonglit  api)roin'iately  lolhiwg 
"  Thanks  to  God."  So  Meyer,  com{).  I'hilippi. — R.] 
It  follows,  from  what  has  been  said,  that  tlie  Church 
was  already  won  over  by  the  Apostle's  Iriends  to  the 
Pauline  form  of  the  gospel.  But  here  the  matter 
treated  of  is  the  essential  element ;  the  true  euergj 
of  freedom  from  the  law  is  the  true  energy  of  life  in 
obedience  unto  righteousness. 

Ver.  18.  And  being  made  free  from  sin 
[i).f  V  ly  utii}  0  ivr  k;  i)i  an  6  t^i;  d/ia^iTtai;, 
Aorist  pariicii)le,  referring  to  the  definite  act  ot  de- 
liverance. The  clause  stands  in  close  connection 
with  ver.  17,  not  as  a  conclusion  (since  ori'  would 
occur  in  that  case),  but  rather  as  an  expansion. — R.], 
The  ()i  leads  us  to  emphasize  the  expression:  ye 
are  enslaved,  or  made  servants,  &c.  From  the  na- 
ture of  tlie  case,  they  knew  the  negative  past — /re". 
from  sill — earlier  and  better  than  this  full  conse- 
quence :  ye  became  the  servants  of  right- 
eousness. 

Ver.  19.  I  speak  after  the  manner  of  men. 
The  nrOiiwTTiroi'  is  analdgous  to  the  y.ar  df>'l(iii> 
nor  in  chap.  iii.  5.*  By  slavery,  which  wa.s  in  full 
bloom  in  ]\ome,  the  Apostle  clearly  explains  to  them 
the  absolute  force  of  the  new  ])rinei]ple  of  life. 

Because  of  the  infirmity  of  your  flesh 
[(Krt  T/jv  drrOivfinv  T/^s"  ffafixoi;  i/ii'ir^. 
The  flesh,  or  the  sensuous  ami  susceptible  fulnes^i  of 
tlie  body,  is  not  only  negatively  weak,  but  also  jiosi- 
tively  diseased  and  disturbed,  both  of  which  facts 
are  expressed  by  the  daflttna.  It  may  be  asked, 
however,  whether  the  Apostle  means  here  the  weak- 
ness ot  intelligence  arising  from  this  infirmity,  by 
which  he  was  compelled  to  represent  to  them  the 
highest  liberty  under  the  figure  of  servitude  (Ben- 
gel,  Meyer,  and  De  Wette,  with  reference  to  1  Cor. 
iii.  1);  or  whether  he  meant  their  practical  infirm- 
ity. The  first  view — that  is,  the  reference  to  intelli- 
gence— ajijiears  also  in  the  intimation  that  the  Apos- 
tle announces  a  popular  explanation  (Vatal»le,  Er- 
nesti,  and  Rosenmiillcr).  The  latter  view  is  favored 
by  Origen,  Chrysostom,  Thcodoret,  Calvin,  &c. :  "  I 
require  nothing  which  your  fleshly  weakness  could 
not  do,"  or  the  like.  The  thought  here  could  not 
be  unintelligible  to  the  Roman  Christians  ;  therefore 
the  practiial  reference  by  all  means  prejiondcrates ; 
but  not  in  the  sense  already  given  :  "  I  require  of 
you  nothing  too  diflicult ;  I  require  only  the  degre* 
of  obedience  which  you  formerly  rendered  to  sin.** 

•  [Hodge:  "The  former  characterizes  as  human  th« 
thing  said,  and  the  other  the  manner  of  euying  it."  Comp. 
Meyer,  however.— Tlils  apologetic  foini  of  exiiressior.  con« 
corns  the  description  of  "  true  freedom  "  as  a  iovAcia.— U.I 


CHAPTER  VI.    12-23. 


213 


The  Ipoatle's  thought  can  rather  be  explained  by 
what  follows :  ''Yield  your  members  srvants,''''  &.c. 
That  is,  even  if,  in  your  spiritual  life,  you  feel  that 
you  are  as  freemen,  you  must  nevertheless  restmin 
your  menibnrs  strictly  in  discipline  and  obedience  on 
account  of  the  infirmity  of  your  flesh.  With  all 
freedom,  the  question  in  reference  to  the  bodily 
members  is  an  appropriate  ascetic  discipline,  such  as 
the  Apostle  exercised  in  reference  to  his  own  body 
(1  Cor.  ix  27  ;  comp.  Gal.  v.  24);  and  therefore  the 
figurative  form  of  his  expression  does  not  merely 
correspond  to  the  antithesis  as  denoting  an  unlimited 
obedience,  but  is  e^tablished  in  a  more  special  sense 
as  the  requirement  of  a  strict  discipline.  This  view 
obviates  Meyer's  reminder:  j.iyo)  cannot  mean 
require.  The  Apostle  does  not  express  a  require- 
ment, but  a  principle ;  by  which  analogy  the  Chris- 
tian, in  his  freedom,  has  to  make  his  bodily  life  ab- 
solutely subject.  Lachmann  [apparently  Oishausen] 
and  Fritzsche  unjustifiably  make  a  parenthesis  of 
this  clause,  a.vn(JMnivov,  /..t.'/.. 

[Witli  Bengel,  Oishausen,  De  Wette,  Hodge,  Al- 
ford,  and  many  others,  I  am  disposed  to  give  a  de- 
cided preference  to  the  first  view,  viz.,  that  this 
clause  refers  to  what  precedes.  Commentators  differ 
as  to  the  force  of  the  terms,  but  the  following  posi- 
tions seem  most  tenable,  hifirmlty  means  intellect- 
ual weakness,  growing  out  of  their  carnal  con- 
dition (<rdo/.o~,  gen.  aHctorix).  The  ethical  reference 
is  in  irajjJ,  not  in  aa&ivfia.  On  aci^i,  see  chap. 
vii.— R.] 

For  as  ye  have  rendered  your  member.s 
[(itantQ  /'«?  naqtiTT tjaaxf  to.  ^li^.rj  vniov. 
rdQ  is  explicative  (Tholuck,  Meyer).  JoT/.u, 
used  as  an  adjective,  only  here  in  New  Testament 
(Hodge). — R.]  To  servitude.  The  apparently  free 
pleasure  was,  in  fact,  a  hard  bondage  under  sin. — 
To  uncleanness  [tt]  dxctdc(Qaict.'\  We  hold 
that  d/.uOai>aia  has  especial  reference  to  the 
heathen  portion  (according  to  chap,  i.),  and  to  in- 
iquity, dvoitia,  on  the  contrary,  to  the  Jewish 
portion  (according  to  chap.  ii.).  Meyer  makes  this 
distinction  :  dxaO-.  is  sin  as  ethically  defiling  man  ; 
and  dvofi.  is  sin  as  violation  of  the  Divine  law. 
Speuer,  De  Wette,  and  others,  distinguish  tims : 
Uncleanness  us  defilement  of  themselves  and  of  sin 
toward  others.  Tholuck  considers  d/.ad-  as  apeciex.^ 
and  dvonia  as  the  generalizing  genus  of  sin.  But 
the  genus  is  declared  in  what  follows.  The  d./.a9-., 
or  fleshly  sin  in  the  narrower  sense,  and  the  dvodia, 
or  violations  of  the  law  in  the  narrower  sense,  con- 
verge in  the  dvonia  in  the  wider  sense  in  guilt  and 
condemnation  before  the  law — -which  constitute  the 
antit'iiesis  to  dyiatri^oc.  Therefore  the  explanation 
of  unto  iniquity,*  ilt;  Trjv  dro/i.,  as  from  one 
sin  to  others,  is  incorrect  (CEcumenius,  Erasmus, 
Luther,  and  Grotius).  The  duality  of  the  service  of 
sin  is  worthy  of  note :  a  service  in  part  to  unclean- 
ness and  in  part  to  insubordination.  This  could  not 
be  the  case  (according  to  the  axiom  that  no  man  can 
serve  two  masters)  if  both  were  not  connected. 

Even  so  now^  render  your  members  as 
servants  to  righteousness  unto  sanctification 

*  [A  (juestioE.  arises  as  to  the  exact  meaiiiiig  of  the 
phrase  ei?  ttji'  ivofiCav .  It  may  mean,  for  the  pur- 
posed iniriiiity— ('.  /'.,  in  order  to  work  iniquity  (Stuart, 
Hodso,  Meyer),  in  order  that  this  shall  be  actualtv  present- 
ed, or  issuicjr  in  iniquity,  av.  indicating  tlie  resultant  state 
(Thoinck,  Ts  Wette,  Alford,  Lange).  The  latter  is  prefcr- 
a'de,  beeause  the  word  seems  to  refer  to  a  state  rather  than 
an  act.  besides,  its  antithesis  is  e'n  ayiacr/uoi',  which 
indicates  the  re.'^ult,  as  \re  infer  from  its  ise  in  ver.  '^2. — 11.] 


[oi'toj?  vT'V  Tta^aarijtraxf  id  fiikri  {ifiUit 
d  or  ?.a  T  ^  d  I,  y.  a  I,  0  a  r  V  ri  i  ti;  dyt^ctafiov^. 
Righteousness,  as  the  new  principle  of  life,  should 
bear  unconditional  sway  over  the  members ;  holi- 
ness should  be  the  end  and  result.  Meyer  translate, 
uyuirruo.:,  holiness.  To  present  holiness.  Even  Tho- 
luck does  not  understand  the  word  to  mean  an  ettbrt 
to  be  holy.  He  refers  to  ver.  22  ;  but  there  dyi,a(y- 
//o.,-  is  still  distinct  from  the  ri/.oq  as  movement 
toward  the  ri/.nc.  He  then  quotes  Heb.  xii.  1-4. 
But  this  passage  does  not  decide  positively  for  th« 
expression  holiness.  For  completed  holiness  is  nol 
the  preliminary  condition  for  beholding  the  Lord, 
but  its  fruit.  But,  according  to  this  very  passage, 
aj'taiTdOs'  cannot  mean  a  striving;  otherwise  we 
would  have  to  translate:  strive  after  the  striving  of 
holiness.  Tiie  expressions  quoted  by  Tholuck  from 
Basil  and  CEcumenius  do  not  btjth  prove  the  same 
thing.  tEcumenius  understands  by  the  word,  abso- 
lute purity  ;  Basil,  thorough  consecration  to  the  holy 
God.  And  this  is  the  sense.  '_-/j't«o'/(d--  means, 
fir?t  of  all,  the  act  of  consecration  ("According  to 
Bleek,  on  Heb.  xii.  14,  it  does  not  occur  among  the 
classics ;  but  Dion.  Halic,  i.  21,  as  in  the  Sept.,  has 
it  of  acts  of  consecration  ; "  Tholuck),  then  the  ctm- 
dition  of  being  consecrated,  or  of  holiness — an  idea 
which  does  not  perfectly  coincide  with  the  idea  of 
completed  holiness,  and  in  which  there  is  at  once  ex- 
pressed the  constant  ethical  movement,  rather  than 
a  substantial  and  quiescent  condition. 

[On  the  lexical  grounds  Lange  advances,  sanctifi- 
cation is  the  preferable  meaning — one  which  accords 
with  the  context.  The  issue  (not,  the  end ;  the  use 
of  the  phrase  in  ver.  22  is  against  this)  is  sanctifica- 
tion, which  indeed  results  in  perfect  holiness,  but 
comes  into  view  here  rather  as  a  progressive  state 
than  as  an  ultimate  one.  Undoubtedly  ririhteousness 
describes  the  principle,  and  dyi,.  the  actual  condition 
(Philippi),  but  in  the  sense  given  by  Lange  above. 
Meyer  says  the  word  always  means  holiness — never 
sanctification — in  the  New  Testament.  Compare,  on 
the  contrary,  Bengel,  Rom.  i.  4. — R.] 

Ver.  20.  For  when  ye  were  servants  of 
sin  [or?  ydjj  ()ov).oi.  tjTf  t^<;  a/(a^T(ac]. 
According  to  Fritzsche,  the  yd^i  indicates  the  elu- 
cidation of  ver.  19  ;  but  according  to  Meyer  and 
Tholuck,  it  announces  the  establishing  of  it.  It  is, 
however,  rather  a  continued  elucidation  of  the  pre- 
ceding than  an  establishment  of  what  follows.*  The 
Apostle  answers  the  question :  wherefore  should  the 
service  of  righteousnefs  be  a  bond-service  ?  An- 
swer :  because  ye,  who  were  formerly  the  servants 
of  sin,  became  free  in  relation  to  righteousness. 
They  were  not  tlie  freemen  of  righteousness,  aa 
though  it  had  made  them  free,  but  in  relation  to  it ; 
therefore  the  dative.  The  argument  lies  in  the  ne- 
cessity of  the  complete  reversion  of  the  earlier  rebi- 
tion.  Since  sin  and  righteou.sness  preclude  each 
other,  they  were  free  in  relation  to  righteousness, 
because  they  were  the  bondmen  of  sin.  Therefore, 
since  they  have  now  become  free  from  sin,  they 


*  [The  difficult  connection  of  the  verse  is  satisfactorily 
explained  in  Webster  and  Wilkinson:  "yap  restates  the 
view  given  of  theur  former  condition  in  respect  to  sin  and 
righteousness,  in  prepriration  for  the  final  and  most  accu- 
rate statement  of  their  present  spiritual  condition  (ver. 
2J)."  Meyer  (who  has  chanced  his  views),  in  4lh  ed.,  also 
finds  in  this  verse  a  preparation  for  the  full  statement  of  a 
motive  for  obcyint'  t!ic  precept  of  ver.  19.  He  groups  vers, 
20-2.:  as  one  in  thought,  calling  attention,  however,  to  th« 
somewhat  tragical  force  of  our  verse,  with  its  emphatifl 
words  in  the  parallel  clauses. — E.] 


214 


THE   EPISTLE   OF   PAUL   TO   THE    ROMANS. 


must  be  the  bon'lmea  of  rigliteou3nes3.  The  fearful 
expression,  free  as  regaids  righteousness  [t/.t  r - 
&tfjai,  ijTt  Ti*  dixaioaii'ij,  dulive  of  refer- 
ence], lioof!  not  niuau  that  righteousiiesa  had  no 
claims  upon  you  (Tholuok),  but  tliat  it  had  no  part 
in  you.*  According  to  Koppe  and  Keiehe,  tiiis  is 
ironical ;  a  position  opposed  by  Meyer,  and  now  also 
by  Tiiohick.  There  is  ceruiidy  nothing  ironical  in 
the  sentence,  but  there  is  in  tlie  word  thrOfi>oi. 
For  we  cjin  no  more  accept  it  in  a  strict  sense,  than 
that  they  should  be  the  slaves  of  righteousness.  As 
tliis  hitter  bondage  is  not  oidy  freedom,  but  also 
spontaneity,  so  was  that  freedom  the  deepest  shivery. 
[That  was  a  sorrowful  freedom  !  Why  find  irony, 
tlien  V— R.] 

Ver.  'Jl.  What  fruit  had  ye  then  therefore? 
Things  whereof  ye  are  novr  ashamed  [t('i'« 
0  I'  I'  y.  a  (J  71  u  V  f  i  /  f  r  i  t  d  t  j^  ;  i  (t'  o  t  s'  ''  '*'  v 
inai^ff/i'VurO^f.  See  Textual  Note  '". —  R.]. 
Here  are  two  divergent  constructions  : 

1.  The  question  closes  witii  roTf.  Tlien  fol- 
lows tlie  answer.  (Thus  the  Pesh.,  Theodore  of 
Mopsvestia,  Theodoret,  Enisinus,  Luther,  and  many 
Othei-s,  down  to  De  ^Velte,  Lachmann,  Tisciiendort, 
and  Philippi.)  [So  Alford,  Webster  and  Wilkin- 
son.] 

2.  The  question  continues  to  inat-a/vvtaOf. 
What  fruit  had  ye  then  in  those  tilings  whereof  ye 
are  now  asliamed  '?  Answer  :  None  ;  for  the  final 
result  of  tliem  (these  things)  is  deatli  (tlius  Chrysos- 
toni,  (Ecumenius,  Beza,  Caiov.,  Grotius,  &c. ;  Ben- 
gel,  .Meyer).     [So  Stuart,  Ilodge,  Word.swarth.] 

3.  Reiche,  in  conjunction  witli  the  latter  con- 
struction, explains  tlms  :  Wiuit  deeds,  of  which  ye 
are  now  a.sliained,  proceeded  from  your  service  of 
sin  (namely,  your  bringing  forth  fruit)  ?  This  third 
construction  is  utterly  untenable ;  y.nfjnoi;  would 
then  recur  as  plural  in  tV  ott,-,  and  xa()7T.  i/n,v 
would  mean  :  to  bring  forth  fruit. 

Tiiei-e  are  the  following  reasons  against  Meyer's 
ex|)lanation :  1.  First  of  all,  he  must  insert  an 
ixtiviitv  before  tip  oli;,  and  introiiuee  a  negation 
into  the  question,  in  order  to  explain  the  form  of 
the  answer,  to  yon>,  kc.  2.  The  (juestion  is.  What 
fruit  had  ye  then  ?  not.  What  will  ye  have  finally  ? 
3.  After  the  antithesis,  it  should  be  made  emphatic 
thit  t  ley  had  formerly  no  fruit,  but  rather  pernicious 
and  horrible  deceptions,  but  that  now  tliey  bring 
forth  their  fr\iit.  4.  Hy  .Meyer's  cmislruction,  ti/' 
oti;  vrv  inavn  ■/  i'VKt  (Yi  would  be  converted 
into  an  enervating  remark.  Meyer  .say.s,  against  ex- 
planation No.  1  :  1.  According  to  ver.  22,  the  ques- 
tion, in  antithesis  to  ver.  21,  is  the  haviuri  the  fruit, 
and  not  the  (piality  of  it.  This  is  wrong  :  the  x«/<- 
TTflv  is  <|ualified,  >«,■  ayiannnv.  2.  I'aul  must  have 
■written  t»'i'«,-  zno/ror,-,  or  i<p  oi ;  as  if  the  meta- 
phorical idea  of  fruit,  or  gain,  could  not  be  re|>re- 
sented  in  a  variety  of  things.  3.  Paul  never  ascribes 
xa()7Tin'(;  to  immorality  ;  he  attributes  i'oyn  to  it 
(Gal.  v.  1ft);  he  predicates  xa^j/roi;  of  onlv  what  is 
good  (Gal.  V.  22;  Eph.  v.  9  ;  Piiil.  i.  11)";  indeed, 
hi-  even  designates  the  loyn  rnv  a/.urniK;  as  axaoTia. 
But  till"  A|)i)slle  says  the  same  thing  here,  wlien  he 
aiiks,  What  fruit  had  ye  then  ?  He  even  denies  that 
they  had  real  fruit — the  true  gain  of  life.  On  the 
other  hand,  they  reaped,  in-Jtcad  of  true  fruit,  ba.se 
deceptions,  things  of  which  they  are  now  ashamed, 
and  in  which  their  future  death  is  announced.    Comp. 

•  I  Stuart :  "counted  youriaoWes  froo."  This  Is  an  Im- 
plied Irony,  and  ol>jectionablo,  for  it  Is  not  strictly  true— R.J 


Gal.  vi.  8.  Tholuck  thinks  that  between  the  tw« 
constructions  there  is  no  demonstrative  decision. 

For  the  end  of  those  things  is  death  [to 
/(£!'  yct.(i  Tt/.Oi;  i/.tiviitv  flciraTo,].  Death 
must  be  understood  here  in  its  complete  and  com- 
prehensive meaning ;  not  eternal  death  exclusively 
(Meyer). 

Meyer,  with  Lachmann,  accepts  /<iv,  and  trans- 
lates :  for  the  end  is  indeed  death ;  but  without 
observing  that  this  contradicts  his  own  construction 
of  the  passage.  It  is  only  on  the  first  construction 
that  ftiv  has  any  meaning.  [See  Textual  Note  ". 
Having  already  accepted  /liv  on  diplomatic  and  criti- 
cal grounds,  before  carefully  considering  the  exegeti. 
cal  results,  I  am  now  dis[)osed  to  insist  upon  retain- 
ing it,  and  using  it  as  decisive  in  regard  to  the  con- 
struction of  the  verse. — K.] 

Ver.  22.  But  now  having  been  made  free 
from  sin  [■vrrt  de  i /.f  ii  f)  f  (toi  O'tvTK;  a  no 
T^<;  a/(a(>tiai;].  The  evil  relation  has  been 
completely  reversed  by  faith. — And  become  ser- 
vants to  God  [duvXni  0  ivrn;  i)i  r  iji  &  nZ  . 
Notice  the  definiteness  of  theaorist  participles. — R.]. 
(lod  himself  here  takes  the  place  of  dt^xuioaiivti, 
for  their  relation  is  now  one  of  personal  love.— 
Ye  have  your  fruit  unto  sanctification  [i/fn 
Tor  xaoTTov  luoiv  fi^  dyi^nauov.  The  pres- 
ent indicates  fruit  already.  The  sense :  have  your 
reward,  seems  unjustifiable  here.  Eii;  is  consecu- 
tive here  (Meyer),  as  I  hold  it  to  be  in  ver.  19  also. 
'yiytarr ft  6vf  satictifi'-alion,  as  above,  a  progressive 
state,  tlie  immediate  i.ssue  of  the  fruit  of  their  per- 
sonal relation  to  God,  tiie  final  issue  follows. — R.] 
They  have  fruit  already  in  this  new  relation.  Meyer: 
the  nottrorc/i;  ^cj^i,-,  ver.  4. — Or  the  ptitce,  chap.  v.  1. 
But  as,  in  the  Old  Testament,  the  firstlings  served 
for  the  a;'t«tr,((d^,  so,  in  the  New  Testament,  this  is 
done  by  the  whole  fruit  of  the  life  of  faith.  Tho- 
luck translates  here  also  :  holhwxs  [without  exclud- 
ing the  idea  of  sanctification,  however. — R.] 

And  the  end  everlasting  life  [  r  d  »)  e  riXoi; 
llintjv  « t  (li  rto )'].  That  is,  ye  have  evei'lasting 
life.  Meyer  says,  this  po.ssession  is  still  an  ideal  one. 
It  is  rather  an  essential  one ;  John  iii.  30  ;  Matt.  v. 
8  ;  Ileb.  xii.  14 ;  1  John  iii.  2.  [We  must  take 
*'  life  "  here  in  its  Tuost  extended  sen.se,  as  "  death  " 
in  ver.  21.  Meyer's  dilHculty  arises  Irom  his  limit- 
ing the  meaning  of  these  two  words  throughout. 
We  have  already  eternal  life  in  germ  ;  in  its  ful- 
ness it  is  the  Tf'/oi;  of  all  our  fruit  and  fruitfulness. 
Not,  however,  by  natural,  inherent  laws  of  develop- 
ment. The  next  verse  sets  forth  anew  the  two  ends, 
and  the  inherent  dilVerenee. — R.] 

Ver.  23.  For  the  wages  of  sin  is  death  [  t  « 
y  aq  o  >/'  "»  r  t  ft  T  //  s  a  //  «  (>  t  1  ft  i,-  f)  c't  v  n  t  o  t;  ]. 
Tholuck:  "'Oi/'olnor,  and  in  the  ])lural  di/'i.ina, 
wages  of  the  servant  and  tiie  soldier;  therefore  pos- 
sibly, though  not  necessarily,  a  continuation  of  the 
figure  of  military  service ;  comp.  on/.ct,  ver.  13. 
Uniier  thii  supposition,  (Jrotius,  Bengel,  and  Wct- 
stein  made  /donTiin  to  mean  the  donationmn  milu 
tare.  Vet  tlie  technical  wonl  for  such  a  gift  is  « 
fni<)n(Ti^  (Kiilzsche)."  The  figurative  character  of 
the  antithesis  lies  in  the  fact  that  sin  pays  its  soldiers 
and  slaves  miserable  wages  (Erasmus  :  oitciria,  vi/« 
virbuin),  namely,  diatli ;  but  <iod  (as  King)  pays 
His  chililren  and  servants,  not  a  reward,  but  the 
honor-gill  of  His  favor,  which  is  eternal  life.  Tho- 
luck defines  the  antithesis  thus  :  as  far  as  sin  is  eon. 
ceined,  her  due  is  according  lo  justice  ;  but,  on  tin 
other  hand,  what  is  received  by  the  believing  actrpV 


CHAPTER  VI.    12-23. 


215 


ance  of  God's  saving  blessings  can  be  regarded  only 
as  a  gift — namely,  the  imparting  of  salvation,  the 
eternal  completion  of  life.  This  antithesis  is  cor- 
rect so  far  as  it  is  not  pushed  beyond  the  proper 
measure,  so  that  justice  does  not  appear  as  mere 
arbitrary  authority.  In  the  present  passage,  how- 
ever, this  antithesis  recedes  ;  for  the  question  is  not 
concerning  the  righteous  punishment  of  sin,  but  the 
way  in  which  sin  itself,  regarded  as  false  dominion, 
pars  tlie  reward.  The  gift  of  God  also,  at  all  events, 
presupposes  the  merit  of  believers,  but  yet  remains 
a  gift,  because  the  whole  idea  of  gain  falls  to  the 
ground  where  merit  is  not  considered,  and  where 
even  tlie  preliminary  conditions  of  good  conduct  are 
bestowed  as  a  gift.*  For  the  idea  of  wages,  see 
1  Cor.  ix.  7.  "  The  plural  (more  usual  than  the  sin- 
gular) may  be  explained  from  the  manifold  eleiuents 
of  original  natural  reward,  and  from  the  numerous 
coins  of  later  money-wages  ;  "  Meyer. 

In  Christ  Jesus  our  Lord  [iv  X^iaxw 
Jrjdov  r iT)  y.vqim  tjfiijtv.  Stuart  follows  the 
inexact  sense  of  the  E.  V. :  "  through  the  redemp- 
tion or  atonement  of  Christ."  True  ;  but  not  what 
Paul  says  here.  In  Chrut  Jesus  is  an  expression 
which  has  a  full,  rich  meaning  of  its  own.  In  this 
case,  we  may  ask  whether  the  phrase  limits  God,  or 
ffift  of  God,  or  is  used  more  generally.  Meyer  says : 
in  Christ  it  rests,  is  causally  founded,  that  the  gift 
of  God  is  eternal  life.  Webster  and  Wilkinson  : 
"  in  Him,  by  virtue  of  His  relation  to  Deity,  God  is 
the  giver ;  in  Him,  we,  as  united  with  Him,  having 
an  inteTest  in  Him,  are  recipients. — R.].  He  is  not 
only  the  source,  but  also  the  central  treasure  of  our 
eternal  life. 


DOCTBINAIi   AND   ETHICAX. 

1.  It  is  certainly  not  accidental  that  the  word 
to  rule,  [iaai.Xfvn,v,  occurs  so  frequently  in  the 
Epistle  to  the  Romans  (chap.  v.  14,  lY,  21  ;  vi.  12) ; 
likewise  the  word  weapons,  '6  n Xa,  here,  and  in 
chap.  xiii.  12.  See  the  JSxtcf.  Notes,  where  refer- 
ence is  made  to  the  Apostle's  similar  allusions  to 
local  relations  in  the  First  Epistle  to  the  Corinthians, 
as  well  as  in  the  Epistle  to  the  Ephesians.  His  epis- 
tles in  general  abound  in  these  evidences  of  truth  to 
life.  In  the  Epistle  to  the  Galatiaus,  for  example, 
we  see  very  plainly  the  Galatian  fickleness ;  in  the 
Epistles  to  the  Corinthians,  we  see  the  city  of  Cor- 
inth portrayed  ;  and  in  the  Epistle  to  the  Colossians, 
the  Phrygian  popular  spirit,  &c.  Such  evidences  of 
authenticity  are  regarded  by  the  critics  of  Baur's 
school  as  mere  cobwebs,  while  they  convert  cob- 
webs of  the  barest  probability  into  important  and 
decisive  evidence. 

2.  In  this  section  the  Apostle  passes  from  the 
figure  of  military  service  to  that  of  servitude,  in 
order  to  portray,  in  every  relation.  Christian  free- 
dom in  its  contrast  with  the  bondage  of  man  in  sin. 

3.  On  ver.  12.  The  despotic  dominion  of  sin  in 
the  mortal  body  of  the  unregenerate,  is  an  ethical 
corf  of  physical  demoniacal  possession.  Sin,  as  a 
foreign  force,  has  penetrated  the  individual  life,  and 
riots  there  as  lord  and  master.  Christianity  now 
consists  essentially  in  raising  the  shield  of  the  Spirit 
against  this  usurping  despotism,  in  the  power  of  the 
triumph,  dominion,  and  fellowship  of  Christ. 

*  [On  x°^P>'<''IJ^<^y  see  v.  15  ff. — The  antithesis  is  differ- 
ent here,  yet  rolated — there,  fall,  trsjisgression ;  here, 
wages,  hut  of  sin  — E.] 


4.  Ver.  13.  If  the  real  Christian  should  again 
serve  sin,  his  conduct  would  be  a  voluntary,  coward, 
ly,  and  inexcusable  surrender  of  his  arms  to  a  hos. 
tile  power  already  overthrown.  But,  according  to 
the  Apostle's  view,  the  whole  life  of  humanity  is  a 
moral  struggle  of  the  spirit  between  righteousness 
and  unrighteousness,  in  which  all  the  human  mem- 
bers are  arms  that  contend  for  either  righteousness 
or  unrighteousness.  Man,  physiologically  regarded, 
is  born  nidied,  without  weapons  or  arms  ;  ethically 
considered,  he  is  "  armed  to  the  teeth  ;  "  his  mem- 
bers  have  throughout  the  significance  of  moral  arms. 

5.  The  conclusion  made  by  non-legal  impurity, 
that  sin  is  made  free,  because  we  are  not  under  law, 
but  under  grace,  is  reversed  by  Paul,  who  says  that, 
for  this  reason,  sin  is  to  be  regarded  as  abrogated 
and  excluded.  The  law  does  not  make  sinners,  but 
it  suits  sinners  ;  bondage  under  the  law  corresponds 
to  bondage  under  sin,  and  the  law  cannot  annul  this 
bondage.  To  him  who  stands  under  the  law,  his 
own  inmost  nature  is  still  a  strange  form  ;  for  the 
inmost  nature,  in  its  living  character,  signifies  the 
inwardness  of  the  law,  freedom  from  the  letter  of 
the  law,  liberty.  To  be  estranged  from  one's  self  is, 
therefore,  to  be  still  in  the  bondage  of  sin,  and  there- 
fore under  that  of  the  law  also,  as  the  foreign  form 
of  the  inmost  norms  of  life.  But  in  grace,  man  has 
become  at  once  free  from  sin  and  the  law,  because 
by  grace  he  has  come  to  himself  (Luke  xv.  15),  and 
because  it  has  written  the  law,  as  the  word  of  the 
Spirit,  on  his  heart.*  On  the  power  of  sin,  see  Tho- 
luck,  p.  313  ;  on  the  vova  obedietUia,  p.  314. 

0.  On  ver.  1(>.  Life  is  throughout  a  consequence 
of  an  established  principle,  either  for  death  or  for 
life,  whether  man  may  have  made  this  principle — his 
self-determination — more  or  less  clear  to  himself. 
Christianity  is  a  thoroughly  synthetical  view  of  life 
— a  view  of  life  in  its  grand,  complete,  and  funda- 
mental relations.  Adam,  Christ — the  state  of  bond 
age,  the  state  of  freedom,  &c. 

7.  On  ver.  17.  When  the  Apostle  thanks  God 
that  the  Romans  have  not  merely  become  Christians 
in  a  general  sense,  but  have  become  obedient  to  the 
doctrinal  form  of  the  freedom  of  the  gospel  from 
the  law,  the  application  of  this  to  the  evangelical 
confession  lies  very  near.  The  Apostle  speaks  here 
of  definite  doctrinal  types,  not  so  much  in  the  for- 
mal as  in  the  material  sense.  The  antithesis  is  juda- 
izing  Christianity. 

8.  On  vers.  19,  20.  That  the  members  should 
be  servants  to  righteousness,  is  not  merely  a  figura- 
tive expression  ai'ising  from  the  antithesis  that  they 
were  enslaved  to  sin.  Rather,  this  is  a  demand 
which  follows  from  the  fact  that,  in  consequence  of 
serving  sin,  they  are  afflicted  with  weakness  of  the 
flesh ;  and  therefore,  notwithstanding  the  freedom 
of  the  Christian  spirit — yea,  by  virtue  of  it — the 
morbid  and  blunted  natural  forces,  the  animal  na- 


*  [Stuart :  •'  Christians  are  placed  in  a  condition  ol 
which g'ince  is  the  prominent  feature:  grace  to  sanctify  as 
well  as  grace  to  renew  the  heart ;  grace  to  purify  the  evil 
affections  ;  grace  to  forgive  otiences  though  often  repeated, 
and  thus  to  save  from  despair,  and  to  excite  to  new  efforts 
of  obedience.  Viewed  in  this  light,  there  is  abundaut  rea- 
son for  Asserting  that  Christi.ins,  under  a  system  of  grace, 
w'ill  much  more  efiVctually  throw  off  the  dominion  of  sin, 
than  they  would  do  if  under  a  mere  law  dispensation." 
Tet,  if  there  be  one  point  where  there  is  most  obscurity  in 
the  minds  of  the  majority  of  professing  Christians,  it  is  here. 
That  it  has  largely  arisen  from  an  obscuration  of  the  doc- 
trine of  sanctification  by  grace,  or  rather  the  unwise  sun- 
dering of  .iustific:i''nn  and  sanctificaton  in  discussicg  thij 
Epistle,  is  painfully  true— R.] 


316 


THE   EriSTLE    OF   PAUL   TO   THE   ROMANS. 


turcs,  niu-st  be  subjected,  watched  over,  and  con- 
trolled. Au<;u.stine  tenches  that  tlje  little  tree,  which 
baa  grown  crooked  on  one  side,  is  thereljy  stretched 
BO  that  it  can  be  bent  a  little  toward  the  other  side. 

y.  The  fruit  of  the  service  of  sin  is  fiist  of  all 
represented  in  bitter  disjippointnients,  confusion,  dis- 
grace, and  shame  ;  finallv,  in  death.  The  reward  of 
ein  is,  from  its  very  nature,  the  low  wages  for  slavish 
or  niiliiarv  service,  and  in  addition  to  this,  further 
Coiiteinptilile  pay,  viz.,  deatli.  How  glorious  does 
the  honorable  gill  of  eternal  life  appear  in  compari- 
son with  this  wretched  reward  !  See  the  Exef/. 
Kolen.  We  nnist  here  reject  the  exaggerations  of 
the  idea  of  gracious  retribution,  as  well  on  the  side 
of  arbitrary  authority  as  on  the  side  of  reward.  In 
human  relations,  gaiu  is  a  lower  form  than  merit ; 
but  the  donation  goes  far  beyond  the  merit,  since  it, 
as  the  gilt  of  personal  magnanimity,  will  more  than 
outweigli  the  work  of  personal  worth.  Everywhere 
in  the  kingdom  of  love,  to  say  nothing  of  the  king- 
dom of  grace,  all  idea  of  nterit  falls  to  the  ground  ; 
but  the  api)ropriateness  of  the  reward  to  the  dignity 
of  the  chilli  and  the  worthiness  of  the  servant,  which 
are  bestowed  by  God  and  religiously  and  morally 
a|>propriated,  do  not  fall  to  the  ground.  Grace  is 
not  thereby  so  glorifieil  that  it  is  absolved  from  jus- 
tice.* On  the  w(i)//  aui'ivio^,  see  Connn.  on  the  Gos- 
pel of  John,  iii.  15. 


HOMILETICAL   AXD    PRACTICAL. 

The  well-established  apostolical  admonition  to 
a  moral  course  of  life:  1.  To  whom  is  it  diiected  ? 
2.  What  does  it  require  ?  3.  By  what  is  it  estab- 
lished y — Our  body  is  mortal  (ver.  12). — In  whose 
service  should  our  members  be?  1.  Not  in  the  ser- 
vice of  unrighteousness ;  but,  2.  In  the  servee  of 
righteousness  (ver.  I'H). — In  which  service  do  our 
Weapons  hold  out  better?  1.  Many  believe  in  the 
service  of  unrigliteousness  ;  but  there  they  are  de- 
stroyed ;  2.  Christian  experience  teaches,  on  the 
Other  hand,  that  it  is  in  the  service  of  righteousness, 
for  there  they  remain  untouched  (ver.  l:^). — Under 
the  law  there  is  di-ath,  but  imder  grace  there  is  life 
(ver.  14). — Law  and  grace. 

SliouM  we  sin,  since  we  are  not  under  the  law, 
but  under  grace  ?  (Jod  forl)id  !  Because  freedom 
from  the  law  is  (1.)  not  lawlessness,  but  (2.)  obedi- 
ence  to  righteousness  [com[).  Luther's  work  on  the 
Freedom  of  a  Christian  Man],  (vers.  15-23). — What 
is  it  to  be  obedient  in  heart  to  the  form  of  doctrine 
with  which  we  are  connected  ?  1.  Not  only  to  be 
orthodox,  but  also  believing  (ver.  17). — The  form 
of  at)ostolical  doctrine.  1.  What  must  we  imder- 
stami  thereby?  (The  Apostle  Paul's  doctrine  of 
ju-(fifieation  by  faith.)  2.  How  far  is  this  form  of 
imf)nrtance  for  us?  (ver.  17). — Christian  (ireachers 
should  never  forget  to  .so  speak  after  the  manner  of 
men  that  everybody  can  understand,  chap.  iii.  5 
(Ver.  l'.>). — The  fruits  of  serving  sin  and  serving 
r,-)d:  1.  The  fruit  of  the  former  is  death;  2.  The 
Iniit  of  the;  latter  is  eternal  life  (ver.  21). — What  is 
the  fruit  of  sin?  1.  A  fruit  of  which  one  nnist  be 
ashamed;  2.  One  whose  end  is  death  (ver.  21). — 
What  is  the  fruit  of  righteousness  ?  1.  One  of  holi- 
K  11CB8 ;    2.  One  whose  end  is  eternal  life. — The  pre- 

•  [Tt  in  wpII  to  note  here  the  sayliiij  of  Ati(ni«tino :  Or<i- 
lia  ii'H  rril  iffilin  ulln  ninlo,  niri  nil  r/niliiilii  umiii  mndo; 
"  Omro  I*  not  gnicc  in  any  sort,  if  it  uo  not  free  In  every 
•ort.-K.) 


cious  fruit  of  holiness.  It  is  not  only  to  be  regard- 
ed iis  (1.)  lovely,  but  (2.)  it  makes  wise,  and  joyous, 
and  blessed  (vers.  21,  22). — Death,  and  eternal  life. 
1.  The  former  is  the  wages  of  sin  ;  the  latter  ifl 
God's  gift  in  Jesus  Christ  our  Lord. 

Llthkr  :  In  His  dtal/i,  that  even  we  should  die 
like  Ilim.  Observe  that  believers  have  slill  wicked 
lusts  in  the  flesh,  which  they  do  not  obe}  (ver.  12), 
— So  long  as  grace  rules,  the  conscience  remains  free 
and  controls  sin  in  the  llesh  ;  but  without  grace,  sin 
rules,  and  the  law  condenms  the  conscience  (ver.  14). 

Stakkk  :  Sin  still  arises  even  in  the  regenerate, 
and  they  can  again  fall  under  its  dominion  ;  thci'e- 
fore  they  need  the  warning  (ver.  12). — The  pious  are 
never  without  law,  and  yet  not  under  the  law,  but  ic 
it  (ver.  14). — Whoever  still  permits  sin  to  rule  ovei 
him,  cann<it  be  under  grace  (ver.  14). — To  be  a  ser 
vant  of  sin,  is  the  greatest  misery  ;  but  to  have  been 
a  servant  of  sin  is  the  greatest  blessedness  (ver.  17). 
— Justification  impels,  move.s,  and  powerfully  awak- 
ens toward  the  exercise  of  godliness ;  Ps.  cxxx.  5 
(ver.  18). 

IIkdi.ngkr:  To  have  piety  from  compulsion,  fear, 
or  politeness,  in  order  to  please  others,  or  through 
one's  own  inclination,  desire,  praise,  and  advantage, 
was  the  delusion  and  bondage  of  Ishmael.  The  chil- 
dren of  God  are  not  under  the  law  ;  1  John  iv.  18 
(ver.  15). — Christians  are  not  libertines,  who  can  do 
what  they  please  :  they  are  servants,  but  servants  of 
God  1  But  where  are  such  servants  ?  How  great  is 
their  number?  Servants  of  court,  fashion,  passion, 
men,  the  state,  self,  and  the  devil,  can  be  seen  ia 
abundance. 

Ckamkr  :  We  shall  never  have  a  better  fate 
than  Paul,  all  of  whose  words  have  been  ])erveried, 
misinterpreted,  and  made  sinful. — Nothing  is  more 
beconiing  in  a  servant  than  obedience.  Becanse  we 
are  now  the  servants  of  God,  we  must  be  steadfastly 
obedient  from  the  heart  until  the  end,  according  to 
God's  word,  and  not  according  to  our  own  notion 
(ver.  Iti). — Ql'ksnel:  As  the  heart  is,  so  is  the  use 
of  the  body.  He  serves  the  Lord  who  has  chosen 
Him  from  the  heart.  A  true  Christian  dedicates 
himself  wholly  to  God,  his  heart  by  love,  and  his 
body  by  good  works  (ver.  13). — O  blessed  .servitude 
with  which  we  .serve  God  !  The  servjee  of  men 
makes  miserable  people ;  but  the  ser<'.ce  of  God 
makes  us  saints  in  time  and  kings  in  eiernity  ;  Isa. 
xiv.  3  (ver.  22). — Mii.i.Eii:  God  will  have  no  ct>in- 
])ulsory  service  ;  a  willing  heart  is  the  l)est  otfering; 
in  the  weak  flesh  a  willing  spirit,  in  the  small  work 
a  great  will;  Ps.  ex.  3  (ver.  19). — He  who  is  free 
from  righteousness  has  no  y)art  in  Christ  (ver.  20). — 
As  the  fruit  grows  from  the  seed,  so  does  ignominy 
grow  from  sin,  outwardly  before  the  world  and  in- 
wardly in  the  conscience  before  (iod  (see  ver.  21). 

Si'KNER  :  Earnest  and  true  Christianity  consists 
herein  :  although  sin  is  present,  it  does  not  reign 
(ver.  12). — We  dare  not  think,  that  though  the 
wages  of  sin  is  death,  Christ  has  redeemetl  us  from 
death,  so  that  it  will  not  finally  injure  tis.  For  the . 
redem|ition  wrought  by  Christ  will  not  help  us  any, 
if  we  do  not  become  obedient  to  Him  (ver.  23). 

G.SKi.Acii :  The  body,  with  its  impulses  and  mem- 
bers, is  like  a  house  full  of  arms  or  im|)lemenls,  for 
war  or  every  kind  of  labor.  In  the  service  of  sin, 
these  members,  the  sinful  impulses,  then  become 
themselves  nn-mbers  unto  sin  (ver.  13). — The  servi- 
tude of  obedience  is  also  true  freedom  (ver.  17).— 
Since,  by  the  gospel,  man  becomes  a  servant  as  well 
as  a  freeman,  license  is  just  as  much  excluded  af 


CHAPTER  VII.    1-6. 


217 


slavish  obcdieuce  to  a  foreign  power  (ver.  18). — If 
righteousness,  so  rules  in  us  that  all  our  members 
become  its  instruments,  they  will  work  together  for 
the  increase  of  our  holiness  (ver.  19). — A  single 
glance  at  the  fruit  and  the  reward  of  sin  must  fill  the 
Christfau  with  shame,  and  therefore  with  abhorrence 
of  the  false  freedom  which  abuses  grace  (ver.  21). — 
The  perfect  sanetiiication  of  man  in  body  and  soul  is 
also  his  true,  eternal  life ;  for  by  the  perfect  com- 
munion of  his  whole  nature  with  the  Fountain  of  all 
life,  God  himself  pervades  him  spiritually  and  bodily 
with  the  lulness  of  everlasting  life  (ver.  22). 

Lisco  :  Earnest  admonition  to  holiness  of  life 
(vers.  12-23):  1.  Its  import  (vers.  12-14);  2.  The 
impulse  to  a  more  zealous  sanctificatiou  is  the  grace 
of  redemption  (vers.  15-23). 

Hecbnkr  :  Freedom  from  the  law  is  not  liberty 
to  sin,  or  lawlessness  (ver.  15). — In  Christianity,  the 
law  of  the  letter,  with  its  worldly  power,  does  not 
rule,  but  the  free  law  of  love  (ver.  15). — Obedience, 
the  practice  of  God's  will,  awakens  in  us  increasingly 
the  spiritual  power  of  life,  and  obtains  spiritual 
health  (ver.  16). — Purity  and  beauty  of  soul  arist. 
only  from  .'^inlessness  (ver.  19). — The  remembrance 
of  earlier  sins  never  becomes  wholly  effaced,  but, 
1.  It  keeps  the  converted  person  humble  and  watch- 
ful ;  it  awakens,  2.  thankfulness  for  the  love  and 
grace  of  God  ;    3.  sympathy  for  others. 

Besser  :  Believers  are  servants  cf  righteous- 
ness (vers.  12-23). — Unrighteousness  is  a  tyrannical 
master,  who  does  not  release  his  slaves  according  to 
their  pleasure,  but  drives  them  ever  farther  from 
God's  commandments  (ver.  19). — SerV'Huvi  Dei 
sui/una  iibtrlas  (ver.  19.) — The  wages  of  sin  is  as 
manifold  as  the  wages  with  which  a  general  rewards 
his  soldiers  (bread,  clothing,  money) ;  but  its  sum  is 
death,  empty  death. 

La.nge  :  The  service  of  sin,  at  first  apparently  a 
voluntary  life  of  warfare,  but  afterwards  plainly  a 
mercenary  condition,  and  finally  a  state  of  slavery. 
— The  fearful  self-deception  in  surrendering  one's 
self  to  sin  :   1.  At  the  outset,  slavery  instead  of  free- 


dom ;  2.  In  continuance,  always  backward  instead 
of  forward  ;  3.  Finally,  death  instead  of  life. — Vol- 
untary  return  to  bondage  is  the  deepest  guilt  of  sin. 
— Real  death  is  explained  by  its  opposite.  It  is  not 
contrasted  with  the  present,  but  with  eternal  life.— ^ 
Etei'ual  life  as  the  fruit  of  the  true  service  of  Goa 
in  righteousness  :    1.  As  redemption  ;    2.  As  gift. 

[Tii.LoTSo.v :  Sin  is  the  blindness  of  our  minds, 
the  perverseness  and  crookedness  of  our  wills,  and 
the  monstrous  irregularity  and  disorder  of  our  affec- 
tions and  appetites,  the  misplacing  of  our  powera 
and  faculties,  and  the  setting  of  our  wills  and  pas- 
sions above  our  reason  ;  all  which  is  ugly  and  un- 
natural ;  and,  if  we  were  truly  sensible  of  it,  a  mat- 
ter of  great  shame  and  reproach  to  us. — Burkitt  : 
Sin,  as  a  raging  and  commanding  king,  has  the  sin- 
ner's heart  tor  its  throne,  the  members  of  the  body 
for  its  service,  the  world,  the  flesh,  and  the  devil  for 
its  grand  council,  lusts  and  temptations  for  its  weap- 
ons and  armory  ;  and  its  fortifications  are  ignorance, 
sensuality,  and  fleshly  reasonmgs. — Death,  as  the 
punishment  of  sin,  is  the  end  of  the  work,  though 
not  the  end  of  the  worker. — Grotius  :  It  is  the  na- 
ture of  all  vices  to  grow  upon  a  person  by  repetition. 
— Clarkk  :  Let  God  have  your  hearts,  and,  with 
them,  your  heads,  your  hands,  and  your  feet.  Think 
and  devise  what  is  pure  ;  speak  what  is  true,  edify- 
ing, just,  and  good  ;  and  walk  steadily  in  the  way 
that  leads  to  everlasting  felicity. — Every  sinner  has 
a  daily  pay,  and  this  pay  is  death. — The  sinner  has  a 
hell  in  his  own  bosom  ;  all  is  confusion  and  disorder 
where  God  does  not  reign.  If  men  were  as  much 
in  earnest  to  get  their  souls  saved  as  they  are  to  pre 
pare  them  for  perdition,  heaven  would  be  highly 
peopled  ;  and  devils  would  have  to  be  their  own 
companions. — Hodge  :  The  motive  to  obedience  is 
now  love,  and  its  aim  the  glory  of  God. —  When  a 
man  is  the  slave  of  sin,  he  commonly  thinks  himself 
free ;  and,  when  most  degraded,  is  often  the  most 
proud.  When  truly  free,  he  feels  himself  most 
strongly  bound  to  God,  and  when  most  elevated,  is 
most  humble. — J.  F.  H.] 


FomTH  Section. — The  transition,  in  principle  and  reality,  of  Christians  from  the  service  of  the  letter 
under  the  law  into  the  service  of  the  Spirit  uyider  grace,  by  virtue  of  the  death  of  Christ.  Believers 
should  live  in  the  consciousness  that  they  are  dead  to  the  law. — Tholcck  :  "  Your  marriage  with  Christ, 
having  taken  the  place  of  the  dominion  of  the  law,  necessarily  leads  to  such  a  dominioii  of  God  in  a 
new  life." 

Chap.  VII.   1-6. 


Know  ye  not,  brethren  (for  I  speak  to  them  that  [those  who]  know  the 
law),  how  \omit  how]  that  the  law  hath  dominion  over  a  man  as  long  [/qd'  ooov 
■/Qovov.,  for  as  long  time]  as  he  liveth  ?  For  the  woman  which  hath  a  hus- 
band [the  married  woman]  '  is  bound  by  the  law  to  her  husband  so  long  as 
he  liveth  [to  the  living  husband]  ;  but  if  the  husband  be  dead  [have  died],^  she 
is  loosed  from  the  law  of  her  husband.  So  then  if,  while  her  husband  liveth, 
she  be  married  to  another  man,  hhe  shall  be  called  an  adulteress :  but  if 
her  husband  be  dead  [liave  died],  she  is  free  from  that  law  ;  so  that  she  is 
no  [not  an]  '  adulteress,  though  she  be  married  to  another  man.  Wherefore 
Accordingly],  my  biethren,  ye  also  are  become  [were  made]  *  dead  to  the  law  by 
throngli]  the  body  of  Christ ;  [,]  that  [in  order  that]  '  ye  should  be  married  to 
another,  even  to  him  who  is  [was]  raised  from  the  dead,  that  we  should  bring 


218 


THE   EPISTLE   OF   PAUL   TO   THE   ROMANS. 


forth  fruit  unto  [to]°  God.  For  when  we  were  in  the  flesh,  the  motions  [pas- 
sions] '  of  sins,  which  were  by  [by  means  of]  the  law,  did  work  [iyt^QytizOy  tcere 
efficient,  wrought]  in  our  members  to  brmg  forth  fiuit  unto  [to]  death.  But 
now  we  are  [have  been]  delivered  from  the  law,  that  being  dead  [having  died  to 
that] '  wherein  we  were  held  ;  that  we  should  serve  [so  that  we  serve] 
ness  of  spirit  [the  Spirit],'"  and  not  i?i  the  oldness  of  the  letter. 


m  aew- 


TKXTUAL. 

>  Ver.  2. — [The  E.  V.  renders  viravSpoi  :  whkh  hath  a  htisband ;  which  is  less  forcible  than  the  srn^ls  word 
morriid.  It  is  true  th:it  neither  renJeiings  convey  the  exact  sense  of  the  original,  so  well  as  :  ilai  dem  Minne  unter- 
thdnig'-  Wei/)  (L:inf;c)  ;  yet,  as  the  idea  of  su'njeetion,  expressed  in  the  Greek,  is  still,  to  some  extent,  implied  in  marrii'd, 
it  is  the  best  rendering  that  caa  be  given. — Ihe  periphrasis:  so  long  as  he  Uveth,is  altogether  unnecess;try  ;  the  living 
hiisb'iiid,  is  both  more  forcible  and  more  exact. 

■■<  Ver.  2.— [The  active  verb  r/iV  should  be  substituted  for  be  dead.  The  question  arises,  How  can  we  best  expiess  the 
delicate  shade  of  the  Greek  conditional  proposition  :  edc  5e  awoBivj).  Al  ford  gives  :  /lave  died  ;  Wordsworth:  nhnll 
liaredi'd;  Amcr.  Bible  Uninn :  die.  The  first  seems  preferable;  the  second  is  strictly  literal,  since  the  aorisi  implies 
soniettiing  which  takes  plaee  antecedent  to  what  is  affirmed  in  the  apodosis,  but  is  not  so  ele({ant ;  the  lust  is  that  bald 
Conditional  form,  which  should  be  reserved  for  tlie  equivalent  Greek  form  («i  with  the  optative  or  indicative).  These 
remarks  apply  to  the  same  clause,  as  it  occurs  in  ver  3. 

'  Ver.  3. — [The  negatrve  belongs  to  the  verb,  and  is  joined  to  the  noun,  at  the  expense  of  forcibleness.  Forbes 
remiirks,  that  here  the  E.  V.  destroys  the  regularity  of  the  parallelism.  The  first,  second,  and  third  lines  iu  the  original 
<«rrespond  exactly  to  the  fourth,  fifth,  and  sixth  respectively. 

'Apa  oiv  (divroi  rov  avSpot 
fioixoAif  Xpjj/iaTi'o-et, 

€av  ■yeVrjTat  avSpi  €Te'p(j> " 
«ai'  Si  anoBoLvj)  6  avrip, 

i\ev6epa.  farlv  arrb  toO  v6p.ov,  toD  fiT)  elvau,  axrrifv  fjioixoAifo, 
yeyopLtvrjv  aySpl  irtpt^. 

So  then,  as  long  as  her  husband  liveth, 
She  shall  be  called  an  adulteress, 

If  she  be  married  to  another  man ; 
But  if  her  husband  be  dead, 

She  is  free  from  the  law  so  as  to  bo  no  adulteress, 
Though  she  be  married  to  another  man. 

*  Ver.  4. — [Were  made  dead  (Amer.  Bible  Union),  though  not  very  elegant,  is  perhaps  the  best  rendering  of 
j0af  aTui07)Te.  Mnrlifi/,  would  be  ambiguous  here.  W>re  slain,  is  preferred  by  A Iford,  because  the  more  violent 
Greek  verb  is  used,  recalling  the  violent  death  of  Christ ;  but  this  would  point  to  the  act  of  killing,  rather  than  to  the 
fa't  of  being  deprived  of  life,  which  is  ilie  prominent  thought  here. 

*  Ver.  4.— [Both  clauses  are  final,  though  ditfei-ing  in  form.  By  changing  the  first  that  of  the  E.  V.  into  in  order  that, 
the  force  of  the  Greek  is  preserved,  and  its  varied  foi-m  in  a  merisure  reprodueeil.  ' 

•  Ver.  4.— [.\8  unto  0<>d  is  the  usual  rendering  of  e'n  rov  Oeoy,  to  Go't  will  serve  to  represent  the  simple  dative  : 
Tip  OtC.     The  meaning  seems  to  be  :  In  theg'nnj  of  God. — The  dative,  TmdavaTw  is  also  found  at  the  close  of  ver.  5. 

'  Ver.  5. — [The  K.  V.  usually  renders  iraBritiar  a,  sufferings.  Here,  passions  (Wordsworth,  and  others;  Lange : 
Leid'-nscluiflen)  is  ctymologiftilly  exact,  and,  on  the  whole,  preferable  to  motions,  emotions  (Amer.  Bible  Union),  stirrings 
(Alford). 

"  Ver.  6. — [The  Rerepta  reads  anoOavovr  o  v  \  a  conjecture  of  Beza's,  arising  from  a  misunderstanding  of  the  text, 
having  no  uncial  support.  1).  K.  F.  G.  (Vulgate,  and  some  Latin  authorities)  read  toO  Oavorov;  a  gloss,  to  get  rid  of 
Ihe  particiiile,  which  was  regarded  as  disturMng  the  structure  of  the  sentence  (Meyer).  N.  A.  B.  C.  K.  L.,  many  ver- 
Bons  and  fathers,  warrant  the  correctness  of  a.iroSa.v6vTt<;,  which  is  now  almost  universally  adopted.  (The  English  text 
is  ememled  to  correspond.) 

•  Ver.  6. — [The  clause  is  ecbatic  and  present :  Siart  iovXtvuv. 

"  Ver.  6. — \\i  the  reference  be  to  the  Holy  .Spirit,  the  above  emendation  is  necessary.  If  not  (as  Dr.  Lange  holds), 
the  clause  should  read  :  in  nrwmts  of  spirit  and  not  in  oldness  of  UUer.    See  Exig.  Sotcs  on  both  views. — K.] 


EXEOETICAL  AJS'D   CRITICAL. 

Summary.* — a.  The  figure  of  marriage  and  the 
law  of  marriage  to  descritje  the  reliitions  of  believers 
ti)  ihn  law  (vers.  1-3);  h.  The  iipijlieatioii  of  the  fig- 
ure :  the  marriage  did  not  remain  [jure,  because  sin, 
who.-<e  motions  were  by  the  law,  insinuated  itself.  It 
is  dissolved  by  death  (vers.  4-0). 

Ver.  1.  Know  ye  not.  ['H  uyvotlrt. 
Conip.  vi.  3.  The  particle  i]  implies  a  doubt,  and 
connects  always  with  some  preceding  categorical 
clause  (Winer,  p.  474). — On  the  coniieetion.  .Meyer 
deems  it  a  resumption  of  vi.  14,  but  immediately 
linked  to  last  main  thought  (vi.  22),  viz.,  that  the 
Christian  had  his  fruit  unto  holiness,  and  the  end,  eter- 
nal life  (whicli  is  proved  in  vi.  23). — li.]  Since  the 
ij  assumes  a  doubt  at  the  beginning  (c-liap.  iii.  29  ; 
vi.  3) ;  the  Apostle  intimates  tliat  not  all  the  believ- 

•  |On  the  difflcuUy  roopocting  the  figure,  see  the  full 
remarks  of  I'rof.  Stuurt  in  loco.-Vi.] 


ers  in  Rome  are  conscious  of  the  whole  conclusion, 
that  the  gospel  has  made  them  free  from  the  service 
of  the  Mosaic  law — a  conclusion  tiiat  he  will  now 
make  clear  to  them  by  the  figure  of  the  law  of  mar- 
riage. Tlierelore  the  ((uestioii.  Should  you  not  fully 
know  the  consequence  of  the  riglit  of  marriage  in 
case  one  of  the  couples  dies  ?  has  this  meaidng : 
Should  you  not  fully  know  tlie  consequence  of  the 
deatii  of  believers  l)y  and  for  the  law  ?  The  course 
of  treatment  is  this :  After  having  shown  that  they 
are  no  more  under  sin,  with  more  particular  refer- 
ence to  the  (Jentiles,  the  Apostle  now  declares,  with 
more  particidar  reference  to  the  Jews,  that  tliey  too 
are  no  more  under  the  law.  The  unity  warranting 
this  transition  consists  in  the  fact,  that  one  cannot  be 
under  sin  without  being  under  the  sense  of  the  law, 
and  that  he  cannot  be  under  the  law  without  being 
under  the  sense  of  sin.  So  far,  therefore,  our  de- 
duction extends  back  not  only  to  chap.  vi.  14,  but 
even  to  chap.  v.  2<» ;  iii.  9  ;  ii.  17.  That  is,  the  law 
comes  into  consideration  here  so  far  as  it  is  the 
power  of  the  letter,  which  kills  (2  Cor.  iii.  6) — th< 


CHAPTER  VII.    1-6. 


21G 


phenomenon  is  completed  as  the  experience  of  sin 
(see  ver.  24). 

Singular  views :  1.  Reiche :  The  xvQifvfiv  in 
ver.  1  refers  to  the  zi'^ioi,-  in  the  concluding  verse 
of  diap.  vi ;  2.  Meyer  :  The  freedom  of  Christians 
from  the  law  follows  from  the  truth  of  the  foregoing 
verse.  But  the  Apostle's  transition  consists  in  his 
design  to  show  that  Christians  are  just  as  dead  to  the 
law  by  baptism  in  tiie  death  of  Christ,  as  they  are 
dead  to  sin.  This  arises  from  the  fact  that  they 
have  received  eternal  life  as  the  gift  of  God  in 
Christ.  They  are  therefore  dead,  by  the  death  of 
Clirist,  to  death,  as  a  result  of  sin,  as  they  are  dead 
to  death  as  a  result  of  the  law,  according  to  chap. 
vii.  24.  [Meyer's  view  in  4th  edition  is  indicated 
above. — R.] 

Brethren.  Certainly  not  merely  the  Jewish 
Christians  (according  to  Grotius,  and  others ;  also 
Tholuck,  in  a  qualified  way)  are  meant  in  this  ad- 
dress (Meyer).  Yet  Meyer,  in  denying  this,  over- 
looks the  fact  that  the  Jewish  Christians  are  regard- 
ed most  prominentl}",  because  the  pomt  in  question 
is  respecting  the  law  (see  chap.  ix.  3).  [The  only 
limitation  being  "  those  who  know  the  law,"  it  must 
be  remembered  that  in  the  apostolic  age,  as  well  as 
since,  the  knowledge  of  the  Old  Testament  on  the 
part  of  Christians  in  general  is  presupposed. — R.] 

For  I  speak  to  those  -who  know  the  law. 
[Parenthetical,  as  in  the  E.  V.  Explanatory  of 
brethroi. — R.]  Of  what  law  does  he  speak  ?  It 
must  not  be  overlooked,  that  what  the  Apostle  fur- 
ther adduces  as  the  design  of  the  law,  already  re- 
minds  of  the  law  of  nature.  Therefore  Koppe : 
every  law  is  meant.  Glockler  :  the  moral  law.  But 
though  the  Roman  law  might  have  a  similar  pur- 
port, the  Apostle  nevertheless  means  the  Mosaic  law 
itself;  for  the  point  of  his  argumentation  is,  that, 
according  to  the  piinciples  of  the  Mosaic  law  itself, 
Christians  must  be  regarded  as  having  been  made 
free  by  this  law.  It  is  not  upcessary  to  prove  that 
the  Mosaic  law  in  general,  but  not  the  law  of  mar- 
riage in  particular  (Beza,  Carpzov  [Bengel],  and 
others),  is  meant  here  The  Jew  did  not  have  a  sep- 
arate marriage-law ;  yet  the  Mosaic  law,  with  refer- 
ence to  the  marriage-law,  is  meant. — And  who  are 
tliose  who  know  *,he  law  ?  Explanations :  1.  The 
Roman  Christians,  the  majority  of  wiiom  were  Jew- 
ish Cliristans ;  2.  The  Jewish-Christian  portion,  to 
whom  Paul  addresses  himself  in  particular  (Philippi, 
and  others) ;  .S.  In  addition  to  these,  the  Gentile 
Christians,  who,  as  Jewish  proselytes,  had  been  en- 
trusted with  the  law  (De  Wette,  and  others) ;  4. 
Tholuck  calls  to  mind,  that  the  Gentile  Christians 
became  acquainted  with  the  law.  [As  the  customs 
of  the  synagogue  remained  to  a  large  extent  those 
of  the  early  Christian  assemblies,  the  Old  Testament 
was  read  to  all  believers,  as  indeed  was  necessary  to 
their  Christian  instruction.  One  could  not  be  a 
Christian  even  then,  and  remain  ignorant  of  the 
law. — R.]  The  question  in  general  here  is  not  a 
difficult  specialty  of  the  Mosaic  law,  but  a  principle 
evidenced  also  by  natural  law,  which,  for  this  very 
rea,=on,  docs  not  result  from  one  passage,  but  from 
the  connection  of  the  Mosaic  law.  Tholuck  :  "  One 
of  the  legal  maxims  current  among  the  Jews  ;  Este 
endeavors  in  vain  to  prove  it  from  the  Old  Testa- 
ment." Yet  the  example  of  Ruth,  Abigail,  and 
even  of  tlie  second  marriage  of  Abraham,  is  more 
than  one  legal  maxim  current  among  the  Jews. 
Moreover,  the  legal  principle  in  chap.  vi.  7  is  of  kin- 
dred nature. 


That  the  law  hath  dominion.  We  must  not 
connect  6  r6,H0t;  too  avO^wnov  (Mosheim, 
and  others),  but  v6/io<;  with  xiiQuvfi,.  Man  is 
certainly,  however,  the  man  in  question  placed  un- 
der  the  law.  [Wordsworth  explains :  "  The  law 
(of  Moses)  is  lord  over  the  man — the  human  crea. 
ture — whether  man  or  woman.  Comp.  Chrysostom, 
Theodoret,  Augustine."'  This  takes  the  verb  in  the 
literal  sense :  to  be  lord,  and  introduces  the  figure 
of  the  marriage  at  once,  thus  avoiding  any  difficulty 
about  the  special  law,  for  the  whole  law  is  personi- 
fied.    Meyer  seems  to  favor  this  view  also. — R.] 

For  as  long  time  as  he  liveth  [i<p  baov 
/^ovov  Ct]].  According  to  vers.  2—4,  the  t^ 
evidently  refers  to  the  man  himself,  and  not  to  the  law, 
so  that,  in  a  metaphorical  sense,  it  would  have  the 
force  (as  Origen,  Erasmus,  Bengel,  and  others  think) 
of  making  the  figure  itself  plainer.  This  would 
have  been  to  prove  first  that  the  law  has  no  more 
force.  Philippi  understands  the  ltji'  to  be  the  old, 
natural  life.  See  Tholuck  on  the  contrary :  in  this 
case  the  appeal  to  legal  knowledge  would  be  inap- 
propriate, and  the  figure  already  violated.  The  law 
is  personified  as  master,  just  as  sin  is  in  tlie  forego- 
ing section.  [And  the  point  of  the  figure  is  not 
afi'ected  by  referring  the  verb  to  the  man,  for  which- 
ever  party  dies,  the  relation  ceases.  Comp.  Hodge. 
— R.]  Meyer  gives  prominence  to  the  point,  that 
itp    offov  -/(jovov  is  emphatic* 

Ver.  2.  For  the  married  woman  is  bound 
by  the   law  to  the   living   husband   [  ij    y  a  (j 

vofKi).  A  concrete  explanation  of  the  proposition 
of  ver.  1  (Meyer),  introduced  by  yuQ,  which  has 
here  the  force  of  for  example  (Hodge,  Alford).  The 
perfect  ditiixai  here  denotes  the  continuing  char- 
acter of  the  binding  (Winer,  p.  255),  which  agrees 
with  the  emphatic  tV  oaov  yjjovov  (ver.  1).  "Y  nav- 
fiQOii,  subject  to  the  mav,  married,  only  here  in  the 
New  Testament,  but  current  in  later  Greek  authors. 
— R.]  The  figure  in  vers.  2  and  3  is  quite  clear,  but 
its  application  is  difficult.  Since  the  law  is  com- 
pared with  the  first  man,  and  Christ  with  the  second, 
this  seemed  to  be  the  apphcation  that  should  follow  : 
The  law,  as  the  first  man  of  the  theocratic  Church, 
is  dead ;  now,  the  Church  can  be  freely  married  to 
Christ.  Therefore  even  Usteri,  Riickert,  and  others, 
have  remarke<t  that  the  figure  is  not  clearly  carried 
out ;  and  Chrysostom  took  the  view,  that  Paul, 
through  forbearance  toward  the  Jews,  reversed  the 
relation  in  his  application,  and  that,  instead  of  say- 
ing,  the  law  or  the  husbajid  '"s  dead,  he  says.  You 
who  were  formerly  bound  by  the  law  are  dead.  [So 
Wordsworth,  who,  however,  joins  with  it  several 
other  reasons. — R.]  Meyer,  with  Fritzsche,  thus 
relieves  tlie  difficulty :  In  consequence  of  the  unity 
of  the  matrimonial  relation,  death  is  an  event  com- 
mon to  both  parties  ;  when  the  husband  is  dead,  the 
wife  is  legally  dead  to  the  husband.  We  may  in 
this  case  ask.  Why  did  not  the  Apostle  conform  his 
figure  to  the  application,  and  designate  the  wife  her- 

*  [Meyer's  note  ii?  excellent  :  " Xot  brfnrche  dies  does 
the  law  lose  its  dominion  over  him  ;  so  long  as  he  lives,  he 
remains  subject  to  it.  If  this  is  considered,  and  an  entirely 
irrelevant  '  (mhj  so  long  as  he  lives '  be  not  interpolatedj 
the  thought  seems  neither  trivial  nor  dispmportionate  to 
the  appeal  made  to  the  legal  knowledge  oi  the  readers. 
For  a  peculiarily  of  the  vd/aos  consists  in  this,  that  it  cannot, 
as  human  laws,  have  only  temporary  validity,  or  be  altered, 
suspended,  nor  can  one  be  exempt  from  it  for  a  time,  &c. 
>o,  so  long  as  man  lives,  the  dominion  of  the  rd^os  ovei 
him  remains."  Of  course,  this  means  previjos  to  the  deatk 
to  the  law  (ver.  4).— R.] 


^zo 


THE   EPISTLE   OF  PAUL   TO   THE   ROMANS 


self  u3  the  dead  part  ?  Clearly,  because  of  the  sec- 
ond marriage.  Tliis  exphmatiun  of  Fritzsclie  and 
Meyer  (conci unity)  is  established  by  the  Apostle, 
aad  also  rendered  eiuphatio  by  his  language.  As 
the  woman  is  not  dead,  but  is  killed  in  respect  to 
hei  marriage  relation,  or  is  situated  as  dead,  by  the 
natural  deatii  of  her  husband,  so  believers  have  not 
died  a  natural  death,  but  are  made  dead  to  the  law, 
gince  they  are  crucitied  to  the  law  with  Ciirist.  The 
idea,  deaU  in  a  tnarriat/e  relation,  is  therefore  the 
tei'tiuin  coiiiparafioitis.  The  OavaToi'aOcu  in  ver. 
4  is  therefore  like  the  xaTctiiYtlaOai,  of  a  wulow,  in 
which  also  a  death-like  orphanage  is  indicated.  That 
the  law  itself  is  also  dead,  as  a  letter,  by  its  statu- 
tory application  to  tlie  crucifixion  of  Christ,  follows, 
without  any  thing  further,  from  what  Iuls  been  said. 
Tlioluck,  not  being  satisfied  with  Meyer's  removal  of 
the  dilHculty,  seems  desirous  of  placing  himself  on 
the  side  of  those  who  give  an  allegorical  interpreta- 
tion to  the  passage  commencing  with  ver.  2.  Ex- 
planations: 

1.  The  wife  is  the  soul,  the  husband  is  sin ;  sin 
dies  in  the  fellowship  of  believers  with  Christ's  death 
(Augustine,  and  others  ;   Olshausen). 

t.  (July  the  vonoi;  can  be  regarded  as  the  hus- 
band (Origeu,  Chrysostom,  Calvin,  Pliilippi).  Like- 
wise, with  special  reference  to  the  sense  of  guilt 
(Luther);  with  special  reference  to  sin  (Spener). 

De  Wette  and  Meyer  have  properly  rejected  the 
introduction  of  allegory  in  vers.  2,  3  ;  it  destro_vs  all 
legal  evidence  of  the  figure.  The  Apostle  did  not 
avoid  .saying  iOavuru'ift^ti  6  rono;,-  because  he  wi.shed 
to  give  a  more  pregnant  e.xpre.-^sion  to  tlie  thought, 
and  to  include  in  one  the  other  side  also,  but  because 
Oai'aTiji'(T,0ai.  is  different  from  a  simijle  anoOv)]- 
axfn',  and  because  the  retroactive  inference  from 
the  act  which  the  adnrinistration  of  the  law  has  com- 
mitted on  the  body  of  Christ  is  proximate  to  the 
dying  of  the  law  (according  to  Heb.  viii.  18  ;  de- 
cayed and  wa.xed  old).  The  gospel  is  eternally  new, 
because  it  refers  to  only  eteinal  relations.  The  law 
grows  old  from  the  beginning,  because,  in  its  out- 
ward and  national  character,  it  relates  to  transitory 
and  ever-changing  relations.  Application  to  Catholi- 
cism and  Protestantism.  (All  they  that  take  the 
Bword,  &e.)  "  i' /T  a  i'()  o  o^•,  viro  ttuhjccta  ;  the  wife 
Lad  no  right  to  sejiarate  herself* 

But  if  the  husband  have  died,  she  is  loosed 
from  the  law  of  her  husband  [tccv  fie  utto- 
&  a.  V  71  6  ci  V  tj  (t ,  y.  ctr  t'j  I)  y  >i  T  ai:  a  7i  o  t  ov 
vouiiv  ToT'  av()(;os.  On  the  conditional  clause, 
Bee  Tcj-tiial  Note  ".  On  the  verb,  comp.  Gal.  v.  4, 
^•ange's  ('oinm.,  p.  127.  The  genitive  is  one  of  ref. 
erence,  of  the  ol)Ject  respecting  which,  see  Winer, 
p.  177. — R.]  That  is,  which  relates  to  her  husband. 
On  the  relationship  of  the  expression  x  « r  jy  (i  ■/  t/rat 
to  the  inavuToinijTf,  comp.  Meyer's  translation : 
"  She  has  become  undone,  and  thereby  free  and  ab- 
solved from  the  law  which  related  to  her  iiu.sband 
(united  her  to  him)."     (See  Gal.  v.  4.) 

Ver.  3.  She  shall  be  called  an  adulteress. 
She  receives  the  name  in  a  furnial  and  legal  way. 
And  therewith  she  is  .-ubjeet  to  the  severest  punish- 
ment of  the  law — stoning.  [Levit.  xxi.  10  ;  comp. 
John  viii.  5.] 

[She   ia   free    from    that   Isivr,    tkf  v  &i(ia 

*  [She  Is  bound  to  him  by  tlio  law— i.  *.,  the  Mntinic  biw 
—which  miiilo  no  provision  lorh<T  looniiiR  hc>rs«!'f  (in  Dout. 
xxiv.  2  it  was  the  power  o I'  the  hu-lumd,  not  tlie  wife,  to 
ri'puiliute  the  rehition).  llore  the  Ipw  it  no  longer  cpoUcn 
•)f  Haur.itivLly.-H.) 


iariv  oltto  tou  v6/tov.  The  article  showj 
that  the  reference  is  to  the  law  of  the  huxband,  hence 
the  E.  V.  :  lh.it  /nw,  is  correct. — K.] 

So  that  she  is  not  an  adulteress.  Meyer  in- 
sists upon  the  idea  of  design  :  in  order  that  she  be 
no  adulteress ;  and  declares  this  to  be  the  design  of 
the  Divine  legal  ordinance — which  Tholuck  there 
pedantically  finds.  Yet  the  ex()rcssion  here  might 
certainly  have  been  chosen  with  reference  to  this 
application.  The  Judaists  assuredly  charged  the 
believing  Jews  with  apostasy,  and  therefore  with 
religious  adultery.  Hence  Paul  says  fiyai.  instead 
of  /(jiiiictTi^K-;  *  and  Fritzsclie  has  strikingly  made 
the  ToTi  n't}  urai,  dependent  on  i /.t  c  0  i  (j  a. 
[All  these  views  are  alike  grammatical.  That  of 
Fritzsche  is  harsh,  however,  while  Meyer's  seems  to 
be  adopted  more  to  prepare  the  way  for  the  parallel 
he  makes  (ver.  4) :  m  order  thnt  ye  should  be  mar- 
ried to  another.  It  is  not  necessary  to  press  the 
figure  to  this  extent,  however. — R.] 

Ver.  4.  Accordingly,  my  brethren,  ["/iffr* , 
see  Winer,  p.  283. — H.]  The  ex()lanation  follows 
here  first ;  tiiis  is  not  al/ei/orieaJ,  but  si/nibo/icol, 
because  marriage  represents,  in  the  external  sphere 
of  life,  what  religion  does  in  the  inward  and  higher 
(Eph.  V.  32). — Ye  also,  as  the  widowed  wife. — 
Were  made  dead  to  the  law  f  [i  &  avar  tO' 
i>//Tf  Tw  v6fio>.  See  Textual  Note  *.  The  verb 
is  aorist,  referring  to  a  definite  act  in  the  pa.st,  viz., 
the  release  from  the  law  at  justification. — R.l  Tiiat 
is,  in  relation  to  the  marriage-covenant.  The  ex- 
pression i  (tavat  lit  (y  tj  T  t  is  chosen,  not  merely 
because  Christ's  death  was  a  violent  one,  but  also 
because  it  describes  the  death  of  Christians  to  the 
law  as  a  death  incurred  by  virtue  of  the  administia- 
tion  of  the.  law. 

Through  the  body  of  Christ  [  rV  t  a  r  oT> 
a  lit  II  «  T  o  s'  TO  r  A"  (*  I  fT  T  o  r  ].  In,  and,  at  the 
same  time,  with  Ilim,  ;is  lie  was  put  to  death.  The 
atoning  effect  of  the  sacrificial  death  cannot,  at  all 
events,  be  the  premise  here,  although  it  is  included. 
[The  aorist  shows  that  the  reference  is  definite  ;  the 
proiiosition  indicates  the  means  of  the  death  to  the 
law.  Two  opinions  prevail:  (1.)  That  it  refei-s  to 
the  atoning  death  of  Christ  as  the  ground  of  justifi- 
cation. So  Ilodge,  and  ottiers.  It  may  be  urged  in 
favor  of  this,  that  this  is  the  means  or  ground  of 
justification,  and  that  thus  the  antithesis  to  "  was 
raised "  is  preserved.  But  the  Apostle  generally 
speaks  of  the  death  of  Christ  in  plain  terms,  when 
he  refers  to  it.  Col.  i.  22,  which  Hodge  (piotes  as 
an  instance  of  "  His  body,"  meaning  His  death,  adds 
the  qualifving  phrases,  "  of  His  flesh,"  "  through 
deatli."  (2.)  With  Thi.luck,  Meyer,  Lange,  and 
others,  it  may  be  referred  to  the  fellowship  with 
Christ  in  His  death.  This  view  accords  better  with 
the  point  which  the  Apostle  has  reached  in  his  urgu- 
ment,  as  well  as  the  idea  of  union  with  Christ  under- 
lying this  pa.s-sage.  This  does  not  deny,  but  implies 
the  atoning_  efficacy  of  llis  death,  which  is  always 
latent,  if  not  patent,  in  the  A])ostle's  argument.  It 
has  been  the  fault  of  some  commentato:«,  to  insi.st 


*  [That  l8,  they  mi.'ht  ho  iind  were  so  callal,  but  yet 
iperf  nnl  iruillv  of  reliinous  adulter)'. — U.] 

t  I  Dr.  Ilodtce  nt  some  lenjrth  conibals  the  view,  th.it  th« 
Mosnic  law  (or  nither  the  .Iowl.-)h  economy)  i"  alone  referred 
to  thrnuprhoiit  this  piissnpre.  Ho  riarhtly  siirs  :  "  I'aul  here 
mennn  by  the  liiw,  the  will  of  Uod,  ns  ii  rule  of  duty,  how« 
over  revealed."  8<'e  on  iii.  20,  p.  Hi  (ul.-io  Gil'itums,  ii. 
Ill,  pp.  V.I,  52).  The  most  untenable  of  all  views  Is  thnt 
whieh  limita  y6iiot  to  the  ritunlistic  JewUh  olMerrauoeai 
-Kl 


CHAPTER   VII.    1-6. 


231 


on  finding  an  expression  of  it,  where  it  is  only  im- 
plied.—R.] 

Christians  are  dead,  buried  (chap,  vi.),  and  risen 
(Col.  iii.  1)  with  Christ ;  indeed,  they  are  even,  in 
principle,  transported  to  heaven  (Phil.  iii.  20).  But 
since  they  are  dead  with  Him,  they  are,  like  Him, 
dead  "  to  the  law  through  the  law "  (Gal.  ii.  19). 
[Comp.  Coimnentary  bt  loco,  pp.  50,  51. — R.]  Cal- 
vin, Grotius,  Koppe,  and  others,  have  explained, 
that  the  iOavaTo'iOrj  toi  vo/k/i  is  a  milder  expres- 
sion for  6  v6,u.  iOavarioOtj,  omiOaviv  v/itv.  This 
explanation  does  not  regard  the  difference  between 
natural  and  violent  death,  nor  self-destruction.  The 
law  could  not  be  dead  ;  this  would  have  been  revo- 
lution. As  a  Divine  form  of  revelation,  it  had  to 
grow  old  and  vanish  away  (Heb.  viii.  13) ;  but  as  a 
human  ordinance  it  has  itself  inflicted  death.  There- 
fore the  law  still  retained  its  former  historical  and 
ethical  (not  religious  and  essential)  force  toward 
those  who  were  not  dead  to  it  by  the  fellowsliip  of 
Christ. 

ITirough  the  body  of  C/irint,  &«  rov  amfiaro: 
S-c(vc(r<ox9fvToc;.  It  may  be  asked,  in  what  relation 
this  being  dead  with  the  body  of  Christ  stands  to  the 
beinri  reconciled  by  tlie  body  of  Christ.  Tholuck : 
*'  Fellowship  with  the  death  of  Christ  includes  free- 
dom from  the  xaTafjc'i  of  the  law  (Gal.  iii.  10),  and 
this  latter,  which  is  brought  to  pass  by  thankful  love 
in  return,  includes  the  death  of  the  old  man  to  sin 
(chap.  vi.  6)  and  strengthening  to  a  new  life."  The 
becoiiiincf  free  from  the  i'd//ot;  is  consummated  with 
the  development  of  repentance  and  faith — that  is, 
with  justification  ;  the  having  become  free  from  the 
old  law  is  decided  when  the  new  law,  the  law  of  the 
Spirit,  the  righteousness  of  faith,  appears  (Eph.  ii. 
16). 

In  order  that  ye  should  be  married  to  an- 
other [fii,-  TO  yfviaQ-ai,  t'/fccg  txiQm.  The 
clause  seems  to  be  final.  In  order  that ;  the  pur- 
pose of  the  death  to  the  law  was  union  to  Christ. 
— R.]  rivfcrO-ai,  t/i-o?,  to  become  the  possession 
of  a  husband.  The  figure  of  conjugal  communion 
of  the  believing  Church  with  the  Lord  (2  Cor.  xi. 
2 ;  Eph.  V.  2,  5  ;  Rev.  xxi.  8).  To  another.  The 
stronger  tTfQM  is  here  used.  [And  it  is  more 
closely  defined,  even  to  him  "who  was  raised 
from  the  dead,  t  w  ly.  v  i  ■/.  q  mv  i  yf  ^  0  e  v  t  l. 
— With  good  reason  is  this  added. — R.]  Not  only 
do  Christians  belong  to  the  risen  Christ  because  He 
has  acquired  them  by  His  death  (1  Peter  i.),  but 
also  because  they  themselvex,  having  been  dead  with 
Pim.,  have  become  a  heavenly  race,  a  super-terrestrial 
people^  who,  as  risen  ones,  can  be  united  only  with 
the  Risen  One ;  therefore  their  continue  <  connection 
with  the  law  of  this  life  would  be  a  misalliance.  The 
common  element  of  this  new  communion  is  the  new 
life. 

That  we  should  bring  forth  fruit  to  God 
[  ('  r  a  X  a()  n  0  qi  0  Q  >'j  a  b)  fi  f  V  r  ly  &  f  ly  .  Final 
clause  (so  Tholuck,  Meyer,  De  Wette,  Alford).  The 
dative  is  dat.  commodi  apparently. — R.]  The  fig- 
ure of  marriage  leads  to  that  of  the  fruit  of  mar- 
riage (Theodoret,  Erasmus,  Meyer,  and  others). 
Tholuck,  on  the  contrary :  "  Since  a  reference  to 
xafjno';  (chap.  vi.  22)  occurs,  and  since  y.a^nbv 
TZoifTv;  qiquv,  and  even  xaQnoifiOQnv  (Mark  iv.  20  ; 
Luke  viii.  15  ;  Col.  L  10),  frequently  occur  in  a 
metonyme  derived  from  the  fruits  of  the  field,  as  a 
technical  Christian  phrase  for  the  practical  effects 
of  the  life  of  faith,  and  the  allusion  recurs  in  ver. 
6,  where  the  figure  is  not  that  of  marriage,  it  seems 


very  unsafe  to  accept  the  figure  of  the  fruit  of  chil 
dren."  Reiche  and  Fritzsche  have  even  rejected 
this  interpretation,  because  an  undignified  allegory 
arises ;  they  have  therefore  construed  the  figure  aa 
referring  to  the  field,  or  fruits  of  tiie  field.  PhiLippi 
likewise ;  De  Wette,  on  the  contrary,  accepts  the 
former  view.  But  the  allegory  of  an  unfruitful  roar 
riage  cannot  be  more  dignified  than  that  of  a  fruit 
ful  one.  Yet  the  spiritual  fruit  of  righteousness,  in 
accordance  with  its  supersensuous  nature,  is  pro- 
duced for  God,  for  glorifying  God.  [The  figure 
must  not  be  so  pressed  as  to  make  the  fruit  of  the 
marriage  to  God,  as  Father ;  to  His  glory,  is  the 
meaning. — R.] 

Yer.  5.  For  when  we  were  in  the  flesh 
[oTf  yctQ  7j/ifv  iv  T^  ffcc^/ci.  Meyer:  "The 
positive  and  characterizing  expression  for  the  nega- 
tive :  when  we  were  not  yet  made  dead  to  the  law." 
Alford  :  "  Virtually  =  '  under  the  law.'  "  Hodge  : 
"  When  in  your  unrenewed  and  legal  state."  For  a 
more  thorough  discussion,  see  the  Excursus  in  the 
next  section. — R.]  The  antithesis  of  ver.  5  should 
serve  to  explain  tlie  last  conclusion  in  ver.  4.  The 
yoLQ  tells  us :  According  as  we  were  situated  in  our 
fleshly  tendency,  we  must  now  also  be  situated  in 
the  Divine  tendency.  The  flvai  denotes  the  stand 
point  of  personality ;  the  outward  tendency  of  life 
from  a  definite  principle.  Here,  therefore,  the  ten- 
dency of  life  is  from  the  principle  of  the  flesh.  Ex- 
planations :  1.  Meyer :  The  ad^i,  the  humanity  in 
us  (what,  then,  would  not  be  human  in  us  ?),*  in  its 
opposition  to  the  Divine  will ;  the  element  of  life  in 
which  we  exist.  The  opposite  to  the  a/roSuvorTfi; 
of  ver.  6.  2.  Theodoret,  (Ecumenius :  In  the  xaTo. 
vofiov  nohrda.  The  flesh  is  the  material  and  ex- 
ternal part  of  the  body  and  the  life.  Therefore, 
since  we  stood  in  this  external  tendency,  which,  as 
an  external  and  analytical  form  of  fife  (dependent 
on  the  individual  ini&i'fuai,),  also  in  its  better  form, 
took  the  law  as  a  combination  of  external  and  ana- 
lytical precepts.  [Of  these,  (1.)  is  much  to  be  pre- 
ferred. Dr.  Lange  does  not  make  it  clear  whether 
he  adopts  the  view  oi flesh,  given  immediately  above. 
There  are  very  strong  objections  to  it  in  any  case. 
-R.] 

The  passions  of  sins  [ra  na&ti  urtza 
r  lov  dfia^Ti, (7)  v ].  According  to  Meyer  and  Tho- 
luck, the  genitive  of  object.  "  From  which  the  sins 
arose."  Tholuck  cites  James  i.  15  as  proof.  We 
hold,  however,  that  sins  are  here  denominated  pro- 
ducers of  the  passions.  For  the  passions,  7Ta&.,  are 
not,  as  Tholuck  holds,  the  same  as  the  ETn-Oi'/nlat 
(according  to  which  Luther  translates  lusts),  but  they 
are  the  imdi'fuai,  enhanced  by  the  impulse  of  the 
law.  Then,  in  the  case  of  sins  arising  as  conse- 
quences of  the  naOrj/t.,  the  idea  would  follow  that 
abortions  to  death  have  been  produced  from  the 
marriage-bond  of  the  law  itself  with  man.  The 
connection  with  the  law  assumes,  therefore,  at  the 
same  time,  a  connection  with  the  aua^JTict  (see  chap. 
vi.  13),  and  this,  in  the  isolation  of  individual  afiag- 
■rial,  was  operative  as  producer  by  the  sinful  pas- 
sions excited  by  the  law  in  the  members.  The  law 
itself  did  not  bring  forth  the  fruit  of  death  ;  but  it 
stirred  up  sin,  so  that  the  latter  made  the  tindv/uiat 
into  n a,  &  t'l ft  ar a ,  and  thus  into  productive  forces. 
[Either  view  is  preferable  to  the  Hendiadys :  sinful 


♦  [To  this  interpolation  it  may  be  rejoined :  What,  then, 
would  not  be  <ropf  in  us  ?  "What  is  not  carusil,  sinful,  it 
us?— E.] 


222 


THE   EPISTLE   OF   PAUL   TO   THE   ROMANS. 


feelings  (Olshauson,  Hodge),  which  is  forbidden  by 
the  piunil  M/(  «4<TK7>t'.  llaOtjiiara  is  pas- 
sive (coinp.  Gal.  V.  24),  and  hence  it  is  pciliai)S  bet- 
ter to  take  the  genitive,  as  tliat  of  the  object  (which 
led  to  sins),  so  as  to  accord  with  what  is  predicated 
in  tvtjoyilTo. — R.] 

Which  were  by  means  of  the  lavr.  T« 
diei  Tor  ro/iov.  (Jrotius  supplies  <fat,v6fifva,  which 
is  too  little;  Meyer,  sc,  orra,  wiiicli  is  far  too  much. 
According  to  ver.  9,  dva^iovra.  Tholuck  :  "  Many 
of  the  older  commentators,  in  order  not  to  let  tiie 
law  appear  in  too  unfavorable  a  light,  explained 
thus  :  of  the  knowledge  of  sin  communicated  by  the 
law  (thus  Clirysostom,  Ambrose,  BuUinger,  and  oth- 
ers). Yet,  tlius  construed,  diet  voiioc  would 
stand  beyond  the  pragmatism  of  tlie  passage."  Tho- 
luck, like  Meyer,  would  also  supply  the  i<irb.  siibst. 
[The  proximity  of  ver.  7  supports  the  obvious  mean- 
ing :  occiidoneil  by  the  law  (Meyer :  vermittelt),  not 
cau^-d,  however. — R.] 

Wrought  [  f  1'  >;  (* ;'  f  r T  o  ].  Middle.  Were  effi- 
cient in  a  fruitful  nianiior. 

In  oiir  members  [ti'  roTq  n().iai,v  fjfiutv. 
Ilodge  weakens  the  force,  by  making  this  almost  = 
in  us. — R.]  Single  productions  between  individual 
passions  and  individual  nieml)ers,  in  which  the  cen- 
tral consciousness  was  enslaved  for  the  production 
of  iixlividual  miscarriages. 

To  bring  forth  fruit  to  death  [tli;  to 
X  n  o  7T  o  1^  o  I)  tj  fT  a  I,  x  ijt  0- a  v  d  t  o  .  This  clause 
expresses  not  merely  the  residt  (Ilodge),  but  the 
final  object  of  the  energizing  (Meyer,  Alford,),  being 
parallel  to  the  last  clause  of  ver.  4. — R.]  Meyer : 
To  tend  a  life  terni'Tiatinj  hi  death.  Expressing  but 
little,  almost  nothing,  here.  That  false  fruit,  aborr 
tions,  or  miscarriages,  might  arise  (wherefore  the 
subst.  xnQTTo::  itself  must  i)e  avoideil).  Erasmus : 
ex  infelici  matrimonio  infflices  fcetax  sunttttiwus^ 
quidqiiid  nascerctur  morti  erA'ioipie  f/i(/}ientcs.  Lu- 
ther :  ^Vhere  the  law  rules  over  people,  they  are  in- 
deed not  idle ;  they  bring  fortii  and  train  up  many 
children,  but  they  are  mere  bastards,  who  do  not 
belong  to  a  free  mother.  Meyer  would  also  iiere 
limit  death  to  the  idea  of  eternal  death  ;  see  above. 
[He  also  carries  out  the  figure  of  progeny,  which 
Lange  retains  here,  so  far  as  to  make  "death  "  here 
a  personification.  This  is  less  justifiable  than  the 
reference  to  eternal  death,  whicii  conveys  a  truth, 
and  forms  a  fitting  antithesis  to  no  O-nZ  (ver.  4). — 
R.] 

Ver.  fi.  Bat  now  'we  have  been  delivered 
from  the  law  [vi<vi  <)  e  (antitliesis  to  o'rf,  ver. 
6 )  X  n  T  fj  1)  y  r'j  !)■  rj  u  f  v  an  o  Tor  v  o  /(  o  n.  No- 
tice the  aori.^t,  which  Paul  uses  so  constantly  in 
reference  to  the  accomplished  fact  of  justification. — 
R.]  We  are  annidled  in  relation  to  the  law,  and 
tlierewith  the  law  is  annulled  to  us.  (On  the  read- 
ing («/ro.'>«i'0)'ro<,-,  sec  the  Critical  No!e  on  the 
Text  ;  also  Tholuck,  p.  330.) 

Having  died  to  that  wherein  we  w^ere 
held  I  ft  -T  o  !)  n  )■  o  )■  T  f  c  f  i'  ")  /.  (ct  t  t  /  n  n  r  '>({]. 
Wc  must  unilcrstand  to<''t«i  before  t  c  oi .  Meyer 
explains:  in  which  we  were  confined  as  in  a  pri.son. 
More  ill  harmony  with  the  former  view  is  this : 
wlicp-by  we  were  ehaineil  as  by  a  legal  and  even 
mntriiiionial  obligation.  Wherefore  wc  certainly  do 
not  ni'i'd  to  refer  I  v  m  merely  to  voim^  (with  Ori- 
gt-n,  Koppe,  De  W(;tti',  Philippi  [Ilodge],  and  oth- 
ers).  Tholuck  :  "  The  law,  therefore,  is  regardetl  as 
mmtyutv,  as  a  chain,  auMlogriusly  to  the  t'li^ioronv- 
fttOu  (TiyxtK/.n(T/iivoi,  Oal.  iii.  23,  so  far  as  it  holds 


its  subjects  in  rfoeAf/a  (Rom.  viii.  16  ;  2  Tim.  i.  7), 
The  direct  reference  of  the  iv  oi  to  sin  (according 
to  Clirysostom,  U-Icumenius,  and  others)  is  too  strong 
on  the  opposite  side." — Tlie  cause  of  the  chaining 
of  man  by  sin  on  one  side,  as  well  as  by  the  law  on 
the  other,  was  the  totality  of  the  tiiai.  iv  rfj  (Tct^xi, 
as  it  expressed  itself  in  mere  divisions  of  lust  and 
legality.  This  is  clear  from  what  follows :  in  tht 
oldtiess  of  the  letter. 

So  that  we  serve  [warf  rToiiA?t'»tv  fjnaq. 
The  clause  is  not  final,  as  the  E.  V.  indicates ;  tha 
service  is  a  present  state,  already  resulting  from  the 
accomplished  fact  of  deliverance  fi'om  and  death  to 
the  law.  Serve  God,  is  the  meaning,  the  omission 
of  &n7i  being  due  to  tiie  self-evident  difference  of 
reference  in  the  two  phrases  which  follow.  The 
consciousness  of  the  readers  would  tell  them  that 
the  old  service  was  one  to  sin,  the  new  one  to  God 
(so  Meyer). — R.]  The  dorln'<n,v  can  be  spo- 
ken ironically  in  only  a  conditional  manner.  We 
have  really  our  external  life  to  enslave,  but  not  after 
the  old  way,  in  single  portions  and  acts,  according  to 
individual  precepts,  motives,  and  affections,  but  in 
the  newness  of  the  Spirit ;  therefore  by  virtue  of 
the  perfect  principle  of  the  Spirit,  which  is  ever 
new,  and  always  assuming  a  new  form.  The  iv 
denotes  not  merely  the  sphere  of  activity  (Meyer), 
but  the  power,  the  principle  of  activity  itself. 

In  newness  of  the  Spirit  [iv  xa^»'0T7Tt 
nvfv/tccToq.  Untenable  views :  That  t  v  is  re- 
dundant, and  the  dative  the  oliject  of  the  verb  dor- 
hiinv ;  that  there  is  a  Ilemliadys  {new  xpirit,  Ilodge). 
The  E.  V.  is  fond  of  Hendiadys,  and  very  often  mis- 
construes iv,  but  has  avoided  these  mistakes  in  the 
present  instance.  Alford  correctly  remarks,  that  the 
datives  "  are  not "  as  in  vi.  4,  attri  ufes  of  the  geni- 
tivi'S  which  follow  them,  but  utate.i  in  uhich  those 
genitives  are  the  ruJiitg  elements. — What  is  the  pre- 
cise force  of  TTVf  v /t  ar  o  i;  ? — R.]  Meyer  :  "  It  ia 
the  Holy  Spirit,  as  the  operative  principle  of  the 
Christian  life."  Clearly,  it  is  the  spirit  as  itself  the 
inward  Christian  principle  of  life,  which  is  certainly 
not  to  be  thought  of  without  the  communion  of  the 
Holy  Spirit.  For  the  Holy  Spirit  as  ;r  r  f  v /<  a  sim- 
ply,  operating  objectively,  was  also  the  producer  of 
the  yijniiiia,  which  here  constitutes  the  antithe- 
sis. This  principle  is  itself  an  eternal  newness,  and 
has,  as  a  result,  an  eternal  newness  as  the  principle 
of  the  absolute  renewal.  Tholuck  :  "  The  spirit  of 
grace  produced  by  God's  gracious  deed."  [With 
Meyer,  Alford,  and  others,  it  seems  best  to  refer  this 
to  the  Holy  Spirit.  The  absence  of  the  article  is  not 
agninst  this  view  ;  as  the  opinion  of  Ilarless,  that 
TTvnuin  without  the  article  is  subjective,  is  not  well 
cstablislied.  (Comp.  Meyer  on  Rom.  viii.  4  ;  liar- 
less,  Eph.  ii.  22;  Lange's  Comm.,  Gal.  v.  Ift,  p.  137.) 
This  passage  seems  to  point  to  chap,  viii.,  where 
nrtriin  occurs  so  frequently,  in  the  sense  of  the 
Holy  Spirit;  the  more  so  as  trcinl  occurs  just  before 
(ver.  fi).  The  ol)ji'ction,  that  the  Holy  Spirit,  work- 
ing objectivi'ly,  was  the  author  of  the  letter,  and 
hence  that  the  antithesis  requires  another  meaning, 
has  not  much  weight.  See  notes  fin  Rom.  viii.  4  tf. 
-R.] 

And  not  in  the  oldness  of  the  letter  [xni 
0  1'  7T  a  k  n  Ki  r  rj  T  I.  (only  h(^re)  y  (>  ri  n  u  nr  m;. 
Not  =  iild  littn-  (Ilodge),  nor  yet  —  wn./.t  the  l<t\r^ 
in  the  Jtesh,  though  tlicse  latter  thoughts  are  im- 
plied. The  genitive  .seems  to  be  pen.  anctorii^  aa 
TTvn'' fi  aro  (;  in  tlie  pn-vious  clause. — R.]  On  th« 
Y (id  11  It  a,  see  chap.  ii.  20  ;  2  Cor.  iii.  6.     The  law 


CHAPTER   VII.    1-6. 


223 


▼iewed  externally,  and,  by  its  historical  and  subjec- 
tive exleinaliziition,  become  an  old  and  dying  object, 
na'/.awrijq.  Meyer  writes  somewhat  unintelligibly  : 
The  nai.aU>rrj<;,  according  to  the  nature  of  the  rela- 
tion in  whicii  the  y(idfi/(a  stands  to  the  principle  of 
sin  in  man,  was  necessarily  sinful  (see  ver.  7  ft'.),  as, 
on  the  otiier  hand,  the  xairortji;  must  be  necessarily 
moral  in  consequence  of  the  vitally  influencing 
nvufia.  [The  service  which  resulted  from  the  rule 
of  the  letter,  was  not  merely  their  old  service,  but  a 
service  having  in  it  an  element  of  decay.  The  ser- 
vice under  the  law,  precisely  the  written  law  (when 
viewed  as  the  y^a////a),  was  a  killing  yoke,  is  still, 
when  the  service  is  in  the  oldness  of  the  letter. 
Meyer  evidently  means,  that  a  law  with  external  pre- 
cepts, of  the  letter,  necessarily  so  acts  upon  man's 
sinfulness,  that  the  very  service  he  attempts  to  ren- 
der is  sinful.  The  letter  killeth  (2  Cor.  iii.  6).— Such 
a  characterization  of  the  service  under  the  law  forms 
a  fitting  warning  against  a  return  to  legalism — an 
appropriate  conclusion  to  this  section,  and  a  point 
of  connection  with  ver,  7. — R.] 


DOCTKINAL  AA^D   ETHICAIi. 

1.  The  connection  with  sin,  according  to  chap, 
vi.  12-23,  was  a  slavish  state  •;  the  connection  w'ith 
the  law,  on  the  other  hand,  according  to  the  present 
section,  was  comparable  to  an  eaithly  marriage-state. 
The  connection  of  believers  with  Clirist  now  appears, 
in  comparison  with  this,  as  a  super-terrestrial  mar- 
riage^covenant  (see  Eph.  v.  32). 

2.  It  is  only  by  keeping  tlie  figure  of  the  law  of 
marriage  free  from  an  allegorical  interpretation,  and 
by  distinguishing  between  the  figure  itself  and  its 
historical  application,  that  the  evidence  clearly  ap- 
pears which  the  argumentation  of  the  Apostle  con- 
templated, and  particularly  for  the  Jewish  Ciiristians. 
But  this  evidence  still  continues  in  force.  The 
standpoint  of  external  legality,  and  that  of  living 
faith,  cannot  be  confused  as  religious  principles. 
Both  standpoints  are  sundered  by  the  death  of 
Christ.  Where  they  seem  to  be  united,  the  confes- 
sion of  the  law,  or  the  legal  confession  of  faith,  is 
the  dominant  religious  principle  ;  while  the  opposite 
principle  has  the  meaning  only  of  a  historical  and 
etliical  custom,  which,  from  its  nature  as  a  legiU  cus- 
tom, as  much  limits  the  Catholic  man  of  faith,  as  it, 
in  the  character  of  an  evangelical  custom,  burdens 
the  legal,  Romanizing  Protestant. 

3.  Tholuck  :  "  The  law  is  annulled  in  relation  to 
believers,  not  in  its  moral  import,  but,  as  .Calovius 
remni'ks,  quoad  rigorem  exactionix,  quoad  malnVic- 
tioti'm,  et  quoad  servilem  coactiotiem."  According 
to  the  Sermon  on  the  Mount,  as  well  as  according  to 
Paul,  it  is  done  away  so  far  as  it  is  fulfilled  ;  it  is 
annulled  in  a  negative  sense  so  far  as  it  is  annulled 
in  Christian  principle,  the  law  of  the  Spirit.  An  in- 
ward principle  has  come  from  the  external  precept ; 
an  inward  rule  from  the  external  form  ;  an  inward 
tendency  from  the  external  law ;  a  unity  from  multi- 
plicity ;  a  synthesis  from  the  analysis  ;  and  from  the 
ordinance,  "  Do  this  .and  live,"  the  order,  "  Live  and 
do  this."  It  must  be  borne  in  mind,  that  Paul  here 
speaks  of  the  finite,  formal  character  of  the  law, 
and  not  of  the  law  as  a  type  of  the  New  Testament, 
as  it  has  become  transformed  into  the  law  of  the 
Spirit.  [Comp.  Doctrinal  ^iTotes  on  Galatians,  iii. 
19-29,  pp.  88,  89.— R.] 

4.  The  figure  of  marriage,  which  extends  through 


the  Old  Testament  in  typical  forms,  is  here  employed 
in  reference  to  the  relation  between  Christ  and  the 
whole  body  of  believers.  The  individual  believer 
participates  freely  in  the  marriage-bond  of  this  body, 
yet  not  in  a  mystical,  separatistic  isolation  of  his  re- 
lation to  Christ. 

6.  In  ver.  5  Paul  speaks  especially  concerning 
the  passions  of  sitis,  which  are  excited  and  occa- 
sioned by  the  law ;  and  there  is  no  reason  for  under- 
standing among  them  the  abnormal  forms  of  pas- 
sionate excitement.  The  history  of  Pharisaism,  and 
of  fanaticism  in  general,  from  the  crucifixion  of 
Clirist  down  to  the  present  day,  teaches  us  how  very 
much  additional  weight  is  also  added  by  the  normal 
forms.  In  this  direction  there  has  arisen  the  odium 
generis  Immani,  as  well  as  the  increasingly  strong 
warfare  of  hierarchical  or  ecclesiastical  party-law 
against  the  eternal  moral  laws  of  humanity,  in  which 
the  nature  of  God  himself  is  represented,  while  in 
the  statute  only  the  distorted  apparent  image  of  the 
Church,  and  not  its  eternal  pith,  is  reflected. 

6.  The  abortions  of  ordinances  at  enmity  with 
the  gospel  and  humanity  reached  the  centre  of  their 
manifestation  in  the  crucifixion  of  Christ ;  but  they 
everywhere  reappear,  where  Christ  is  again  crucified, 
in  a  grosser  or  more  refined  sense.  And  this  not 
only  occurs  where  the  written  revealed  law  is  per- 
verted into  fanatical  ordinances,  but  also  where  the 
ideals  of  the  natural  law  (Rom.  ii.  14)  are  distorted 
to  fanatical  caricatures,  as  is  shown  in  the  history 
of  the  Revolution  of  1848. 

Y.  On  ver.  6.  Tholuck :  "  yQci/Kfia,  nvfv/ict 
(chap.  ii.  29).  The  former  is  chiefly  a  designation 
of  the  external  principle ;  the  latter,  of  the  inward- 
ly operative  principle.  And  this  inwardly  operative 
principle  is  the  gracious  spirit  produced  by  God's 
gracious  act.  Calvin  :  Spiritum  liiteree  opponit,  quia 
antequam  ad  dei  voluntatem  voluntas  vostra  jjer 
spiritum  sanctum  forrnata  sit,  non  hahemus  in  lege 
nisi  exiernam  litteram,,  quce  froenum  quidern  exteri.ia 
nostril  actionibus  injicit,  concupixcentice  avtem  nos- 
trcB  fxirorem  minime  cohibet.  And  Melanchthon  : 
Idea  dicitur  littera,  quia  non  est  verus  et  viviifi  tnotus 
animi,  sed  est  otiosa  imitatio  interior  vcl  exterior,  nee 
ibi  potest  esse  vera  invocatio,  ubi  cor  non  apprehen- 
dit  remissiohem  )  eccatorian.'''' 

8.  How  the  law,  in  its  letter  or  finite  relation, 
began  to  grow  old  immediately  after  the  beginning 
of  legislation,  is  shown  to  us  clearly  by  the  history 
of  the  Israelites ;  and  Deuteronomy  even  gives  the 
canonical  type  of  this  truth.  The  history  of  the 
Christian  Church  teaches,  on  the  other  hand,  how 
the  newness  of  the  spiritual  life  becomes  constantly 
newer  in  its  power  of  renewal.  But  the  same  an- 
tithesis is  again  manifested  in  the  continual  obsoles- 
cence of  the  Church  in  the  Middle  Ages,  and  in  the 
continued  rejuvenating  of  the  evangelical  Church. 


H03d:rLETICAIi  AND  PEACTICAIk 
On  Chap.  vii.  1-6. 

As  Christians,  we  belong  no  more  to  the  law,  but 
to  Christ.  1.  Because  we  are  dead  to  the  law  by 
Jesus,  who  abolished  the  power  of  the  law  ;  2.  Be- 
cause we  are  united  to  Him  by  the  same  fact,  in 
order  to  bring  forth  fruit  to  God  (vers.  1-6). — 5Iar. 
riage  as  a  type  of  spiritual  relations :  1.  As  a  type 
of  our  relation  to  the  law  ;  2.  As  a  type  of  our  re. 
lation  to  Christ  (vers.  1-6). — As  the  relation  of  man 


224 


THE   EPISTLE   OF   PAUL   TO   THE   ROMANS. 


to  Christ  is  altogether  different  from  that  to  the  law, 
80  is  Christian  marriage,  on  tiie  other  hand,  alto- 
gether (iillerent  from  that  of  the  Old  Testament 
ivers.  1-0). — How  death  divides,  but  also  unites 
ver.  4). — Union  of  heart  witli  Christ  the  Risen  One 
is  the  eondititin  of  tiie  liappy  union  of  human  hearts 
with  eaeh  oilier  so  as  to  bring  forth  fruit  unto  God 
(ver.  4). — How  miserable  it  was  to  live  under  the 
law  in  the  ilesh  ;  how  happifying  it  is  to  live  under 
grace  in  the  Spirit !  Proof:  1.  Description  of  the 
elate  under  tiie  law  :  a.  we  were  in  bondage  ;  b.  sin- 
ful lust?  worked  in  our  niembei-s  to  bring  forth  fruit 
unto  deatii ;  c.  we  served  tlie  letter.  2.  Descrip- 
tion of  the  condition  under  grace  :  a.  we  are  free  ; 
b.  the  newness  of  the  Spirit  incites  us  to  bring  forth 
fruit  unto  (iod  ;  c.  we  serve  the  S|)irit,  and  not  the 
letter  any  more  (vers.  5,  0). 

Starke  :  As  a  thistle-hush  is  full  of  thistles,  so 
are  uneonverteil  and  carnal  men  full  of  the  fruits  of 
the  flesh  (ver.  5). — Christ  frees  us  from  the  burden 
of  tlie  law,  that  we  may  take  His  yoke  upon  us 
(ver.  6). — Heuinokr:  Wo  are  free  from  the  law,  not 
as  a  precept  of  duty — which  remains  perpelually — 
but  in  its  condemnation,  compulsion,  and  sharp- 
ness (ver.  1). — Where  there  is  not  a  heart  and  ready 
will,  there  is  only  external  labor  and  weariness ; 
where  conversion  of  the  life  and  spiritual  increase 
are  not  exhibited  in  the  inner  man,  it  is  lost  work 
and  tlie  service  of  the  letter,  even  if  one  sliould 
wear  out  tlie  temple-fioor  with  his  knees,  give  his 
body  to  be  burned,  and  become  a  beggar  aud  a  her- 
}nit ! 

Spe.ner  ;  Our  perverted  nature  is  such,  that, 
■when  any  thing  is  forbidden,  we  have  all  the  greater 
desire  to  have  it.  ^Ve  have  often  seen  children 
think  less  of,  and  have  no  desire  lor,  a  certain  thing, 
for  which  they  liave  all  the  more  desire  when  for- 
bidden. So,  when  tlie  law  forbids  this  and  that,  we 
are  prompted  toward  it  by  our  wicked  nature  (ver. 
6). — We  are  not  so  free  tliat  we  do  not  have  to 
se.'ve  any  more ;  only  the  kind  of  service  is  differ- 
ent. Formerly  it  was  compulsory,  now  it  is  ren- 
A>*'ed  witli  a  joyful  will ;  then  it  was  the  letter,  now 
it  is  the  spirit  (ver.  6). — Roos  :  The  trutii  which  Paul 
here  portrays  (vers.  1-4)  is  this :  that  nothing  but 
death  annuls  the  dominion  of  the  law. 

Lisco  :  The  complete  freedom  of  man  from  the 
law  promotes  his  true  sanctification  (vers.  1-6). — 
The  relation  of  man  to  the  law. — Application  of  this 
relation  to  believers  (ver.  4).— Advantages  of  the 
new  state  above  the  old  one  under  the  law  (vers. 
6,6). 

JIecdner  :  The  Christian  is  free  from  the  co- 
ercion of  the  law  (vers.  1-6). — The  death  of  Christ 
became  freedom  from  the  compulsory  power  and 
curse  of  the  law  :  1.  As  abrogation  of  tlie  Levitical 
eacrificial  system ;  2.  As  inducement  toward  free 
and  thankful  love  toward  Goil  (ver.  4). — Irreligious 
Doliticians  express  only  their  ignoble  and  servile 
manner  of  thinking,  when  they  ileem  all  religion  to  be 
only  of  servii'c  as  a  bridle  for  the  people  (ver,  4). — 
The  nature  of  the  Christian  is  spirit :  1.  In  refer- 
ence to  faith  ;  2.  In  reference  to  action.  The  lat- 
ter stands  in  contrast  with  this  spirii  in  tlicsc  same 
respects  (ver.  6). 

Bksser  :  Here,  for  the  first  time  since  chap.  i. 


13,  Paul  addresses  the  saints  at  Rome  as  bnthrenr-* 
breiliren  "in  Christ  Jesus  our  Lord"  (ver.  1).— 
"  But  now  " —  iiis  now  is  an  evangelical  key-note  of 
the  Epistle  to  tlie  Romans;  couip.  chap.  iii.  21,  and 
other  places  (ver.  6). 

L\.NOK  :  The  death  of  Christ  a  serious  boundary 
between  the  legal  and  the  evangelical,  believing, 
standpoints:  1.  The  meaning  of  this  boundary 
itself;  2.  The  application:  no  religious  confiisiona 
of  the  two  standpoints.  By  a  customary  connection 
of  them,  one  is  made  to  mean  only  a  moral  limita. 
tion,  which,  after  all,  is  not  in  conformity  with  the 
internal  relations. — The  sensuous  power  and  spirit- 
ual weakness  of  legalism  consists  in  its  being  an 
earthly  rehitioi-,  confined  to  this  life,  though  in  tlie 
fear  of  (iod  (in  this  life  the  head,  the  city  of  God, 
the  apparent  image  of  the  kingdom,  &c.). — Tiie  mar- 
riage-bond of  the  free  Churcli  of  God  is  a  super- 
terrestrial  relation,  and  therefore  the  power  of  the 
renewal  of  the  earthly  life  :  a.  Christ  in  tlie  next 
life  and  in  tliis  one  ;  b.  Faith  also  ;  c.  The  Church 
as  well. — The  reci|)rocal  action  between  the  law  and 
sin  unto  death,  a  counterpart  to  the  reciprocity  be- 
tween the  Spirit  of  Christ  and  faith  unto  new  life. — 
The  contrast  between  the  Old  and  New  Testament  in 
its  lull  meaning  :  1.  Tlie  Old  Testament  growing  old 
and  making  old  from  the  beginning ;  2.  The  New 
Testament  renewing  itself  and  the  world  from  the 
beginning. — But  a  New  Testament  is  in  the  essetice 
of  the  Old,  as  well  as  an  Old  is  in  the  inanifcstaiion 
of  the  New. 

[Bdrkitt  :  All  the  wisdom  of  the  heathen,  and 
of  the  wisest  persons  in  the  world,  was  never  able 
to  discover  the  first  sinful  motions  arising  from  our 
rebellious  natures ;  only  the  holy  law  of  God  makes 
them  known,  and  discovers  them  to  be  sin.  Such  is 
the  holiness  of  the  law  of  God,  that  it  requires  not 
only  the  purity  of  our  actions,  but  also  the  integrity 
of  all  our  faculties. — Scott  :  Self-righteous  |)ride  and 
anlinomian  licentiousness  are  two  fatal  rocks  on 
which  immense  multitudes  are  continually  wrecked, 
and  between  which  none  but  the  Holy  Spirit  can 
pilot  us ;  and  the  greatest  objections  of  ojien  ene- 
mies to  the  doctrines  of  grace  derive  their  greatest 
jilausibility  from  the  unholy  lives  of  many  professed 
friends. — Clauke  :  Tlie  law  is  only  the  means  of 
discloshtii  our  sinful  projiensity,  not  ij(  iirodminp  it; 
as  a  bright  beam  of  the  sun  introduced  into  a  roonc 
shows  millions  of  motes  in  all  directions — but  these 
were  not  introduced  by  the  light,  but  were  there  be- 
fore, only  there  was  not  light  enough  to  make  them 
manifest — so  the  evil  propensity  was  in  the  heart 
before,  but  there  was  not  light  sufficient  to  discover 
it. 

Literatitre,  chiefly  Homiletical,  on  the  7th 
Chapter  of  Romans:  Arminhs,  Dinacrtationon  the 
True  and  Oeiiuine  Scn.te  of  Jioiuntis  I'//.,  Works, 
2,  471  ;  E.  Ei.TON,  Complaint  of  a  Snnrtifial  Sinner 
Answered,  or  Explanation  of  the  Ith  i'hnpler  of 
Romans,  Lomlon,  1618  ;  J.  Stafforp,  Scripture  Doe- 
trine  of  Siu  Conxidired,  in  Twentii-five  JHsroumes  on 
liowanx  VII.,  London,  1772;  J.  Glas,  The  Flesh 
and  the  Spirit,  Worics,  3,  142 ;  J.  Fraser,  Seripturt 
Doctrine  of  Sanctification  ;  A.  Kxox,  Letter  to  J.  8. 
Hur/nrd,  Exq.y  on  th''  Seventh  Chapter  to  the  Ro- 
moM,  Remains,  8,  409.— J.  F.  H.] 


CHAPTER  VII.   7-26.  225 


Fifth  Section. — Si/tiopsis :  The  law,  in  its  holy  design,  by  the  feeling  of  death,  to  lead  to  the  new  life  in 
grace.  The  development  of  the  law  from  extirnality  to  inwardness.  The  experience  of  Paul  a  sketch 
from  life  of  the  conflict  under  tlie  latv,  as  well  as  of  the  transition  from  the  old  life  in  the  law  to  the 
neu  life  in  the  Spirit. 

Chap.  VII.  7-25. 

1  What  shall  we  say  then  ?  Is  the  law  sin  ?  God  forbid.  [Let  it  not  be  !] 
Nay,  [but]  I  had  not  known  [i.  e.,  recognized]  sin,  tut  by  [except  through]  the 
laAV  :  for  I  had  not  known  lust  [evil  desire],'  except  the  law  had  [if  the  law 

8  had  not]  said,  Thou  shalt  not  covet.  But  sin,  taking  occasion  [,]  by  the  com- 
mandment, [omu  comma'j  wrought  in  me  all  mannei"  of  concupiscence  [evil  desire]. 

9  For  without  the  law  sin  teas  [is]  dead.  For  [Now]  I  was  alive  without  the 
law  once  :  but  when  the  commandment  came,  sin  revived  [sprang  into  life],  and 

10  I  died.      And  the  commandment,  which  vxis  ordained  to   [teas  unto]"  life,  I 

11  found  [the  same,  or,  this,  was  found  by  me]  to  be  unto  death.  For  sin,  taking 
occasion  [,]  by  the  commandment,  \omit  comma]  deceived  me,  and  by  it  slew  7ve. 

12  Wherefore  [So  that]  the  law  is  holy,  and  the  commandment  holy,  and  just,  and 
good. 

13  Was  [Did]  then  that  which  is  good  made  [become]  '  death  unto  me  ?  God 
forbid.  But  sin,  that  it  might  appear  sin,  working  death  in  [to]  me  by 
[through]  tliat  which  is  good ;  [,]  that  sin  by  [through]  the  commandment 
might  become  exceeding  [exceedingly]  sinful. 

14  For  we  know  that  the  law  is  spiritual :   but  I  am  carnal,*  sold  under  sin. 

15  For  that  which  I  do  [perform],^  I  allow  [know]  not :  for  what  I  would,  that 
do  I  not   [not  what  I  wish,"  that  I  practise]  ;    but  what  I  hate,  that   do   I. 

16  If  then  I  do  that  which  I  would  not  [But  if  what  I  wish  not,   tliat  I  do],  I 

17  consent  unto  [I  agree  with]  the  law  that  it  is  good.     Now  then  it  is  no  more 

18  [longer]  I  that  do  [perform]  it,  but  sin  that  dwelleth  [dwelling]  in  me.  For 
I  know  that  in  me  (that  is,  in  my  flesh),  dwelleth  no  good  thing  [good  doth  not 
dwell]  :    for  to  will  [wish]  is  present  with  me  ;    but  hoio  [omu  how]  to  perform 

19  that  which  is  good  I  find  not  ['^,  is  not].'     For  the  good  that  I  would  [wish], 

20  I  do  not:  but  "the  evil  which  I  would  [wish]  not,  that  I  do  [practise].  Now 
[But]  if  I   do   that  I*  would   [wish]   not,  it  is  no  more   [longer]   I   that   do 

21  [perform]  it,  but  sin  that  dwelleth  [dwelling]  in  me.     I  find  then  a  [the]  law% 

22  that,  when  I  w^ould  [wish  to]  do  good,  evil  "is  present  with  me.     For  I  delight 

23  in  the  law  of  God  after  the  inward,  man  :  But  I  see  another  law  in  iny  mem- 
bers, warring  against  the  law  of  my  mind,  and  bringing  me  into  captivity  to" 
the  law  of  sin  which  is  in  my  members. 

24  O  wretched  man  that  I  am !    who  shall  deliver  me  from  the  body  of  this 

25  death  [or,  this  body  of  death]  ? '"  I  thank  God  [or,  Thanks  to  God]  "  through 
Jesus  Christ  our  Lord.  So  then  with  the  mind  I  myself  [I  myself  with  the 
mind]  "^  serve  the  law  of  God  ;  but  with  the  flesh  the  law  of  sin. 


1  Ver.  7.— [The  E.  V.  renders  fniBvixCav  here  hint,  in  ver.  8,  concnpiscnce,  and  the  verb  ETriSufi^o-tis,  covet. 
In  order  to  preserve  the  correspondence,  the  Amer.  BiWe  Union  translates  the  noun  covelinffin  both  places.  We  are 
forced  to  retain  covt  in  rendering  the  viTb,  but  it  seems  better  to  give  the  noun  a  more  exact  translation,  even  at  tho 
cost  of  variation  from  the  verb.  Lust  is  too  specific,  conciipiscnce  too  rare,  desire  would  he  indefinite  without  tho 
adjective  eviJ.  "  The  misfortune  is  that  we  have  no  English  noun  that  corresponds  well  to  the  generic  sense  of  the  verb 
covd "  (Stuart).  .        ,         . 

2  Ver.  10.— [The  italics  of  the  E.  V.  are  virtually  a  gloss.  Was  only  need  be  supplied.  For  is  a  favorite  emenda- 
tion,  hut  unio  brings  out  the  telic  force  of  e  c  s  quite  as  well.— The  passive  form  of  the  Greek  is  restored  m  the  second 
clansv.  ,    ,  .    i     ,    J,     , 

3  Ver.  13.— [\.  A.  B.  C.  D.  E.,  Lachmann,  Meyer,  Alford,  Wordsworth,  Tregelles,  read  eyevtro  instead  of  yevov* 
(Jfec,  K.  L.).  The  coiTection  probably  arose  fioni  not  underst:niding  the  historical  aorist  (Alford).  The  Amer.  Dibk 
Union  follows  the  latter  reading,  which  is  now  considered  incorrect. 

♦  V.'r.  14.— [N'.  A.  B.  C.  B.  E.  F.  G.,  Griesbach,  Laclimaim,  Scholz,  Tischeiidorf,  Meyer,  Wji^.6Wor;h,  '/regelles,  and 
Lange,  read  crapKivos  instead  of  o-apxtKo?  (iZ-'/-.,  N^  K.  L.)  ;  the  latter  being  very  naturally  ELbstituted  to  correspond 
with  nvev/xaTiKOi  .     It  was  also  more  familiar.     On  the  meaning,  see  Exfff.  jyoles. 

»  Ver.  15— [Three  Greek  verbs  of  kindred  signification  :  Karepvi^oiaoi,  TrpdrTia,  iroieco,  occur  in  this  verse, 
recurring  throughout  the  section.  The  E.  V.  renders  all  three,  do,  except  in  ver.  18,  where  the  first  verb  is  translated, 
per/iirm.  It  is  better  to  retain  this  throughout,  and  render  jrpdTTU) ,  practise,  as  etymologically  exact.  Alford  dcnici 
any  distinction  between  the  last  two  verbs. 

15 


2v;o 


THE    EPISTLE   OF   PAUL   TO   THE   ROMANS. 


•  Ver.  15. — I  Would  (E.  V.)  is  an  inexact  lendcrij  g  of  SiXia.  The  choice  lies  between  will  and  with.  Tl  e  former 
If  to  be  prcferreJ,  if  the  idea  of  simple,  !-pontanc"us  \olition  is  doomed  the  prominent  one  ;  the  latter  is  favored  by  tli* 
presence  of  >inTii,   Indic-itin?  nn  emotional  fenluie  ir.  the  volition,     ^c  Exig.  Aole.'. 

^  Ver  18. — (X.  A.  li.  C,  many  versions  and  fathers,  LachmanL.,  Tischendorf,  Alford,  Trepelles,  omit  tvpiaxm .  It 
Is  Inserted  in  I),  i'.  K.  L.,  li'C,  "oy  many  fathers,  Meyer,  Wordsworth,  Lanfie,  and  others.  Meyer  deems  the  omission 
due  to  the  transcriber's  liaslily  passini:  over  from  ov)(  to  ov  at  the  bepinninp  of  ver.  19.  Lange  holds  that  cvpttrxM 
would  disappear,  as  soon  as  the  sententious  antithesis  (To  will  is  immediately  present,  but  the  carrying  out  of  that 
which  is  good  1  can  never  find)  was  no  longer  understood. 

»  Ver.  20.-  [N.  A.  K.  L.,  insert  eyiu  aftei  6i\u).  Meyer,  Alford,  TreL'elle?,  and  others,  follow  B.  C.  D.  F.  in  emit* 
ting  it.     The  analogr^-  of  vers.  15,  18  is  atJHinst  it.  liut  Lanpe  deems  it  important  to  mark  a  propiess  in  the  thought. 

•  Ver.  23.— [X.  fi.  D.  F.  K.,  and  si'mo  cursives,  insert  iv  before  T<p  vdiotu.  Omitted  in  Itec,  A.  C.  L.,  fathers. 
Most  modem  editor.-  reject  it.    Treiie'iles  retains  it.    If  retained,  it  cannot  mean  hi/  means  of  (see  Alfoi-d). 

'•  Ver.  2-1.— [On  these  two  renderings,  see  Exrg.  Aolff. 

"  Ver.  25.— [There  is  considerable  variation  here.     The  Hec,  N'.  A.  K.  L.,  read  evxapio-ru.    B.  has  xapit  t<S 
0eJ>,  whicli  is  adopted  by  Lachmann,   Tischcndoif,  Alford,  Tregelles,   Lange.     We  find   also:   i)  x<>P'f  tou  #toD  ana 
tow'  Kvplou.     Meyei  contends  for  the  reading  of  the  lieopla,  wTiicli  certainly  has  the  best  MSS.  support, 
"i  \er.  25.— [Forbes : 

'Apa  ovv  ovTO?  iyui 

TuJ  ixiv  vol  Sov\evui  vofitf  @coC, 
Tjj  St  capKi,  i/o/xu  anapriat. 

So  then  I  myself 
With  my  iniiid  serve  the  law  of  God, 
But  With  my  flesh  the  law  of  sin. 

Lange,  however,  seems  to  take  ntv  ,  ,  .  Si  an  =  either  .  .  .  or.    See  Exeg.  Xoles.—'R.'\ 


A. — Tlie  development   of  life  under  the  law  as  de- 

velopment  of  the  knoichdge  of  sin. 

SiDiunari/.—l.  The  law  in  relation  to  sin  ;  vers. 
12,  13.  a.  The  holiness  of  tlie  law  in  its  rehition  to 
the  sinfulness  of  man;  vers.  7-12.  b.  Tiie  effect 
of  the  law  in  hamiony  with  its  design :  Disclosure 
of  the  deadly  effect  of  .-^in,  in  causing  it  to  complete 
itself  as  well  in  facts  as  in  the  consciousness ;  ver. 
l.S. — 2,  The  sinner  in  relation  to  the  law ;  vers. 
14-23.  a.  The  revelation  of  man's  carnal  nature  or 
tendency  in  general  under  the  si)irituality  of  the 
law  ;  ver.  14.  b.  The  disclosure  of  the  sinful  ol)- 
Bcuration  of  the  understanding ;  or  the  dispute  of 
knowledge;  vers.  15,  16.  c.  The  disclosure  of  the 
sinful  obscuration  of  the  will ;  or  the  di.spute  of  the 
will ;  ver.^.  17,  18.  d.  Di.«closure  of  tiie  sinful  ob- 
scuration of  feeling ;  or  of  the  unconscious  ground 
of  life;  vers.  19,  20.  e.  Disclosure  of  the  darken- 
ing of  the  whole  human  consciousness  by  the  oppo- 
sition of  God's  law  and  a  mere  seeming  law  ;  or  the 
deadly  rent  in  the  wiiole  man;  vers.  21-23. — 3.  The 
unliappy  pieinonition  of  death,  in  the  sense  of  the 
entangl'-ment  by  the  (seeming)  body  of  death,  and 
the  rclciise  from  it ;  ver.  24.  4.  Th<'  transition  from 
death  to  life ;  ver.  25.  a.  The  redenii)tion,  in  the 
former  hidf  of  the  verse,  b.  Conclusion  in  relation 
to  the  starting-point  of  the  new  life  ;  second  half  of 
ver.  25. 

B. —  T/ie  same  development  as  transition  from  the 
lain  to  the  Gospel,  from  iicin  to  .salvation. 
(E|)ii.  V.  13 :  "  Hut  all  things  tiiat  are  reproved  are 
made  manifest  by  the  light :  for  whatsoever  doth 
make  manifest  is  light.")  a.  Tiie  holy  design  of  the 
law  to  discover  the  root  of  sin,  and  with  tlie  sense 
of  guilt  to  awaken  the  sense  of  death  ;  vers.  7-12. — 
h.  The  wholcsomeness  of  this  comi)lcti'  unma.sking 
of  sin  in  its  absolute  sinfulness;  ver.  13. — c.  View 
of  tlie  conflict  between  the  spiritual  and  divine 
character  of  tiie  law,  and  the  carnal  character  of  the 
sinner ;  ver.  14. — d.  Conaeiousness  of  the  want  of 
clo?riios9  and  su|iremacy  of  understanding ;  vers. 
15,  iCi. — e.  Consciousness  of  the  want  of  firmness 
ind  energy  of  will;  vers.  17,  18. — /'.  Consciousness 
of  the  weakness  of  the  nobler  sentiments,  and  the 
superior  power  of  the  lower ;  vers.  19,  20. — </.  The 
consciousnesa  of  the  clrnsin  between  the  inner  man 
and  the  outward  life;  of  the  rent  between  the  two 
reciprocally  contradictory  laws;  vera.  21-23. — 
V  The  fruit  of  this  development :  the  consummated 


consciousness  of  the  necessity  of  deliverance ;  ver. 
24. — i.  Deliverance  and  the  new  law  of  life :  clear 
distinction  between  knowledge  and  flesh  ;  ver.  26. 
The  /  is  distinguisiied,  first  from  sin  in  knowledge, 
then  in  the  will,  then  in  the  feeling,  then  in  the 
whole  consciousness  of  the  inward  nature,  but  finally 
in  the  inquiring  cry  for  the  Redeemer. 

Gener.vl  Prkmminaut  Rkmarks. — We  come  first 
of  all  to  the  question,  In  what  sense  does  the  Apos- 
tle speak  in  the  first  person  si-igular?  what  does  the 
iydt  mean?  Different  views:  The  expretrlon  is  a 
/(fTa<T/ij.i/«rtrr/(6:;,  bco  1  Cor.  iv.  6 — that  is,  the  rep- 
resentation of  one  £^'>:rc  in  another.  Thus  the 
Greek  fathers  applie«l  the  passage  to  the  fall  of 
Adam,  or  of  the  human  race  (Tholuek  :  "  By  way 
of  exam[)le,  the  introduction  of  man  into  the  para- 
disaical condition  "). — Others  believed  the  Jewish 
peojdc  before  and  under  the  law  denoted  (Chrysos- 
tom,  Turretin,  Wetstein,  Reiche).  The  view  of  the 
Socinians  and  Arniinians  (Grotius,  and  others)  was  a 
modification  of  this  one,  that  the  homities  pleriqtie 
are  meant,  who,  under  the  legal  economy,  have  sur- 
rctidered  themselves  to  a  gross  life  of  sin.  But  the 
Apostle  evidently  speaks  of  a  human  condition  of 
soul,  in  which  the  inward  ccmilict  of  life  is  very  ear- 
nest and  great ;  ami  the  language  of  his  own  expe- 
rience is  unmistakable.  Even  if  he  spoke  of  the 
human  race  in  gcnei-al,  or  of  the  Lsraelitish  people 
in  ])articular,  he  could  not  speak  of  a  mere  fitrna- 
/^iinTttTiinL;  which  would  be  excluded  from  the 
organic  connection  by  the  Apostle's  theological  view. 
But  since  the  Apostle  uses  the  most  forcible  lan- 
guage of  his  own  experience,  his  expression  is  ifiin*- 
(Tn;  (xoM'o.ToiirVt) ;  that  is,  he  exjjresses  in  his  expe- 
rience a  universal  human  experience  of  the  relation 
of  man  to  the  law  (Mi'yer,  and  others).*  For  it  ia 
self-evident  that  the  .\postle  could  have  no  occasion 
to  describe  a  special  experience  concerning  himself 
alone. 

But  now  the  second  qtiestion  arises :  What  state 
of  the  soul  has  the  .\poslle  portrayed  ?     Does  this 

•  [Wordnworth,  leso  correctly,  snyo:  "By  the  pronoun 
7.  the  holy  Apostle  personifies  itumnn  Nature,  and  iden- 
tifies it  with  himself,  and  savs,  in  his  own  name  and  person, 
'  what  he  menus  to  be  Mpplled  to  Mankind  geneniUy,  m  their 
I  unregenerate  H'nte."  This  author  follows  his  urumI  patri.s- 
:  tic  bent,  in  implyine  that  this  is  a  description,  not  of  what 
'  !#•(#«,  but  iiiiffhl  hire  been  I'aul's  experience.  This  leal  foj 
I  the  honor  of  "  the  holy  Apostle  "  ia  undoubtedly  at  the  ex« 
I  penao  of  Lis  siucerity.'— K.] 


CHAPTER  VII.   7-25. 


227 


passage  refer  to  tlie  condition  of  the  unregenerate, 
or  of  the  regenerate  ? 

Vieii'S.-^l.  The  unrer/enerote :  The  Greek  fathers, 
Augustine  before  his  controversy  with  the  Pelagians 
{prop.  44  in  Ep.  ad  Rom.);  also  Jerome,  Abehird 
(to  a  certain  extent),  and  Thomas  Aquinas ;  then 
Erasmus,  Bucer,  Musculus,  Oohino,  Faustus  Socinus, 
Anninius  (on  Affehnan,  see  Tlioluck,  p.  328) ;  the 
Spener  school  (according  to  tlie  suggestions  of  Spe- 
ner) ;  and  later  exegetical  writers.  [Among  tliese, 
Julius  Miiller,  Neander,  Nitzscii,  Hahn,  Tholuck, 
Krehl,  Hengstenberg,  Riickert,  De  Wette,  Ewald, 
Sfier,  Stuart,  Ernesti,  Jlessner,  Schmid,  Lechler, 
Kahnis,  and  Meyer  (most  decidedly).  Some  of 
these,  however,  really  support  the  modified  view  up- 
held below  (4).— R.]. 

2.  The  ri generate:  Methodius  in  the  Origenianis 
(see  Tlioluck,  p.  386) ;  Augustine  in  the  controversy 
with  the  Pelagians  (on  account  of  vers.  17,  18,  22, 
2o  ;  Retract,  i.  23,  &c.) ;  *  Jerome,  Luther,  Calvin, 
P>eza,  the  orthodox  school ;  recently  Kohlbriigge, 
Dn!<  7te  Kapitel  des  Briefer  an  die  Edmer  (1839). 

3.  The  first  section,  from  vers.  7-13,  treats  of 
the  unregenerate  ;  vers.  14-25,  of  the  regenerate  : 
Philippi  [whose  careful  and  thorough  discussion 
{Comm.,  pp.  249-258)  is  one  of  the  ablest  in  favor 
of  this  reference. — R.].  The  identity  of  the  subject 
Is  against  this  view.  Hofmann,  Sc/iriftbeu'eis,  i.  p. 
469  :  '•  The  Apostle  does,  indeed,  speak  of  his  pres- 
ent condition,  but  apart  from  the  moral  ability  to 
which  he  had  grown  in  Christ."  According  to  Mey- 
er, this  is  the  earlier  Augustininn  view  (of  the  unre- 
generate); but  it  seems  to  be  scarcely  an  intelligible 
one.  [This  view  (referring  only  vers.  14-25  to  the 
regenerate)  is  that  of  most  Scotch  expositors  (latterly 
Brown,  Haldane,  Forbes) ;  of  Delitzsch  (Bibl.  F-<g- 
choL,  pp.  368  &.,  2d  ed.),  and  is  ably  defended  by 
Dr.  Hodge.  As  the  current  Galvinistic  interpreta- 
tion, it  requires  further  consideration.  Mention 
must  be  made  also  of  the  modified  form  of  it  held 
by  Alford.f     The  arguments  in  favor  of  making  the 


♦  [Tholuck,  Stuart  (Meyer,  Lnnsrc,  apparently),  attrib- 
ute the  change  in  Augustine's  views  to  the  Pelagian  con- 
troversy;  Dr.  Hodge,  on  the  other  hand:  "to  a  deejier 
insight  into  his  own  heart,  and  a  more  thorough  investi- 
gation of  the  Scriptures."  In  the  Expositio  Quurundam 
Prop.  Ep.  Rom.  Prnp.  45  (not  the  incomplete  commentaiy) 
the  earlier  view  is  s+ated  (394).  It  is  repeated  in' Ad  Simp. 
(397),  C'Vf.  vii.  21  (400).  The  Pelagian  controversy  began 
about  412.  It  is  not  until  420  that  the  other  view  is  pre- 
pciited  {Cnnlra  duas  Epistolas  Pel.  ad  Bonifnc,  i.  12).  It  is 
rcpe<ited  in  Ritrac^aiioma,  i.  23,  i.  1  (427),  and  in  Contra  Jul.., 
vi.  13  (about  the  same  time).  The  language  of  Augustine 
is  as  follows  (in  Relrnc.)  :  qux  pnstea  ledis  quibtisdnm  divin- 
orum  froclitlorihus  eloquinrum,  quorum  me  movent  inictoritas, 
confidi'vavi  dUigentius  et  vidi  e.llam,  d<'  ipso  npostnlo  posae 
iv'rllini  qiind  ait  "  (ver.  14)  ;  "  quod  in  ris  libns  quns  rontrn 
Pd'gionos  nnper  scripsi,  quon'um  potui  d.iligenli'r  oslendi." 
The  tone  of  the  whole  section  is  polemic.  This  fact,  in  con- 
nection with  the  dates  above  given,  shows  that  tlie  prob- 
abilities are  stronaly  in  favor  of  the  view  of  Stuart.  A 
general  change  may  have  been  going  on,  but,  as  regards 
this  passage,  the  change  seems  due  to  the  exigencies  of  the 
controversv.  Comp.  Mianc's  edition  Augnslini  Opira,  1. 
6"n,  i'i.  2071,  &c.  ;  also  Schaff,  History  of  the.  Christian 
Cliurch,  iii.  pp.  9S8  if.— B,.] 

t  rTiiis  view  is  as  follows  :  From  vers.  7-13  is  historical, 
tamal  p»lf  iinder  the  convictions  of  sin  in  the  trnnsition 
state.  Ver.  14  is  still  of  the  carnal  self,  but  Paul,  i  i  pass- 
ing forward,  transfers  himself  into  his  presint  position  by 
the  change  of  tense.  Speaking  in  this  tense,  he  begins  to 
tell  of  the  motions  of  the  will  toward  God  (ver.  1.5,  which  is 
true  only  of  the  regenerate).  Tlien  an  appnrcnl  verbal  con- 
fii.'iinn  arises,  the  egn  having  a  wider  Tncaning  in  ver.  17 
than  in  ver.  18,  &c.  After  ver.  20,  the  subject  is  the  actual 
thfn  existing  complex  self  of  Paul  in  his  state  of  conflict 
This  view  is  more  easily  justified  by  the  exegesis  of  sepa- 
rate verses  than  that  of  Dr.  Hodge,  yet  the  "  confusion"  is 
great — ^K.l 


sharp  transition  at  ver.  14,  are  as  follows,  as  urged 
by  Hodge  :  (1.)  The  onnn  probavdi  is  ok  the  other 
side  (on  account  of  the  first  person  and  present 
tense).  (2.)  There  is  not  an  expression,  from  the 
beginning  to  the  end  of  the  section,  ver.  14-25, 
which  the  holiest  man  may  not  and  mu.st  not  adopt. 
(3.)  There  is  much  which  cannot  be  asserted  by  any 
unrenewed  man.  (4.)  The  context  is  in  favor  of 
this  interpretation.  The  positions  (2)  and  (3)  must 
be  discusseil  in  the  exegesis  of  the  verses  as  they 
occur  (especially  vers.  14,  15,  22).  It  will  be  found 
that  there  is  very  great  difficulty  in  applying  all  the 
terms  in  their  literal  sense  exclusively  to  either  class. 
Philippi  is  most  earnest  in  upholding  the  3d  position 
of  Hodge.  In  regard  to  (1),  it  may  be  observed, 
that  the  first  person  is  used  in  vers.  7-13,  so  that 
the  change  from  the  past  to  the  present  tense  alone 
enters  into  the  discussion.  Is  this  change  of  fenst 
sufficient  to  justify  so  marked  a  change  in  the  sub 
ject  ?  A  consistent  attempt  to  define  the  subjecl 
throughout  on  this  theory,  leads  to  the  "  confusion," 
which  Alford  admits  in  the  view  he  supports. — The 
context,  it  may  readily  be  granted,  admits  of  this 
view  ;  for  in  chaps,  v.  and  vi.  the  result  of  justifica- 
tion, the  actual  deliverance  from  sin,  has  been 
brought  into  view,  and  ver.  6  says :  we  .tcrve,  &c. 
But,  on  the  other  hand,  it  must  be  admitted  that 
vers.  7-13  recur  to  the  ante-Christian,  legal  position. 
Not  until  ver.  25  *  is  there  a  distinct  Christian  utter- 
ance, while  chap.  viii.  sounds  like  a  new  song  of  tri- 
umph. If  the  Apostle  is  holding  the  distinctively 
Christian  aspect  of  the  conflict  in  abeyance,  though 
describing  the  experience  of  a  Christian,  in  order 
that  he  may  give  it  more  force  in  chap,  viii.,  he  is 
doing  what  is  not  usual  with  him  as  a  writer,  still 
less  with  a  struggling  believer  in  his  daily  experi- 
ence. The  context,  we  hold,  points  most  plainly  to 
the  view  given  next,  and  adopted  by  Dr.  Lange. — R.] 
4.  The  Apostle  is  not  describing  a  quiescent 
state,  but  the  process  in  which  man  is  driven  I'rom 
the  law  to  Christ,  and  an  unregenerate  person  be- 
comes a  regenerate  one.  So  Olsliausen  :  "The  state 
under  the  law  cannot  coexist  with  regeneration,  and 
without  question,  therefore — as  chap.  vii.  24  is  to 
express  the  awakened  need  of  redemption,  and  ver. 
25  the  experience  of  redemption  itself^ — vers.  14-24 
are  to  be  referred  to  a  position  before  regeneration, 
and  to  be  understood  as  a  description  of  the  conjfici 
ioitliin  an  avakcncd  person.  Since,  however,  the 
Apostle  makes  use  of  the  present  for  this  section, 
while  before  and  afterwards  he  applies  the  aorist,  we 
are  led  to  the  idea  that  he  does  not  intend  to  have 
this  state  of  conflict  regarded  ns  concluded  with  the 
experience  of  redemption.  In  the  description  (vers. 
14-24)  itself,  also,  as  will  afterwards  be  more  par- 
ticularly shown,  an  advance  in  the  conflict  with  sin 
is  clearly  observable ;  the  better  /  stand  out  in  the 
man,  more  and  more  the  pleasure  in  God's  law 
gradually  increases.  This  is  the  case  in  a  still  higher 
degree,  a.s  ver.  25  expresses,  after  the  experience  of 
the  redeeming  power  of  Christ,  where  the  conflict 
with  sin  is  described  as  for  the  most  part  victorious 
on  the  side  of  the  better  part  in  man.  But  a  battle 
still  continues,  even  after  tiie  experience  of  regen- 
eration," &c. — In  all  this,  the  antithesis,  vndrr  the 
law  and  being  free  from  the  laiL\  does  not  bear  being 
confounded.  It  only  admits  of  the  condition,  that 
the  Christian  must  again  feel  that  he  is  weak,  so  far 


*  [Forbes  defends  this  view,  however,  from  the  parallel" 
ism  in  the  latter  part  of  ver.  25.— K.] 


228 


THE   EPISTLE    OF   PAUL   TO    THE   ROMANS. 


as  he  fiills  momentarily  under  the  law  of  the  flesh, 
and  ihiTchy  under  the  law  of  death.  Even  Bengel 
finds  in  lliis  scttion  a  progress,  but  he  docs  not  cor- 
rectly descrilje  it :  iSeusitn  mispirat,  connititur, 
enilitiir  ad  Hbcrtatctn.  Inde  pmlutUii  screnior  Jit 
oratio.  But  after  the  coinbiitiint  experiences  deep 
conviction,  lie  declines,  rather,  into  despair;  but 
then  tills  is  the  way  to  complete  deliverance. 

Tlioluck  i)roperly  remarks  :  "  As  the  question  is 
usually  raised,  whctlier  the  regenerate  or  the  uure- 
gencrate  person  is  spoken  of,  it  produces  misunder- 
Btaiiding  so  far  as  the  s/ntim  Irrcgaiitorum  conipre- 
iK-nds  in  itself  the  very  dillerent  states  of  soul  of  the 
status  exfex  carnalis  and  of  the  status  leyul'is ;  then, 
how  tar  the  relation  of  Old  Testament  believers  to 
law  and  regeneration  is  regarded  dilVcrcntly ;  and 
finally,  how  far  the  idea  of  regeneration  has  been  a 
self-consciously  variable  one." 

[This  view  is,  on  the  whole,  the  most  satisfactory. 
It  atlniits  the  conflict  after  regeneration,  but  guards 
against  the  thought  that  this  is  a  description  of  dis- 
tinctively Christian  experience.  It  is  rather  tliat  of 
one  under  the  pedagogy  of  tlie  law  "  unto  Christ," 
whether  for  the  first  time  or  the  hundredth  time.  It 
is  the  most  hopeful  state  of  the  uuregenerate  man  ; 
the  least  desirable  state  of  the  regenerate  man.  Of 
course,  it  cannot  be  admitted  that  there  is  a  third 
class,  a  terlium  tjuid,  the  awakened.  This  view  \ 
seems  to  be  the  one  which  will  harmonize  the  polem- 
ics of  the  pa.st.  Jowett  adopts  it,  Schaff'  also,  while 
Delitzsch,  after  advocating  (3),  says :  "  lie  speaks 
of  himself  the  regenerate— i-i.  e.,  of  experiences  still 
continuing,  and  not  absolutely  passed  away — but  he 
does  not  speak  of  himself  qua  regenerate — i.  c,  not 
of  experiences  which  he  has  received  lly  the  specifi- 
cally New  Testament  grace  of  regeneration."  He 
further  admits  that  such  experiences  might  occur  in 
the  heathen  world,  according  to  Rom.  ii.  15.  The 
advantages  of  this  view  are  very  numerous.  It  re- 
lieves the  exegesis  of  a  constant  constraint,  viz.,  the 

Vattempt  to  press  the  words"  into  harmony  with  cer- 
laiu  preconceived  anthro[)oIogical  positions.  It 
agrees  best  with  the  context.     Its  practical  value  is 

/beyond  that  of  any  other.     See  Dnctr.  Notes. — R.l 

On  the  literature,  see  the  Introduction.  Also 
Tholuck,  ]),  3:39,  where  the  explanations  of  Hun- 
nius  and  Aretius  may  also  be  found.  Winzer,  Pro- 
yramrn^  1832.  A  treatise  in  Knapp,  Scripta  varii 
argumenti. 

EXEGETICAL  AND  CKITICAL. 
First  Pauaokaph,  vers.  7-12. 

Vcr.  1.  What  shaU  we  say  then  ?  [Ti  o  r  i- 
tool'fiiv;  see  the  note  on  this  expression,  iii.  5, 
p  118.  Comp.  also  ix.  30,  where  the  use  is  dilfer- 
•nt. — R.]  Intimation  that  another  false  conclusion 
must  l)e  prevenleil.  Though  the  Christian  be  dead 
to  the  law,  it  does  not  follow  that  the  law  is  not 
holy.  But  it  belongs  to  a  preceding  stage  of  de- 
Tclopmcnt. 

Is  the  law  sin  [  o  i-  o  /<  o  ^•  « /< «  p  t  / «  ]  ?  Ori- 
gen  |. Jerome]:  the  lex  valuralis.  Tholuck:  the 
ilo.saic  law.  Certainly  the  question  is  respecting  the 
justification  of  the  latter.  [.lowett  paiaphrases  :  In 
cotiscMjice  sin  ? — which  seems  almost  an  exegetical 
caprice.  His  reason  for  it,  that  the  consciousness 
of  sin,  rather  than  a  question  of  new  moons  and 
Bubhaths,  is  under  coDsiduration,  betrays  an  entire 


misapprehension  of  the  ethical  purpose  of  the  laAf 
of  Moses.  It  may  be  admitted  that  an  inferentiai 
reference  to  all  law  can  be  found  here,  but  the  pas- 
sage  is  an  account  of  an  historical  experience,  which 
took  place  umler  the  Mosaic  law. — R.j 

Sin.  The  usual  interpretation  :  cau.'>e  of  sin 
Metonymically,  the  operation  named,  instead  of  th* 
cause,  as  2  Kings  iv.  4t> ;  Micah  v.  1  :  Samaria  is  si^ 
for  Jacob.  On  the  other  hand,  De  Wette  and  Meyei 
say  ;  Is  the  law  sinful,  immoral  ?  Alter  what  pre- 
cedes, it  may  well  mean  :  Is  it  the  real  cause  of  sin, 
and,  as  such,  itself  sinful  V  [Bengel:  ^'  cimsii  peC' 
cati  /i(craiiii?io.ia."  "'O  »'0/<os'  itself  being  abstract, 
that  which  is  predicated  of  it  is  alisiract  also " 
(Alford). — R.]  Even  this  conclusion  is  repelled  bj 
the  Apostle  with  alihorrcnce,  /<  >;    y  ivo  it  o. 

Nay,  but.  The  a ).  /.  d  is  taken  by  some  in 
the  sense  of  a/j.dyf :  but  certahdi/.  He  rejids  the 
thought  that  the  law  is  sin,  but  yet  he  firmly  holds 
that  it  brought  injury  (Stuart,  Kidlner,  and  others  ; 
Meyer,  Ilofmann).  Tholuck,  on  the  other  hand 
(with  Theodore  of  Mojjsvestia,  Abelard,  and  others), 
sees,  in  what  is  here  said,  the  expression  of  the  op- 
posite, viz.,  that  the  law  first  brought  sin  to  con- 
sciousness. It  may  be  asked  whether  this  alterna- 
tive is  a  real  one.  If  the  law  be  really  holy,  because 
it  hns  driven  sin  from  its  concealment  and  brought 
it  fully  to  manifestation,  then  there  is  no  alternative 
here.  [This  seems  decisive  against  Stuart's  view. 
Meyer  (4th  ed.)  renders  dlXd,  sondern.  The  law 
is  not  sin,  hit  its  actual  relation  to  sin  is  that  of  (//«- 
coverer  of  sin.  This  is  much  .simpler  than  Alford's 
view  :  /  say  not  that,  tnit  tvfiat  I iiuan  is  that.  The 
objection  that  this  implies  a  praise  of  the  law  (De 
AVette)  is  without  force.  He  might  well  praise  it 
as  leading  toward  ver.  25  ;  viii.  1. — R.] 

But  it  may  be  askeil,  in  connection  with  this 
view.  How  are  the  words,  I  had  not  known  sin 
[rijv  d  fi  a  I)  T  i  a  V  o  !•  n  Eyvwv],  to  be  ex- 
plained ?  According  to  Cyril,  Winzer,  De  Wette, 
Philippi,  and  Tholuck,  this  refers  to  the  knowledge 
of  sin  alone  ;  but,  according  to  Meyer,  and  others, 
it  refers  to  the  becoming  acquainted  with  sin  by  ex- 
jierience.  Meyer:  "The  principle  of  sin  in  man, 
with  which  we  first  become  experimentally  acquaint- 
ed by  the  law,  and  which  would  have  remained  un- 
known to  us  without  the  law,  because  then  it  would 
not  have'  become  active  by  the  excitement  of  desires 
for  what  is  forliidden,  in  opposition  to  the  law." 
This  explanation  lays  too  much  stress  upon  the  sec- 
ond jKiiiit  of  view.  According  to  chaji.  v.  20,  vi.  15, 
and  ver.  8  of  this  chajiter,  it  is,  however,  not  d(uii)t- 
ful  that  the  Apostle  has  here  in  mind  not  only  the 
knowledge  of  sin,  but  also  the  excitement  of  sin. 
But  he  does  not  have  it  in  mind  as  the  increase  of 
sin  in  itself,  but  as  the  promotion  of  its  manifesta- 
tion and  form  for  the  jtidgincnt. 

Except  through  the  law  [ti  /i  ij  <Un  v6- 
/loi'].  Olshaiisen:  "The  law  in  all  the  forms  of 
its  revelation."  Meyer  i)ro]ierly  rejects  this.  AU 
though  the  law  further  appeara  as  immanent  in  man, 
yet,  ever  since  the  Mosaic  law,  by  which  it  was 
awakened,  it  has  the  character  of  the  second,  threat- 
ening, and  deadly  law.  The  moral  law  of  nature, 
ideally  t'onci'ived,  is  one  with  hunnin  nature.  [The 
cit»li<)n  from  the  Decalogue,  immediately  following, 
shows  what  the  nfercncc  is. — H.J 

For  I  had  not  known  evil  desire  [  t  w  v  t  f 
Y  d  (I  i  71 1,  {)■  I'  /I  I  n  V  o  I'  X  -»]  tV  f  tr .  See  j'fxtiinl 
Notf  '.  rd(t  confirmatory,  not  =  for  example. 
On  T»,  see  Tholuck,  Stuart,  Winer,  p.  404.     It  \m 


CHAPTER   VII.    7-26. 


229 


untranslatable  in  English  ;  here  a  sign  of  close  loai- 
cal  connection.  On  the  distijiction  between  the 
verbs,  Bengel  says :  tyviov  majux  est,  ou)a  minus. 
Hinc  posteriux,  cu»i  ctiam  minor  f/radus  veffoiur,  ext 
in  increminto.  The  verb  is  strengthened  also,  in 
this  conditional  clause,  by  the  absence  of  civ,  which 
would  usually  be  inserted. — R  ]  We  cannot  trans- 
late this,  with  lleyer  :  "  For  I  would  not  have  know  n 
desire,"  &;c.  This  would  make  the  law  tbe  producer 
of  lust,  which  is  not  the  Apostle's  meanhig.  That 
lust  was  present  without  the  law,  he  had  sufficiently 
asserted  in  chaps,  i.  and  v.  But  now  he  has  become 
acquainted  with  the  corrupting  and  condemnatory 
character  of  wicked  lust,  under  the  prohibition  : 

Thou  shalt  not  covet  (Exod.  xx.  17),  [0!'/. 
i  n  (,  Q  V  I'  t^  G  t  V  <i .  On  the  proh.ibitory  future  of  tlie 
law,  as  quoted  in  the  New  Testament,  see  Winer,  p. 
296;  Buttmann,  N.  T.  Gramm.,  p.  221.— R.]  As 
this  was  to  him  the  principal  thing  in  the  law,  he 
thus  first  understood  the  inner  character  of  the  law 
and  the  inward  nature  of  sin  ;  but  thus  also  was  the 
propensity  to  evil  first  excited,  in  the  most  manifold 
way,  by  the  contradiction  in  him.  The  desire  was 
now  to  him  universally  and  decisively  the  principal 
and  decisive  thing.  The  first  view  of  the  inner  life, 
or  of  the  interior  of  life,  had  now  occurred.  Tho- 
luck  remarks,  that  Augustine  and  Thomas  Aquinas 
regarded  the  coxcupixcenUa  as  the  c/encrale  peccatum 
fronr  which  all  the  others  proceeded  ;  but  he  ob- 
serves, on  the  contrary,  that  the  ri  in  the  sentence 
suggests  rather  a  subordinate  relation.  But  is  the 
■J]  ()  f  n'  subordinated  or  separated  in  relation  to  the 
whole  sentence  ?  For  I  never  once  understood  the 
meaning  of  wicked  lust  without  the  law. 

To  what  period  of  Paul's  life  does  this  belong  ? 
To  the  time  of  his  childhood  (Origen) ;  or  of  his 
Pharisaical  blindness  ("  the  elder  Lutheran  and  Re- 
formed exegesis  down  to  Carpzov  ")  ?  Tholuck 
gives  reasons  for  the  latt-er.  According  to  Matt,  v., 
Pharisaism  was  narrowed  to  the  act.  He  cites  per- 
tinent expressions  of  Kimchi,  and  other  Jewish 
writers  (see  also  the  note,  p.  352).  In  Jarchi,  the 
explanation  of  the  Tenth  Commandment  is  wanting  ; 
in  Aben  Ezra  there  is  a  dwarfish  construction.  But 
then  he  raises  the  objection,  that  a  person  like  Paul 
must  have  earlier  come  to  a  knowledge  of  the  sin- 
fulness of  the  tnt.f)i'/ila.  But  the  knowledge  of  the 
sinfulness  of  the  tnvOi'ii'in  has  its  first  awakening 
significance,  when  wicked  lust  is  recognized  as  the 
root  of  supposed  good  works,  and  thereby  leads  to  a 
revolution  of  the  old  views  on  good  works  them- 
selves. Even  the  fanatic  rejects  not  only  wicked 
works  in  themselves,  but  also  their  root — wicked 
desires.  But  he  defines  wicked  desires  and  good 
affections  according  to  evil  and  good  works,  while 
the  awakened  one  begins  to  proceed  from  the  judg- 
ment on  inward  affections,  and  afterwards  to  define 
the  works.  Therefore  we  cannot  say,  that  o  v  x 
eyvmv  and  oi'x  -JjfVfn'  stand  here  merely  hypo- 
thetically  ;  the  question  as  to  the  subject  of  this  de- 
claration must  be  raised  first  in  ver.  9  (Tholuck). 
Vers.  7  and  9  denote  the  sanie  experience  through 
which  Paul,  as  the  representative  of  all  true  con- 
testants, passed  under  the  law :  ver.  7  on  the  side 
of  the  perception  of  sin,  ver.  9  on  the  side  of  the 
excitement  of  sin. 

Ver.  8.  But  sin.  The  rf  i  is,  indeed,  "  con- 
tinuative  "  (Meyer),  [not  adversative  (Webster  and 
Wilkinson). — R.],  yet  not  in  reference  to  the  his- 
tory of  the  development  of  the  sinful  experience, 
but  so  far  as  its  second  stage   is  giveti. — Sin,   /; 


a  /(  «  ^  T  (  a ;  that  is,  sin  inwardly  present  as  pecca- 
bility;  the  ImOv/ila,  as  it  was  just  shown  to  be  sin. 
[The  principle  of  sin  in  man,  as  in  ver.  7.  To  admit 
a  personification,  as  held  by  Fritzsche  and  Stuart,*  ia 
unnecessary  ;  to  refer  it  to  actual  sin  (Reiche),  is 
contrary  to  the  conte.\t.  Comp.  Olshausen,  Koppe, 
Philippi,  Hodge. — R.] 

Taking  occasion  [a(f  o^)  /j  ijv  <)b  lafloT- 
(T  a  ].  The  a.<io(iii>i  denotes  the  external  impulse 
or  occasion,  in  opposition  to  the  inner.  [Not  mirely 
opparhmity  ;  "  it  indicates  the  furnishing  the  mate- 
rial and  ground  ot  attack,  the  vhcreivith  and  v/i./nce 
to  attack  "  (Alford).  Its  position  is  emphatic,  though 
the  whole  phrase  is  probably  thus  rendered  piomi- 
nent. — R.]  The  /.a/ifidn-iv  in  /.aj-iuTaa,  as  free, 
moral  activity,  must  be  made  emphatic  here.  There- 
fore Reiche  says,  incorrectly:  it  receiv'd  occasion. 

By  the  commandment  ■wrought  in  me 
[(J'ta  r  7/ 1;  ivTo'/.Tji;  /.  arr^  (j  ydacxTO  iv  f/ioi']. 
The  ()i.a  t // <,■  tvro)..  must  be  connected  with 
y.ciTtj^iy.  (Riickert,  Tholuck,  Meyer),  and  not  with 
uqoij/i.  /.afi.  (Luther,  Olshausen,  ThohKk).-f 
The  sentence  contains  the  declaration  how  sin  took 
an  occasion  for  itself.  It  operated  just  by  (he  cm- 
mandment  [the  single  precept  referred  to  ver,  7], 
since  it  regarded  the  categorical  commandment 
as  a  hostile  power,  and  struggled  and  rebelled 
against  it. 

The  immediate  design  of  the  commandment  in 
itself  was  the  subjection  of  the  sinner;  but  the  pros- 
pective result  was  the  rising  of  sin,  and  this  result 
should  bring  sin  clearly  to  the  light  in  order  to  ca- 
pacitate  the  sinner  for  deliverance.  Meyer  saya 
ambiguously  :  "  Concupiscence  is  also  without  law  in 
man,  but  yet  it  is  not  concupiscence  for  what  is  for- 
bidden." Certainly  the  positive  prohibition  first  ap- 
pears with  the  law  ;  but  the  variance  of  the  s  nner 
with  the  iimer  law  of  life  is  already  perfectly  pres- 
ent. But  now  refractoriness  toward  the  poj^itive 
command  makes  its  appearance,  and  enhances  and 
consummates  sin. 

All  manner  of  evil  desire  \^7i  dcr  av  im,- 
i9  t'l // ^  a  r  ].  The  tmfliftia  was  already  present; 
but  it  now  first  unfoUled  and  extended  itself  to  the 
contrast.  Zwingli,  and  others,  interpret  this  as  the 
l-n-whdye  of  lust ;  Luther,  Calovius,  Philippi,  and 
others,  interpret  it  properly  as  the  exciietnehi  of  lust. 
Tholuck  :  "  According  to  ver.  11,  sin  deceives,  as  ia 
exhibited  in  the  history  of  the  fiill  of  man  ;  to  man 
every  thing  forbidden  appears  as  a  desirable  bless- 
ing ;  but  yet,  as  it  is  forbidden,  he  feels  that  his 
freedom  is  limited,  and  now  his  lust  rages  more  vio- 
lently, like  the  waves  against  the  dyke ;  "  see  1  Cor. 
XV.  46.  [Philippi  well  says  of  this  :  "  An  immova- 
bly certain  psychological  fact,  which  man  can  more 
easily  reason  away  and  dispute  away,  than  do 
away.''"'  \ — R.] 

*  [Stuart  makes  aixapria  here  almost  =  eyat  a-apxiKot 
(ver.  U  ff.).  If  an  equivalent  is  necessary,  o-apf  is  a 
preferable  one.  For  full,  almost  fmciful,  notes  on  the 
presumed  personification,  see  Wordsworth  in  loco. — R.] 

t  [The  proof  of  (his  connection  is,  that  iio  is  never 
joined  with  a0.  Aa/x0.  («  is  u^ual) ;  that  vers.  11,  13  seem 
to  require  it. — R.] 

t  [The  following  citations  from  (he  classics  suppcrt  the 
universality  of  the  principle  set  forth  in  this  verse  (comp. 
Prov.  ix.  17): 

C:ito  (Livy  xxxiv.  4)  :  Noh'le  codem  loco  exislimare, 
Quiritcs,  fulurmn  rem,  quo  fuit,  anlefjuum  lex  de  line  fer- 
rttiir.  El  homlmm  iviprobum  nrni  occusiire  tutuis  est,  (juam 
absnlvi,  el  luxun'a  nmi  viola  loleiohilior  essrt,  quani  eril  vunc, 
ipsis  vinculis,  siculfrrci  bcstia  irritnta,  deinde  emissa.  Sen- 
eca  (de  Chmevtni,  i.  23)  :  Parricidm  cum  lege  caperimt,  ei 
Hits  /acinus pcBiia  momlravit.    Horace  (Cirm.,  i.  3)  : 


2r,o 


THE   EPISTLE   OF   PAUL   TO   THE   ROMANS. 


For  •without  the  law  sin  is  dead  [yi<i(ji<; 
Y  cn>  V  6  fi  o  V  a  II  a  o  T  i  a  r  t  y.  P  u .  A  general 
proposition,  hence,  with  the  verb  omitteii.  Beza 
ami  Ktiehe  iucorioetly  supply  »]»> ;  so  E.  V.,  was. 
It  will  readily  be  understood  that  vtx(ta.  is  not 
used  ill  an  absolute,  but  relative  sense,  =  vopera- 
tiv  (i>T  unobserveii,  if  the  reference  t)e  lituited  to 
the  knowledge  of  sin).  Against  this  the  antithesis 
of  the  following  verse  may  be  urged. — R.]  Meyer, 
incorrectly :  "  not  activili/,  because  that  is  wanting 
whereby  it  can  lake  occasion  to  be  active."  Rather, 
ein  cannot  mature  in  its  root ;  it  cannot  come  to 
naocii-iauii;.  Man  has,  to  a  certain  extent,  laid  him- 
self to  rest  with  it  upon  a  lower  bestial  stage,  which 
is  apparently  nature  ;  the  commandnuMit  lirst  mani- 
fests the  demoniacal  ccjiitradictioii  of  this  stsige,  the 
actual  as  w^ell  as  the  foi-mal  contiadiction  to  God  and 
what  is  divine  (see  chap.  viii.  ',i).  It  is  incorrect  to 
limit  the  statement,  with  Chrysostom,  Calvin,  and 
others,  to  knowledge — it  vas  not  known  ;  or,  with 
Calovius,  to  the  conscience  (tcrroves  conscientice) ; 
or,  finally,  to  limit  the  idea  to  the  sphere  of  desire 
(Tholuck).  It  has  not  yet  ac()uired  its  most  real, 
false  lite,  in  the  7iai^tu[lu(n^.  Reference  must  here 
be  niadi;  to  the  antithesis :  Sin  was  de  id,  and  I  was 
alive.  [The  clauses,  however,  are  not  strictly  anti- 
thetical.—R.] 

Ver.  9,  Now  I  'Was  alive  without  the  law 
once  [  t  y  i<>  <^  i  t  J  m  r  /  ut  o  i  s  v  6  n  o  r  n  1)  T  i . 
For  (E.  V.)  is  incorrect ;  «)*  must  then  be  rendered 
but  or  now  (('.  e.,  moreover),  as  it  is  taken  to  be 
advernaline  or  coutinualive.  The  latter  is  to  be  pre- 
ferred, on  the  ground  that  this  clause  continues  a 
description  of  the  state  without  the  law,  while  the 
real  antithesis  occuis  in  the  following  clause,  for 
which  the  particle  but  should  be  reserved. — R.]  In 
order  to  delinc  the  sense,  we  must  apply  the  twofold 
antithesis.  Paul  could  only  have  lived  first  in  the 
sense  in  which  sin  was  dead  in  him,  and  also  be  dead 
in  the  sense  in  which  sin  was  alive  in  him. 

I  was  alive.  The  /  must  be  emphasized : 
"  the  whole  expression  is  pregnant  (Reiche,  on  the 
contrary,  merely  f]v) ". 

E.x))lanations :  1.  Vidibar  mihi  vivere  (Augus- 
tine, Erasmus  [IJarne.s],  and  others). 

2.  Securiis  erain  (\l. lanclithon,  Calvin,  Bengel 
[Hodge],  and  others),  I  lived  securely  as  a  Pharisee. 

',i.  Meyer  say.s,  to  the  c<jnirary  :  "  Paul  means 
the  life  of  childlike  innocence  which  is  free  from 
death  (ver.  10),  (coinp.  Winzcr,  p.  11;  Umbreit  in 
the  Studien  nnd  Kriliken,  l!S51,  p.  637  f.),  where 
(as  this  condition  of  life,  analogous  to  the  paradisa- 
ical state  of  our  first  parents,  was  the  cheerlul  ray 
of  his  earliest  ri-coUeetion)  the  law  had  not  yet  come 
to  knowledge,  the  moral  spontaneity  hail  not  yet 
occurred,  and  therefore  the  princi|)le  of  sin  was  still 
in  the  .slumber  of  death.  This  is  certainly  a  sititux 
gecnritatis,  but  not  an  immoral  one."  *     Tluduck  re- 


Aiidax  nmnin  prrpi-ti 

O'  ns  humiina  lUit  jtir  velilum  nrfaf. 

Ovid  (/<mor.,  2,  19,  3)  :  Qnml  licfl  ingrnlum  est,  qufid  nnn 
lic'l  acrius  urit ;  (3,  4)  ^ilimur  in  vf.litum  trmper  cupi- 
mxuniif  II r gala. 

To  this  may  well  l>o  iiddod  the  remiirk  of  Goethe  (in  a 
letter  to  Liiviller):  l  h  miirh'r.  ilns  El>  mnit  wnmun  d'H 
Mfiifhen  S'flr  griiitilrl  ixt  iiiid  wirrin  me  Ifb',  fin  F ilOiirr 
nriinf.ii,  wnriii  allf,  liiillifihrn  uiid  himmlifilini  Krdflf  diinh- 
eiiianilfr  gfti'tt  und  wirkin  (I  iiiiK'ht  call  the  clement,  out 
of  which  the  Hotil  of  man  in  fonncd  nnd  in  which  it  liven,  a 
pur(r:itoi-y,  in  which  all  hollixh  and  heavenly  poworn  con- 
nim-dlv  walk  and  work).  — U.) 

•  (U'ho  loKitimatc  result  of  this  inteiprotjition  is  Juwott's 
position :    "  Thu  atutc  which   the   A]ioi)tle  deucrlhcn  u  in 


minds  us  of  the  fact,  that  the  Jewish  child  was  not 
subject  to  the  law  until  his  thirteenth  year  ;  but  he 
accedes  (and  properly  so)  to  the  views  of  the  elder 
expositors.  Paul  first  perceived  the  deadly  sting  of 
the  law  when  he  was  forbidden  to  lust.  The  child, 
as  a  child,  has  childish  devices ;  1  Cor.  xiii.  ;  but  it 
can  here  come  into  consideration  only  so  far  as  ita 
religious  and  moral  consciousness  began  to  develop. 
But  the  status  sicuritittis  of  which  the  Apostle  here 
speaks,  first  begins  where  the  innocent  child's  .\tatiiM 
secnrilntis  ceases.  It  consists  in  the  sinful  life  being 
t;iken,  after  the  course  of  the  world,  as  naturalness 
instead  of  unnaturalness.  And  this  can  also  con- 
tinue under  the  law,  so  long  as  the  law  is  regarded  as 
something  external,  and  is  referred  to  mere  acticwi. 
The  Apostle  first  dates  the  true  existence  of  the  law 
for  man  from  the  miderstanding  of  the  Tlion  shnlt 
not  citfft.  As,  therefore,  Meyer  has  above  given  too 
Augustinian  a  view  oC  original  sinfulness,  so  he  hero 
construes  it  too  much  on  the  opposite  side. 

In  a  historical  reference,  this  text,  according  to 
Rom.  v.  13,  has  especially  in  view  the  period  from 
Adam  to  Moses.  It  has,  therelore,  even  Ijeen  said 
that  Paul  Irmx'  s|)eaks,  in  the  name  of  his  people,  of 
the  more  innocent  and  pure  life  of  the  patriarchs 
and  Israelites  before  the  gift  of  the  law  (Grotius, 
Laehmann,  Fritzsche,  and  others).  Undoubtedly, 
that  historical  sUige  is  included  ;  yet  here  the  ps)'- 
chological  point  of  view  predominates:  the  life  of 
the  individual  uj)  to  the  understanding  of  the  Mosaic 
expression.  Thou  shall  not  covet.  The  law  also 
points,  by  the  or/.  ini,0.,  beyond  itself;  as  the  sac- 
rificial ottering,  jS:c. 

Now  1  was  itlive.  This  means,  according  to  Mey- 
er, "Man,  during  the  state  of  death  {Tudlsein)  of 
the  principle  of  sin,  was  not  yet  subject  to  eternal 
death.  Certainly  he  became  subject  to  physical 
death  by  the  sin  of  Adam."  We  have  alrcifly  re- 
futed this  distinction.  The  condemned  are  first 
actualli/  subject  to  death  at  the  final  judgment ;  in 
principle,  the  children  of  Adam  are  subject  to  it  ; 
but  the  living  man,  of  whom  Paul  here  speak.s,  had 
not  yet  fallen  into  it,  in  the  pea-sonal  consciousness 
of  guilt  and  the  personal  entanglement  in  the  7Ta(jd- 

fjClITi^. 

But  when  the   commandment  came    [t  ).- 

.9  o  r  «■ /,  ,■  i)  I  T/",-  f  r  T  o /.  r  s  .  The  sjieeilic  com- 
mand, not  the  whole  law.  Cunu — /.  e.,  was  Ijroiight 
home  to  me.— At  this  point  the  older  Lutheran  and 
Calvinistic  expositors  found  a  reference  to  the  con- 
viction of  sin  immediately  preceiiing  conversion. 
But  the  use  of  ivTo/.i';  is  against  this,  as  well  as  the 
drift  of  the  whole  pas.sage.  A  writer,  so  loving  in 
his  repetition  of  the  name  of  Christ,  anil  in  diiect  ref- 
erence to  the  work  of  Christ,  would  not  have  left 
such  a  meaning  ol).seure.  Comp.  Philippi  on  the 
p.syehological  objections. — R.l  When  it-s  inwai'd 
character  became  known.     This  certainlv  ha.s  an  his> 


fomc  dcRTCo  ideal  and  im.ipinary."  There  is  no  such  time 
of  innocence,  hut  rather  a  time  of  m-niril;/,  "  liofore  tho 
deejicr  encrpics  of  the  monil  nature  are  ai-oused."  All  that 
penod,  in  the  iiiilividual  consciuUMnes.-;,  as  well  as  Recond:i» 
riiy  ill  tho  hixtoiicil  development  of  redemption,  is  i-cferred 
to  hy  iror<'.  Oruntii.jr,  ax  a  fair  excpesis  of  tlie  whole  con- 
text compels  us  to  do,  that  the  termination  ol  thi-  period 
was  not  lit  the  entrance  of  Christiiiii  knonledfje  of  the  'nw, 
we  m.iy  well  include  the  thou;;ht  urped  so  stro  ply  by  I'rofl 
Stuart :  "  I'.rfore  an  individual  has  a  ilistlnct  atnl  vivid  per- 
cojilion  of  the  nature  and  spirituiility  imd  extent  of  tho 
I>n'ine  I:iw,  he  is  less  :iciive  and  ilespenite  in  hiri  sin  Jind 
puilt  than  after  he  comes  to  such  a  knowledge."  'I'lie  view 
of  ver».  7,  S,  as  iiiolndinp;  excilenicut  uf  siu,  ammita  U8  i> 
advance  to  tldo  position.-  -R.) 


CHAPTER  VII.   7-25. 


231 


torical  application  to  the  gift  of  the  Mosaic  law 
(Reiche,  Fritzsche),  but  a  psychological  application 
to  the  designated  moments  of  introspection. 

Sin  sprang  into  life  [  r/  aftci^ria  av  iu-tj- 
afv\  The  explanation  of  the  av  i'Ctj  a  iv,  re- 
vived y.c  Riickert,  De  Wetto,  and  others.  Tho- 
luck :  *  "  The  ava.  stands,  as  elsewhere  in  com- 
pound words,  in  the  strengthened  meaning  of  sur- 
8iim ;  comj).  a.va/i).imt>  in  John  ix.  11,"  &c.),  is 
opposed  by  Meyer,  in  accordance  with  the  elder  ex- 
positors, and  by  Beugel  and  Philippi.  Bengel  makes 
this  explanation:  sicu(  vizerat,  cxin  per  Adaiinim 
intrnsxet  in  mundiim.  Certainly  the  a /t  u  (i  r  i  a 
became  perfectly  alive  first  in  Adam  as  7Ta^«,-;«o'tt-, 
and  then  as  such  vt/.(jd,  until  the  gift  of  the  Mosaic 
aw  again  brought  it  to  life.  But  this  is  also  repeat- 
ed psychologically  in  the  individual  so  far  as  the 
Adamic  7ia^ufja(Ti.i;  is  psychologically  reflected  more 
or  less  strongly  in  his  first  offences ;  thus  an  indi- 
vidual ).aft(}.  of  the  fall  takes  place,  but  then,  until 
the  awakening  light  of  the  law  penetrates  the  con- 
Bcience,  a  false  state  of  nature  enters,  connected 
•with  an  active  sense  of  life.  [Here,  too,  must  be 
included  both  the  knowledge  of  and  excitement  to 
sin. — R.] — Some  Codd.  read  ttz/fff,  because  the  ex- 
pression ava'C'i^v  did  not  occur  in  the  classical  Greek 
and  in  the  Septuagint.  Origen  thought  there  was 
here  a  reminder  of  a  pre-terrestrial  fall.  Cocceius  : 
evidcidius  apparuit. 

And  I  died  [lydt  Se  aniSarov'].  In  the 
same  sense  as  sin  became  alive,  did  the  sinner  die. 
That  is,  with  the  sense  of  conscious  [and  increasing] 
guilt,  the  sense  of  the  penalty  of  death  lias  made  its 
appearance.  Meyer  makes  an  inadequate  distinction 
here:  "  We  must  understand  neither  physical  nor 
spiritual  death  (Semler,  BiJhme,  Riickert,  and  oth- 
ers), but  eternal  deatii,  as  the  antithesis,  flq  Co// v, 
requires."  The  sense  of  the  penalty  of  death  makes 
no  distinction  of  tliis  kind.  [The  aorist  points  to  a 
definite  occurrence.  He  entered  into  a  certain  spirit- 
ual state,  which  he  calls  death.  Calvin  :  3Iors  pec- 
cali  vita  est  hominis  ;  sursum  vita  peccati  mors  homi- 
nis. — R.] 

Yer.  10.  And  the  commandment,  -wrhich 
was  unto  life,  the  same  was  found  by  me  to 
be  unto  death  [/.at  i  v  ^  i  0  tj  f.ni.  tj  ivTo/.ij 
ij  fii;  tv)  tj  V ,  avr  I]  f  Iq  &  dv  ar  ov  .  Ka  i 
introduces  the  verse  as  an  epexegesis  of  died,  with 
the  addition  of  a  new  circumstance  (Stuart). — R.] 
Supply  oi'ffa  before  unto  life.  In  what  sense  was 
the  coniniandment  thus  found  ?  The  commandment 
has  certainly  promised  life  to  the  one  observing  the 
law;  Lev.  xviii.  5;  Deut.  v.  33;  Matt.  xix.  17.  It 
is,  however,  easily  misunderstood  when  there  is  such 
a  general  explanation  as  this:  "  the  promise  of  life 
was  connected  with  the  observance  of  the  Mosaic 
commandments"  (Meyer).  The  sense  is  rather  from 
the  beginning,  that  tlie  kind  of  promise  is  condi- 
tional on  the  kind  of  observance.  External  obedi- 
ence has  also  only  an  external  promise,  or  a  promise 
of  what  is  external  (Exod.  xx.  12).  But  this  is,  for 
the  pious,  only  the  figure  of  a  higher  obediei»ce  and 
promise.  The  self-righteous  man,  on  the  other  hand, 
made  a  snare  for  himself  out  of  that  promise.  Now, 
In  the  highest  sense,  life  according  to  the  law  of  the 
Bpirit — that  is,  in  faith  (which  is  the  end  of  the  law) 
—results  in  the  !^oitj  aiwvi,o<;.     Only  the  transition 

♦  [So  Stnaxt :  "  to  gather  new  life,  to  show  addilional 
rigor,  not  merely  a  renewal  of  life  which  had  before  ex- 
isted." On  the  lexical  objeetions  to  this  view,  see  Philippi 
in  loco. — K,] 


from  death  to  life  lies  between  the  two.  It  is  jusi 
the  most  intense  effort  to  fulfil  the  law  that  results 
in  death.  This  is  a  circumstance  which  seems  to 
contradict  the  tti;  i^id/jv,  and  yet  it  does  not  contra/, 
diet  it,  but  is  quite  in  harmony  with  it. 

The  same.  We  liold  that,  according  to  tli« 
setise,  we  mu.st  read  avri]  (with  Lachnuu.n,  De 
Wette,  Philippi),  and  not  «  v  i  //,  with  Meyer  and 
Tiseliendorf  [Alford,  Tregelles].  For  the  law  haa 
only  temporarily  become  transformed,  as  the  same 
law  of  life,  into  a  law  of  death ;  it  has  not  perma- 
nently become  a  law  of  death.* 

Ver.  11.  For  sin,  &c.  [17  yaq  a/ja^ria, 
z.T./.  The  yd  (J  introduces  an  explanation  of  ver. 
10.  The  first  words  are  similar  to  ver.  8,  btt 
d lu  a Q  r  la  here  st.mds  emphatically  first.  The 
position  of  Sm  t^c  ivro/.T;i;  is  also  slightly  emphatic. 
— R.]  Not  tlie  commandment  in  itself  has  become 
a  commandment  unto  death  ;  sin  has  rather  made  it 
thus.  How  far  '?  tjin  took  occasion,  or  made  itself 
an  occasion.  That  it  took  it  of  the  commandment, 
is  assumed,  and  is  explained  by  what  follows.  Tiie 
following  /.cu  (>t'  uvT/^Cy  (See,  favors  the  connection 
of  the  () t  «  T  tj  i;  ivr  0  ).7j  i;  with  i%  rj  n  dr  r^a  i 
/I  f ,  deceived  me.  It  first  made  the  command- 
ment a  firovocaiion,  and  tlien  a  means  of  condemnor 
Hon.  Thus  what  applies  to  Satan,  that  he  was  first 
man's  tein/>  er,  and  then  his  accuser,  applies  likewise 
to  sin.  This  passage  calls  to  mind  tlie  serpent  in 
Paradise,  as  'I  Cor.  xi.  3.  But  in  what  did  the  de- 
ception of  sin  consist  ?  Pliilijipi :  "  Since  sin  made 
me  pervert  the  law,  in  which  I  thought  that  I  had  a 
guide  to  righteousness,  into  a  means  for  the  promo- 
tion of  unrighteousness."  f  Not  clear.  It  deceived 
me,  in  that  it  represented  the  law  to  me  as  a  limit 
which  seemed  to  separate  me  from  my  Imppiness. 
Behind  that  limit  it  charmed  me  to  transgression  by 
a  phantom  of  happiness.  Accordingly,  it  is  not 
satisfactory  to  explain  the  following  clause :  And 
by  it  slew  me  [x  at  J  t'  avx  tjc;  an  ixr  ( i- 
vtv^,  thus:  sin  gave  me  over  to  the  law,  kg  that  it 
sleic  me.  In  this  respect  sin  rather  falsified  the  law, 
since  it  represented  to  me  my  well-merited  death  as 
irrernidiable,  or  my  jitdge  as  my  enemy  (see  Gen. 
iii.  ;  Heb.  ii.  15;  1  John  iii.  20).  [^^  JBroiight  mt 
into  the  state  of  sin  and  misery,''''  already  referred  to 
in  ver.  10.  The  allusion  to  the  temptation  is  to 
be  admitted  here  also. — R.]  Tholuck  :  "  Decision 
of  Simeon  Ben  Lachish :  The  wifked  nature  of 
man  rises  every  day  against  him,  and  seeks  to  slay 
him  (Vitringa,  Obstrv.  Sacr.,  ii.  599) ;  also  by  the 
~~n  "i:^  is  denoted  the  angel  of  death." 

Ver.  12.  So  that  the  law  is  holy,  &c.  [(',')  a  re 
6  II  k  V  V  6  II  o  <;  d  y  I  0  <; ,  x.rJ..  The  6)  a  t  i  in- 
troduces the  result  of  the  whole   discussion,  vers. 


*  [It  is  more  difficult  than  import.nnt  to  decide  this 
point.  AvTi),  Jifc/;  this;  avrri,  ip.-a,  ilf  srune.  The  former, 
though  not  in  itself  so  emphatic,  here  takes  the  preceding 
Rubject,  this  very  iniiinuitidment,  giving  it  a  tragical  force 
(^o  Meyer  and  Philippi,  whom  Lange  cites  in  favor  of  the 
other  view).  The  ai  alogj'  of  vers.  15,  16,  19,  20  (touto)  ia 
against  Lange's  preference. — R.l 

t  [So  Iloilpe  :  "The  reference  is  not  to  the  promised 
joys  of  sin,  which  always  moclv  the  expectation  and  dis- 
appoint the  hopes,  but  rather  to  the  utter  failure  of  the 
law  to  d'l  what  he  expected  ftom  it."  This  view  consists 
with  the  assumption,  that  the  point  in  ex)ieriqprice  here 
reached  is  one  nccessaiilj'  and  immediately  preceding  con- 
version. Dr.  Hodae  dees  nnt  thus  assume,  yet  he  appeals 
to  Cliristian  experience  in  confirmation.  If  the  excitement 
to  sin  be  allowed  throughout  these  verses,  the  other  inter- 
pretation, adopted  by  Dr.  Lange,  is  preferable.  Com;... 
however,  a  beautiful  scttin.:  forth  of  thi-  first  view  in 
Neander,  PJinmung,  ii.  081  ((quoted  in  Tholuck). — R.] 


232 


THE   EPISTLE    OF   PAUL    TO   THE   ROMANS. 


7-11.  It  id  not  =  ergo,  yet  of  a  more  general  con- 
(•liK<ive  cliiuactor.  To  fiiv,  tlie  eorrespoiKling  di 
is  wantin  '.  Tlie  antithesis  we  should  expect,  ac- 
oiinliiig  to  Meyer,  is :  but  sin  bi-oiujht  me  to  death 
tUroniili  the  law,  which  was  good  in  itself.  This  is 
tlie  thoujrht  of  viT.  13  ;  but  iis  the  form  is  ehaiif;ecl, 
<)i  does  iH)t  appear. — K.]  Not  only  innocent  (Tho- 
luck),  but  also  absolutely  separated  from,  and  op- 
posed to,  sin.  And  this  applies  not  only  to  the  law 
in  jreiieral,  but  also  to  its  explanation  in  the  single 
coiiun.indiiK'nt. 

[And  the  commandment  holy  and  ju.st  and 
good,  /.ai  Ij  ivTo  /.  /;  u  y  i  a  r.ai  (V  i,/.aiu  xai 
ri  J'  ft  .9-  //.]  The  caininaiulincnt  is  first  holy  in  its 
origin  as  God's  commandment ;  secondly,  just,  as 
the  individual  determination  of  the  law  of  the  sys- 
tem lit  righte(>iisness  (Meyer:  *  "  rightly  constituted, 
just  as  it  should  be");  and  good — that  is,  not  in  the 
vague  sense  of  exollint  (.Meyer,  I'hilippi,  and  oth- 
ers), but  according  to  the  idea  of  what  is  good  : 
beneficial  promotion  of  life  in  itself,  in  spite  of  its 
working  of  death  in  me  ;  indeed,  even  by  its  work- 
ing of  death.  The  term  good  refers  to  the  blessed 
result  of  divine  sorrow,  and  to  the  gospel. f  The 
el.iborate  apology  for  the  c<nninandment  is  certainly 
(according  to  >Ieyer)  occasioned  l)y  the  fact  that  the 
IvTu/.ij  has  been  described  as  precisely  the  object  of 
sin,  in  ver.  7. 

Seconu  Pauaoraph  (ver.  13). 

The  Law  in  relation  to  the  Sinner, 

Yer.  13.  Did  then  that  which  ■was  good 
become  death  unto  me?  [V'o  orr  nyufn^v 
iuui  fyivfTO  &dvaTOi;;  Hcti  'J'lXtual  Aoie ''.J 
Thobick  :  "  The  fitv  in  ver.  12  prepared  for  the  an- 
tithesis fj  ()e  (iiiciiiTtct,  x.T./.  Yet  the  Apostle 
again  presents  his  thoughts  in  the  form  of  a  refuta- 
tion of  an  antagonistic  consequence.  The  ayuOov 
should  lead  us  to  expect  only  whol(?somc  fruits." 
Undoubtedly,  the  expression  ayaf)f'j  (ver.  12)  is  the 
new  proltlein  now  to  be  solved.  It  was  not  so  much 
to  be  wondered  at  that  the  commandment,  as  holy 
and  ju<t,  brought  ileath  ;  but  it  was  an  enigma  that 
it,  as  uy(i.l)i],  should  l)iiiig  forth  death.  The  expla- 
nation of  this  enigma  will  also  show  how  the  law 
has  brought  about  the  great  change  :  Through  Death 
to  Life  !  Was  that  which  is  good,  of  itself  ami  im- 
mediately, made  death  unto  me  ?  This  conclusion, 
again,  is  to  be  repelled  by  Let  it  not  be !  /< ;/ 
J' t  r  o  I  r  o  . 

But  sin  [a  ).).<<.  ij  A /i  a  (trio,  (supply  tfiol 
tyivfTo  flf<r«Tos').  So  all  modern  commentators. 
— K.  ]  Namely,  that  was  made  death  unto  me. 
"  The  construction  of  Luther,  Ilenmann,  Carpzov, 
&c.,  is  totally  wrong:  a).).a,  ti  «/irt(<T«'n  c)i.a  ror 
nyattov  iini,  y.nTf(>yn'lo/i{vt]  (iji')  Odvarov,  IVa 
(favTi  fiiinnrla  "  (Meyer);  so  also  the  Vulgate. 

That  it  might  appear  sin  [iva  (jiavTJ 
tt  ii  (III  T  in.  The  ii'rt  is  telle;  (/arfj,  6e  shown 
to  />«  (.\lford).  This  second  diinijTia  is  a  predi- 
cate ;    anarthrous,   therefore,   and   al.so  as  denoting 

•  [This  Ib  a  mifitiiko.  'Hio  quotation  is  from  I'hilippi. 
Ifeyor  s«y» ;  "  rifflit,  with  revpiM't  to  iti  nquireiiioiit,  which 
aoire.^poiKio  sxa  rtiy  with  hoUiioHs."— K.) 

t  (Bi'tiici-'l  is  uxccUrnt  :  S^incld,  jnfln,  b'inn,  rations, 
tmtfm  iffici'-n/it,  forma,  fiiiif.  His  seconii  view  id  Ipsh  em- 
act  :  re-/)"  til  ujjicioriim  rrga  Diiim,  ri>piiiu  pruTimi,  n- 
tl'iiin  iiiiliirir  niir.  Comp.  C:ilovlu-i  (in  Tlioluck  and  I'lii- 
lipin),  and  Thoodorot  (in  Alford).  — U.  | 


character. — R.]  This  was  therefore  the  most  iniiue* 
diate  de.*ign  of  the  law  :  Sin  should  upjtcir  as  siu 
(E])li.  v.  13  ;  (jen.  iii.  :  Adam,  where  ait  thou?). 

[Working  death  to  me,  by  that  which  ia 
good,  ()  I.  <i  T  0  1'  n  y  a  0  o  ?  /i  o  t  y.  a  t  t  (i  y  n  u  o  ' 
II  i  V  //  .9  «  vara  v.]  The  idea  of  perfectly  dis- 
closed sill  is  just  this  :  that  it  works  death  by  tho 
mi.sconstruction  and  abuse  of  what  is  good.  Thua 
the  law  is  first  made  to  serve  as  a  i)rovueation  to  sin 
unto  death  ;  second,  the  gospel  is  made  a  savor  of 
death  ;  and  third,  the  truth-  is  made  a  mighty  anti- 
christian  lie  (2  Thess.  ii.  11).  Tholuck  :  "The  na- 
ture of  sin  should  thereby  become  manifest,  that  it 
should  appear  as  something  which  makes  use  of 
what  is  even  good  as  a  means  of  ruin,  and  in  this 
manner  the  commandment  should  become  a  means 
of  exhibiting  sin  iii  all  the  more  liideous  light." 
Scholium  of  Matth.eus :  "  iV«  avTij  t«iT/;i'  i/.tyiri, 
rva  o/.tj  ri^f  iciiTt^i;  ni./.oiav  exxu/.i ti-)^."  In  addi- 
tion to  this,  these  pertinent  words :  "'/n  fact,  us  it 
is  the  sovereign  right  of  good  to  overrule  evil  results 
for  good,  so  is  it  ilie  curse  of  sin  to  pervert  the 
effects  of  what  is  good  to  evil.''''  Thus  an  emphasis 
rests  on  the  (Via  toT'  dyaO-ov,  for  which  rea- 
son  it  conies  first. 

Meyer  correctly  urges,  against  Reiche,  that  this 
'iva  is  telic,  in  opposition  to  the  eebatic  view.  Death 
was  already  present  before  the  law,  but  sin  completed 
it  by  the  law  ;  xar  t  (j  yu^o  n  iv  >i.  The  law  is 
not  sin;  sin  disclosed  itself  coni[)letely  as  sin  in 
making  what  is  good  a  means  of  evil. 

That  sin  through  the  commandment  might 
become  exceedingly  sinful  [  i  r  a  y  i  r  t;  t  nt 
y.  u  0 '  /'  TT  f  (*  />'  o  /  //  V  d  11  rt  i>T  <•>  /.  I)  ,•  !j  d  /(  a(j  T  i  a 
(Wet  T/;t,-  ivTo/.Tji;.  Parallel  clause  to  the  last,  of 
inerea.sed  force :  "Ob.serve  the  |)ithy,  shai|),  vividly 
compressed  sketch  of  the  dark  figure  "  (Meyer). — R.] 
K  a  I*)'  ('  n  f  (I  fio  /.  t)  V .  Frequentl v  used  bv  Pa«l ; 
2  Cor.  i.  8  ;  iv.  17  ;  Gal.  i.  13.  The  « ,<  «  ^/t  ... /.  d  <; 
appears  to  be  an  intimation  that  sin,  as  an  imaginary 
man,  should  be  driven  from  real  human  nature  to 
destruetion.  [The  telic  force  of  these  clauses  is  thus 
expanded  by  Dr.  Hodge  :  "  Such  is  the  design  of  the 
law,  so  far  as  the  salvation  of  sinners.  It  does  not 
prescribe  the  conditions  of  salvation.  Neither  is  the 
law  the  means  of  sanctification.  It  cannot  make  us 
holy.  On  the  contrary,  its  operation  is  to  excite  and 
exasperate  sin — to  ri'iider  its  power  more  dreadful 
and  destructive." — R.] 

[Exci:ii.si's  OS  Binr.ico-PsYciioi.oGiCAi.  Tk.rms.— 
The  exact  significance  of  the  terms  ort^/J  anJ 
nvtii/i  a,  as  used  so  fretpiently  by  the  Apostle  \\i 
this  and  the  eighth  chapters,  requires  earelul  consid- 
eration at  this  point.  Hut  such  a  discussion  must 
neces.sarily  be  preceded  by  some  remarks  on  the 
words,  (TiTifia,  V ''/'/,  7ivtv/ia,  body,  soul,  and 
spirit,  as  used  by  Paul  in  a  strictly  anthropological 
sense. 

I.  JS(7>fia,  HoDY.  This  term  is  readily  under- 
stood as  generally  used  in  the  New  Testament.  Still 
it  refers,  strictly  speaking,  to  the  bo.iilg  organism, 
and  has  a  psychological  meaning  almost  =  sense, 
the  .sensiitional  jiart  of  man's  nature.  As  'listin- 
guished  from  ffft((i  (in  its  physiological  .sense),  it 
means  the  organism,  of  which  rrri..;  is  the  material 
substance.  (/\(<»rts-  differs  frotn  adot,  in  not  in- 
cluding the  idea  of  an  organism.)  That  awiin  must 
not  be  restricted  to  the  material  body,  irrespective 
of  it.s  organism  and  vit^il  union  with  the  immaterial 
part  of  uiiui's  nature,  is  evident  from  the  uumeroui 


CHAPTER   VII.   7-25. 


233 


passages  (Rom.  xii.  5  ;  1  Cor.  vii.  2*7  ;  Epb.  i.  23  ; 
Col.  i.  18,  ic),  wlieie  the  Church  is  called  the  bodj' 
of  Chri-st.  This  expression  would  coiivcv  little  meau- 
iiig,  if  ff(o,«r<  had  not  this  psychological  sense.  No 
dithculty  arises  in  regard  to  this  term,  except  in  the 
interpretation  of  a  few  passages  which  seem  to  imply 
an  ethical  sense  ;  e.  o.,  Rom.  vi.  6  (q.  v.) ;  vii.  24  ; 
viii.  10,  lo  ;  Col.  ii.  11.  It  must  be  remarked,  that 
in  most  of  these  the  ethical  force  really  belongs  to 
sonie  attributive  word,  ao)/ia  bfing  in  itself  inditt'er- 
ent  We  may  explain  most  of  these  cases  by  giving 
the  word  a  figurative  sense,  t/ie  orgaitinyn  of  sin 
(Rom.  vi.  6;  vii.  24;  Col.  ii.  11),  analogous  to  (he 
old  titan  ;  or  by  admitting  a  reference  to  the  body  as 
the  chief  organ  of  the  manifestation  of  sin.  The 
term  ^  i  /  ;/ ,  members  (which  is  usually  associated 
with  a<7)fia,  rather  than  with  ad(Ji,  because  the  idea 
of  an  organism  is  more  prominent  in  the  former 
term),  must  be  interpreted  accordingly  (see  Col.  iii. 
5  ;  bthelwerk,  p.  64,  Amer.  ed.).  lu  any  case,  the 
thought  that  the  body  is  the  cliief  source  and  seat 
of  sin,  must  be  rejected  as  unseriptui-al,  unpauline, 
and  untrue.  We  must  also  avoid  a  dualislic  sunder- 
ing of  tJie  material  and  immaterial  in  man's  nature, 
n.  H'' v/rj ,  Soul.  This  term  is  from  i^'i'/m, 
to  breathe,  "to  blow,  and,  like  liiS3 ,  its  Hebrew 
equivalent,  originally  mean?  animal  life  (see  the  New 
Testament  usage,  especially  in  the  Gospels),  but,  like 
the  Hebrew  word,  it  also  is  frequently  referred  to 
the  whole  immaterial  part  of  man's  nature,  in  dis- 
tinction from  aotna.  By  synecdoche,  it  is  put  for 
the  whole  man,  in  enumeration  (Acts  ii.  41  :  about 
three  thousand  souls),  and  in  the  phrase,  nciaa 
il'i'Xfl,  ^''^'^il  xoul.  As  the  word  occurs  but  foui- 
times  in  the  Epistle  to  the  Romans — twice  in  the 
seuse  of  life,  and  twice  in  the  phrase,  ereri/  sotil — 
it  would  not  be  necessary  to  discuss  it  further,  did 
not  the  precise  meaning  of  nvtviia  depend  upon  a 
further  discrimination.  Twice  in  the  New  Testament 
(1  Thess.  V.  23  ;  Heb.  iv.  12)  the  word  is  distin- 
'guished  from  nvfr/ta.  As  both  passages  may  be  re- 
garded as  Pauline,  the  one  occurring  in  his  earliest 
written  Epistle,  and  the  other  in  an  Epistle  of  much 
later  date,  which  is  Pauline,  even  if  not  written  by 
Paul,  the  question  of  a  Pauline  trichotomy  cannot 
be  avoided.  The  fuller  discussion  will  be  found 
under  nvfTtia,  below,  but  here  we  nmst  define  xfi/t} 
more  closely.  Although  it  is  true  that  the  term  does 
mean  the  animal  soul,  it  is  very  doubtful  whether  it 
means  simply  this  in  the  two  passages  above  referred 
to.  If  "  animal  soul "  be  restricted  to  the  principle  of 
life,  then  mTi/ia,  in  such  a  connection,  should  include 
this;  and  a  wish  that  the  principle  of  life  be  "  pre- 
lerved  blameless,"  is  singular,  to  say  the  least.  If, 
kowever,  "animal  soul"  be  taken  to  include  more  than 
this — viz.,  what  we  share  with  the  brutes — then  it  is 
highly  probable  that  this  largely  includes  the  intel- 
lectual part  of  our  nature,  and  i/'i/y^  must  then  be 
=  the  scat  of  the  Understanding,  in  distinction  from 
the  Reason.  That  some  wide  sense  is  involved,  is 
evident  both  from  1  Cor.  xv.  45,  "  the  first  Adam 
was  made  a  living  soul,"  and  from  1  Cor.  ii.  14, 
where  the  adjective  ^•v/i,y.6(i  undoubtedly  includes 
the  intellectual  part  of  man's  nature.  In  both  these 
case,'!  the  antithesis  is  nvf'iia.  in  the  ethical  sense  ; 
hence  the  greater  necessity  for  enlarging  the  idea  of 
V'i'//y.*     Passing  over  many  distinctions  which  have 


*  [Akin  to  the  view  under  disouseion  is  that  of  Goschcl : 
"that  the  soul  proceeds  at  once  from  body  and  spn-it  to 
Unite  thti  two '"    This  contradicts,  or,  at  least,  confuses  the 


been  made,  we  consider  the  view  of  Olshausen,  who 
makes  t/c///  the  centre  of  our  personality,  tiie  battle- 
field of  the  flesh  and  human  spirit.  In  this  view, 
also,  auifi  and  aiiifia  are  almost  identical,  thougt 
he  admits  that,  in  the  unrenewed  man,  the  i/''^'/  is 
under  the  donunion  of  the  ca^jS.  It  exch  des  the 
I'oTs  from  tlie  U't'/i'j,  making  it  tiie  organ  of  activity 
for  the  human  spirit.  This  view  still  restricts  V^l' 
too  much,  even  admitting  the  trichotomy.*  It  con< 
fuses  psychological  and  ethical  terms.  It  leans 
toward  the  error  which  makes  the  body  the  source 
of  sin,  wliile,  on  the  other  hand,  it  excludes  the 
human  spirit  from  the  dominion  of  sin  (and  its 
organ,  the  roT.,).  It  cannot  be  justified  by  Paul's 
language,  for  the  very  passages  which  indicate  a 
trichotomy  imply  the  sinfulness  of  the  human  spirit, 
while  it  is  altogether  unpauline,  as  already  remarked, 
to  refer  sin  to  the  body  as  its  source.  The  use  of 
the  word  ^■v/i/.6c,  as  quoted  above,  is  equally  op- 
posed to  this  view,  which  probably  giows  out  of  the 
attempt  to  find  in  i/''7'/  and  nvir/ia,  terms  analo- 
gous to  the  Understanding  and  Reason.  AVe  there* 
fore  object  to  this  view,  and  claim  a  still  wider  sense 
for  t;'l7^/.  How  much  can  be  claimed  for  it,  will 
appear  from  what  follows. 

III.  Hviv/ia,  Spirit.  This  term,  from  nvtw, 
to  blow,  to  breathe,  means  (like  the  Hebrew  n!l"i ) 
6rfrt//i,  then  wind,  then  anima,  lastly  animus,  spirit, 
in  all  the  various  meanings  we  give  that  word.  It 
must  first  be  discussed  in  its  strictly  psychological 
meaning. 

A.  Besides  the  secondary  meaning,  temptr,  dis- 
position, it  is  used  by  most  of  the  New  Testament 
writers  to  denote  man's  immaterial  nature,  including, 
together  with  o-(7)/ia  (Kom.  viii.  10;  1  Cor.  vi.  20;  ( 
vii.  o4),  and  also  with  aafji  (2  Cor.  vii.  1  ;  Col.  ii. 
6),  the  wliole  man.  In  the  phrase,  "gave  up  tiie 
ghost,"  it  is  doubtful  whetlier  it  means  the  wliole 
immaterial  nature,  or  simply  life  ;  in  Luke  xxiii. 
46  ;  Acts  vii.  59,  the  former  seems  to  be  the  mean- 
ing. But  there  are  a  number  of  passages  where  the 
exact  signification  turns  on  the  previous  question : 
Do  the  Scriptures  assume  or  teach  a  trichotomy  in 
human  nature  ? — that  man  is  a  unity  made  up  of 
body,  soul,  and  spirit  ?  It  is  essential  to  the  proper 
understanding  of  chaps,  vii.  and  viii.  that  this  ques- 
tion be  discussed. f 

1.  First  of  all,  it  must  be  admitted  as  a  fact  that 
the  Scriptures  recognize  the  dualism  of  spirit  and 
matter,  and  that  man  is  both  material  and  immaterial, 
without  any  teiiium  quid,  which  is  neither  material  nor 
immaterial.  The  presumption,  then,  is  against  the 
trichotomy,  so  far  as  it  would  ignore  this  fact.  The 
presumption  is  also  against  any  view  which  classes 
soul  under  the  material  part  of  the  complex  nature, 
since  both  soul  and  spirit  are  used  to  include  the 
whole  immaterial  part  of  man. 

On  the  other  hand,  Plato  and  Aristotle  undoubt- 


immateriality  of  the  soul,  and  makes  a  living  body  ante- 
cf  dent  thereto.  Hegeliani?ni  regards  the  soul  as  only  the 
band  that  coinects  body  and  spiiit.— E.] 

*  [Against  so  limited  a  view  of  >^vx^,  Fee  Tliohick,  p. 
302,  who  includes  under  it  the  vov<;  and  iata  avOpioiroi. 
Camp.  IreniBus,  c.  hxref.,  v.  304. — R.] 

t  [On  the  trichotomy,  see  Delitzs-ch,  Blhl.  P-ych.,  pp. 
84-9S ;  Olshausen,  Romons,  pp.  271,  Tii,  2d  ed. ;  De  nati/rm 
hum.trirhr,i,min,  &c.,  Op'iscc.  Thiol.,  Berlin,  1834,  pp.  143 
ff. ;  Me^sner,  Die  Lfhrc  dis  Apos'd,  Leipzig,  1856,  p.  207,- 
Bishop  EUicott,  Srvum  on  thf  Destiny  of  the  Citation , 
Kotes  on  1  Thess.  v.  23;  Lange's  Cnmm.  on  Onie.<is,  pjj.  212 
f.,  28.5  f  ;  Tholuck,  HomanK,  pp.  288-30.' ;  J.  B.  Heard,  '//i- 
piirtilp  Xiiiuie  of  Mini.  2d  ed.,  Edinb.,  1868;  Lange,  Dog' 
mattk,  pp.  307,  1243.— E.] 


2a4 


THE   EPISTLE   OF   PAUL   TCV^HE   ROMANS. 


edly  teld  that  there  was  a  trichotomy  (for  their 
views,  see  Delitzseh,  p.  'J'.i ;  Eng.  od.  p.  212).  This 
fact  may  be  used  to  explain  1  Thess.  v,  23  as  popu- 
lar language,  but  "  we  must  needs  turn  to  the  Holy 
Seriptures,  and  accept  without  prejudice  what  it 
(inswei's  to  us,  be  it  Platonic  or  anti-Platonic." 
Some  such  view  was  held  by  Origeii,  by  the  Apolli- 
narians  and  semi-Pelagians.  All  these,  like  the  mod- 
ern rationalistic  notions  on  the  subject,  were  extenu- 
ations of  human  corruption.  Vain  speculations  on 
the  subject  are  abundant,  but  this  should  not  be  to 
the  prejudice  of  truth.* 

Turning  to  1  Thess.  v.  23,  we  find  a  distinct  as- 
sumption of  a  tripartite  nature  in  man,  all  the  more 
Weighty  because  it  is  not  in  didactic  form.  To  say 
that  this  is  merely  popular  language,  does  not  meet 
the  CiU-*e.  For,  while  it  may  be  said  that  Paul  does 
not  profess  to  teach  metaphysics,  the  question  then 
recurs :  Was  the  popular  language  of  that  day  cor- 
rect, or  that  of  another  age  ?  Besides,  it  is  a  hazard- 
ous method  of  dealing  with  a  writer  so  uncommonly 
exact,  and  with  a  book  which  concerns  itself  with 
human  salvation.  Experience  has  proven  how  large- 
ly the  ditfusion  and  accei)tance  of  biblical  truth  are 
depcudeiit  on  correct  anthropological  views.  If  we 
believe  that  Paul  chose  his  words  wittingly,  raucli 
more,  if  we  hold  them  to  be  inspired,  this  text,  taken 
by  itself,  assumes  ''  that  in  the  original  structure  of 
man  there  is  something — yet  remaining,  needing 
and  capable  of  saucdjicalion — corresponding  to  the 
three  terms,  bod;/,  soul,  and  spirit."  f  The  same  is 
implied  in  Ileb.  iv.  12. 

Leaving  these  passages,  we  find  little  else  in  the 
New  Testament  to  support  this  view.  Of  course, 
when  accepted,  it  must  modify  to  some  extent  the 
signiHcaliou  given  to  these  terms  in  other  places  ; 
but  there  is  no  other  passage  in  the  New  Testament 
which  could  be  relied  on  to  prove  the  trichotomy 
were  these  absent.  Ilence  we  infer  that  the  distinc- 
tion, if  real,  is  not  of  such  importance  as  luis  been 
thought,  and  cannot  be  made  the  basis  of  the  start- 
ling propositions  which  human  speculation  has  de- 
duced from  it.  This  does  not  deny  that,  from  other 
sources,  the  trichotomy  may  receive  important  sup- 
port ;  it  refers  simply  to  the  place  it  shouhl  take  in 
biblical  psychology.  Judging  from  the  rare  allu- 
sions to  it,  the  prevailing  dichotondc  tone  of  the 
Scriptures,  we  infer  that,  w  iiile  it  may  be  necessary,  in 
order  to  explain  these  i)as.sages,  to  accept  a  trichoto- 
my, the  advantages  of  so  doing  are  incidental,  rather 
than  of  the  first  moment.:]: 

2.  Admitting  that  there  U  a  tripartite  nature  in 
man,  the  main  difheulty  is  a  precise  definition  of 
these  three  parts.  Here  the  German  authors  are  in 
a  very  IJabel  of  confusion.  For  the  sake  of  clear- 
ness, we  first  of  all  reject 

(a.)  All  views  of  the  human  spirit  which  make 
it  the  real  soul  over  against  a  brute  soul,  termed 
V'l//;,  for  the  reasons  given  above  under  II. 

(/>.)  All  views  of  the  human  spirit  which  make 
Jt    a    higher  un/allen  part  of  man's   nature,   over 

*  [The  anthropology  of  Swodpn))oriir  nssiimcs  a  trinity 
rither  than  a  trichotomy,  hikI  ly  bis  doctrine  of  corrc- 
B)>oiiiliii<cs,  tjiiril  seems  to  lodf  its  renl  .sn^nilicance.— P-.) 

t  I  It  must  bo  noted  bow  this  juiKsiiifo  iiasunius  (1.),  tlmt 
the  spirit  needs  Hanctificiition  ;  (2.)  that  body  and  soiil  are 
iiKo  to  bi-  jireservcd  for  (iod  ;  thus  KuardinK  ntniiiist  I'ela- 
KiHiiinni  and  rutionalixm  on  tbo  ono  hand,  and  aiiccticisin 
uiid  inystlcisMi  on  tlic  otlier.— 11.1 

1  [Any  artniMK.-iit  from  the  anuloity  of  tbo  Trinity  must 
bo  lett  out  of  view,  •incc  It  can  prove  nntlilnK.  thouRh  it 
may  )>e  pluasin^  to  ttomu  mindu  to  traoe  auch  an  analogy. 


against  a  soul  under  the  power  of  the  ad(Ji.  Tlii^ 
which  is  the  view  of  Olshausen,  and,  with  modi- 
fications, of  many  others,  is  not  borne  out  by  the 
anthropology  of  .Scripture ;  is  coutradicteJ  by  the 
very  p;Lssages  which  alone  can  establish  a  trichoto- 
my, and  is  in  the  very  face  of  2  Cur.  vii.  1,  where 
"  filthiness,"  noha/io^,  defilement,  stain,  is  attrib. 
uted  to  the  human  spirit.  Did  such  an  unfallen 
spirit,  in  any  sense,  exist  in  man,  we  might  expect 
that  term  to  be  used  in  this  chapter  instead  of  voi-i 
and  6  tail)  cii'0^(jw7ioi;,  whatever  the  reference  may 
be.  Jul.  Miiller  (i.  p.  450)  well  remarks:  ''  Jlvtvfia 
in  this  anthropological  sense  is  itself  exposed  to  pol- 
lution (2  Cor.  vii.  1),  and  needs  sanctification  and 
cleansing  just  as  xfi/r'i  and  ai)i/<a  (1  Thess.  v.  23  ; 
1  Cor.  vii.  34)  ;  this  spiritual  sphere  of  life  is  the 
one  which,  in  the  work  of  regeneration,  most  needs 
to  be  renewed  (Eph.  iv.  23,  compared  with  Rom.  xii. 
2).  The  notion  that  man's  spirit  cannot  be  de- 
praved— that  it  is  only  limited  in  its  activity  from 
without — and  that  sin  is  the  consecpience  of  this 
limitation,  cannot  be  attributed  to  the  Apostle." 
This  excludes,  also,  the  view  of  SchiJberlein  and 
Hofmann  (since  given  up  by  him),  that  the  third 
term  of  the  trichotomy  is  "  the  Spirit  of  God  imma- 
nent in  the  soul." 

(c.)  Rut  this  would  also  exclude  the  view  of 
Philippi,  Sehmid  (ap|)arently  of  Tholuck,  Rotiians, 
p.  301),  that  the  third  term  is  the  pneumatic  nature  "■ 
imputed  to  the  believer  at  regeneration.  If  it  be 
this,  how,  can  it  need  sanctification  V  Besides,  this  . 
involves  the  theory  of  regeneration,  which  makes  it 
the  impartiition  of  an  entirely  new  nature,  not  in 
soul  and  body,  but  in  addition  to  soul  and  body,  ns 
the  third  term  in  trie  complex  being.  This  view 
cannot  satisfactorily  explain  the  trichotomy  in  1 
Tlie.ss.  V.  23  ;  Ileb.  iv.  12. 

(J.)  There  remains,  then,  this  view,  which  meets 
all  the  re((uirements  of  exegesis:  that  man  has  a 
body  in  vital  connection  with  his  soul,  which  lat- 
ter term  includes  all  the  powers  of  mind  and  ■ 
heart,  having  its  their  object  the  world  and  self 
(hence  including  ru7%  and  6  'inoi  «i-i)(jei/To,-  in  this 
chapter).  That,  besides,  he  has,  in  his  unity  of 
nature,  a  sjiirit  which  is  of  the  SiUne  nature  as 
the  soul,  of  a  higher  capacity,  yet  not  se|)arated  ^ 
or  sei)arable  from  it.  This  spirit  is  the  capacity 
for  God,  God-consciousness  (Heard) ;  but  in  nnm's 
present  condition  it  is  dormant,  virtually  dead  in 
its  depravity,  needing  the  jiower  of  the  Holy  Spirit 
to  renew  it.  After  such  renewal  it  becomes  Sfnrit 
in  the  sense  intended  in  the  j>roposition :  "  that 
which  is  born  of  the  Spirit  is  Sjiirit  "  (John  iii.  6) 
This  seems  to  be,  in  substance,  the  view  of  Miiller, 
Delit/sch,  and  Heard.*  It  admits  a  dichotomy,  and 
also  a  trichotomy  ;  claims  that  the  .soul  is  spiritual 
rather  than  material ;  that  there  is  no  gulf  between 
soul  and  s]tirit ;  that  the  human  spirit  is  powerless 
for  good,  yet  that  here,  where  depravity  is  really 
most  terrible,  redemption  l>egins.  "  In  consequence 
of  sin,  the  human  si)irit  is  absorbed  into  soul  and 

•  [Of  course,  tlio  term  will  be  ffiven  a  more  or  less  ex- 
tended mciiiiinn  liy  dillcrent  aiitliors;  but  if  the  two  poci 
tioiiH  bi'  held  fust  :  (I.)  That  this  spirit  is  the  ]i(iiiit  of  con- 
tact with  l)ivin'i  influences;  (2.)  That  it,  too,  has  been 
depnived,  nil  erroneous  conclusions  will  be  avoided.  Dr. 
Lanjfo  (fifni-sit,  p.  2i:!)  goems  to  coincide  with  the  view 
here  |iresenled  :  "  It  must  be  held  fast,  that  man  cojlld 
not  receive  the  Sjiiiit  of  (Iod,  if  he  \ver»>  not  himsell 
a  spiritual  beinfr ;  yet  it  is  a  supposition  of  the  Scrip* 
tare,  that,  gince  the  fiill,  the  spiritual  nature  U  Imund 
in  the  natural  man,  and  dues  not  cumo  to  Its  actuality." 
-K.J 


CHAPTER  YII.   7-25. 


23S 


fleah,  and  man,  who  ought  to  pass  over  from  the 
position  of  the  xin/ij  t(>>aa  into  the  position  of  the 
ni'frfia  KiooTTotorv,  has  become,  instead  of  nvtviia- 
Ti,/.6i,  a  being  x^'v/iy.oi;  and  aa^xt/.tli,' ;  and  further, 
just  for  that  reason,  because  tlie  spirit  stands  in  im- 
mediate causal  relation  to  God,  all  the  Divine  opera- 
tions having  redemption  in  view,  address  themselves 
first  of  all  to  the  nvn^fia^  and  thence  first  attain  to 
the  ^'f/i'i  ;  for  when  God  manifests  himself,  He  ap- 
I)cals  to  the  spirit  of  man  "  {Bibl.  Psych.,  p.  9(i, 
Eng.  ed.,  p.  117).  It  may  be  urged  that  this  pre- 
sents no  real  distinction  ;  I  reply,  that  it  is  not 
claimed  that  the  distinction  is  of  essential  impor- 
tance. But  as  Paul  uses  the  word  nvfviia  in  prefer- 
ence to  V'/'/,  when  he  speaks  of  man's  immaterial 
nature,  especially  as  regenerated  by  the  Spirit  of 
God,  there  seems  to  be  no  other  way  of  accounting 
for  it  except  on  this  view.  (The  objections  to  that 
of  Philippi  have  been  considered  above.)  Delitzsch 
Tery  properly  remarks :  "  Should  any  prefer  to 
Bay,  that  the  Apostle,  by  nvfviia  and  i/t///,  is 
distinguishing  the  internal  condition  of  man's  life, 
and  especially  of  the  Christian's  life,  in  respect  of 
two  several  relations,  even  this  would  not  be  false." 
It  is,  indeed,  the  nearest  expression  of  the  truth  ; 
for  tlie  human  spirit  is  not  brought  into  any  special 
prominence  by  Paul,  save  as  in  a  given  relation  in 
the  Christian's  life.  Hence  we  have  a  second  mean- 
ing of  nvH/ia. 

B.  The  human  spirit  as  acted  upon  hy  the  Holy 
Spirit,  and  thus  becoming  the  seat  of  those  Divine 
impulses,  which  are  the  means  of  redeeming  the 
whole  man.  Of  course,  as  opinions  differ  respecting 
the  first  meaning,  they  will  vary  from  our  definition. 
Piiilippi  makes  this  identical  with  A,  while  others 
■would  claim  that  we  should  distinguish  here  rather  a 
new  principle  of  life  (Lange),  than  a  part  of  our  re- 
newed nature.  Dr.  Lange  seems  to  prefer  this  mean- 
ing throughout  ciiap.  viii.  There,  however,  the 
reference  seems  to  be  mainly  to  the  Holy  Spirit,  the 
objective  agent.  In  vers.  10,  16,  the  subjective 
meaning  is  undoubtedly  the  correct  one,  as  in  John 
iii.  6  ;  iv.  2.3,  24  (so  Rom.  ii.  29,  see  p.  115,  where 
Dr.  Lange  gives  a  different  view),  1  Cor.  vi.  17  ; 
Phil.  iii.  3.  In  many  other  passages  this  meaning  is 
implied,  as  indeed  it  is  even  in  1  Thess.  v.  23, 
though  this  cannot  be  explained  satisfactorily,  with- 
out presupposing  a  h\iman  spirit  antecedent  to  re- 
generation. 

C.  The  most  common  use  of  the  term  is  obvious- 
ly the  strictly  theological  one :  the  Holy  Spirit. 
Opinions  vary  as  to  the  propriety  of  this  meaning  in 
certain  passages.  No  definite  rule  can  be  laid  down. 
The  absence  of  the  article  is  by  no  means  a  certain  in- 
dication that  the  reference  is  subjective  (against  Har- 
less).  The  reason  for  preferring  this  meaning,  rath- 
er than  "  spiritual  life-principle  "  (Lange),  in  chap. 
viii.,  is  that,  in  ver.  2,  the  Holy  Spirit  is  undoubtedly 
referred  to,  over  against  sin  and  death.  When,  then, 
ffdfji  afterwards  occurs  as  the  antithesis  to  nvfv/ia, 
there  is  still  more  reason  for  taking  the  latter  term 
as  the  Holy  Spirit,  since  the  ad(>i  is,  as  it  were,  per- 
.onified  and  externalized,  and  the  correct  antitlieti- 
•al  term  must  be  an  objective  agent.     We  can  thus 

far  more  definitely  fix  the  meaning  of  ira^i,  since  to 
admit  any  subjective  antithesis,  compels  us  to  admit 
also  some  remnant  of  unfallen  nature  in  the  subject, 
for  which  the  use  of  the  word  nvtvfta.  in  the  New 
Testament  gives  no  ground  whatever. 

IV.    ^dtJi,   Flesh.     This  terra  is  used  by  the 


LXX.  to  translate  the  Hebrew  word  "lilJS.  Thii 
Hebrew  word,  in  its  simplest  meaning,  is  applied  to 
the  material  substance  of  the  body,  then  occasionally 
to  the  human  body  itself.  Out  of  this  grows  the 
application  to  all  terrestrial  beings  who  possess  sen- 
sational life.  But  a  more  frequent  use  is  in  the 
sense  of  human  nature,  with  the  personal  life  attached 
to  it  (Gen.  vi.  12  ;  Deut.  v.  26  ;  Ps.  Ixxvih.  39  ; 
cxliv.  21  ;  Isa.  xlix.  26  ;  Ixvi.  16,  23,  24,  and  in 
numerous  other  passages).  In  Deut.  v.  26  ;  Isa. 
xxxi.  3  ;  Jer.  xvii.  5  ;  P».  Ivi.  5,  human  nature  is 
contrasted  with  God,  His  Spirit,  eternity,  and  om- 
nipotence, and  the  more  prominent  thought  is  there- 
fore  "  that  of  the  weakness,  the  frailty,  the  transito- 
riness  of  all  earthly  existence "  (J.  Miiller).  We 
reach,  then,  this  sense  :  "  Man  with  the  adjunct  no- 
tion of  frailty  "  (Tholuck).  There  does  not  appear, 
however,  any  distinct  ethical  sense,  still  less  any  im- 
plication  that  man's  sensuous  nature  is  the  seat  of 
sin,  or  of  opposition  to  his  spirit. 

1.  Passing  to  the  New  Testament,  we  find  also 
the  narrower  physiological  meaning  (1  Cor.  xv.  39  ; 
Eph.  V.  29  ;  in  the  phrase,  "  flesh  and  blood,"  Matt, 
xvi.  17;  1  Cor.  xv.  50;  Gal.  i.  16;  Eph.  vi.  12).  It 
is  also  used  as  =  body,  the  sensational  part  of  man's 
nature,  in  Rom.  ii.  18  ;  1  Cor.  v.  5  ;  vii.  28  ;  2  Cor. 
iv.  11  ;  vii.  1,  5  ;  xii.  7,  &c.,  the  antithesis  being 
spirit,  or  the  immaterial  part  of  man's  nature,  never, 
however,  with  a  distinctly  ethical  import.  The  pre- 
vailing use  of  the  word  in  the  New  Testament  un- 
doubtedly is,  that  which  corresponds  with  the  wider 
meaning  of  "iw3,  human  nature,  sometimes,  as 
Miiller  holds,  with  a  reference  to  the  earthly  life  and 
relations  (Gal.  ii.  20  ;  2  Cor.  x.  3  ;  Phil.  i.  22,  24 ; 
Col.  i.  22  ;  Eph.  ii.  15,  and  a  number  of  other  pas- 
sages, where  the  whole  earthly  side  of  man's  life  are 
contrasted  with  his  relation  to  God  in  Christ) ;  but 
also  in  the  sense  of  man,  with  the  idea  of  frailty 
more  or  less  apparent  (Rom.  iii.  20 ;  1  Cor.  i.  29  ; 
Gal.  ii.  16  ;  Acts  ii.  17,  which  is  a  citation  of  "11^3 
in  this  sense  ;  John  xvii.  2  ;  Luke  iii.  6).  Here  we 
must  class  those  passages  wliicli  refer  to  the  human 
nature  of  Christ :  John  i.  14  ;  Rom.  i.  3  ;  ix.  6  ;  * 
1  Tim.  iii.  16  ;  1  John  iv.  2  (comp.  p.  61).  This  list 
might  be  enlarged,  but  it  is  only  nece.*sary  to  estab- 
lish the  New  Testament  use  of  adiil  in  the  wide 
sense  of  the  Hebrew  equivalent.  Up  to  this  point 
we  find  no  distinct  ethical  meaning — only  a  basis 
for  it. 

2.  The  ethical  sense.  Our  inquiry  here  is  of  a 
twofold  nature.  A.  How  much  is  included  under 
the  term  ?     B.  What  is  its  precise  significance  ? 

A.  How  much  is  included  under  this  terra? 
(1.)  If  we  choose  a  few  passages  where  the  ethical 
sense  is  admitted  by  all  commentators,  such  as  Kom. 
viii.  4,  or  vii.  14  ((ia(>xn'oc) ;  viii.  8,  and  attempt  to 
substitute  "  l)ody,"  or  "  sensational  nature,"  for  ffn^^S, 
it  will  be  evident  that  such  a  meaning  does  not  at  all 
meet  the  case.  It  is  not  only  contrary  to  the  scrip- 
tural anthropology  throughout,  but  in  the  passages 
themselves  the  antitheses  are  not  of  a  character  to 
justify  it,  especially  in  view  of  the  wide  meaning  of 
ffaoj,  already  established.  (2.)  Nor  can  we  limit  it 
to  the  body  and  soul,  and  exclude  the  human  spiric. 
It  has  already  been  shown  how  little  prominence  is 
given  to  this  distinction  in  the  New  Testament,  ho  v 


*  [In  Bom.  viii.  3,  where  the  term  occurs  three  timesi 
it  is  highly  probable  that  in  the  last  two  cases  this  sensi 
is  the  more  correct  cue. — K.] 


236 


THE    ETISTLE   OF   PAUL    TO    THE   ROMANS. 


there  is  no  evidence  whiitcvtT  tliat  the  sph-it  is  not 
under  the  dominion  of  tlie  siircicul  tendency,  but 
that,  on  the  contrarv,  an  innnoral  tendency  is  im- 
plied.* Nor  will  this  view  liiid  support  in  the  use 
of  the  adjective  vc/moi,-  in  an  ethical  t^ense  as  = 
aauxixi')^;  lor  In  the  only  case  where  such  an  ethical 
sense  is  undoubted  (1  Cor.  ii.  14),  the  antithesis  is 
not  simply  :ifn/ictTi./.o^  (applied  to  spiritual  things 
and  persons  as  proceeding  from,  or  influenced  by, 
the  lioly  (ihost),  but  also  "  the  tilings  of  the  Spirit 
of  God."  (3.)  W'liatever  ctiiical  sense  is  to  be  at- 
tributed to  the  word  (T«^;,  must  include  tiie  whole 
uian,  body  and  soul,  or  l)ody,  soul,  and  spirit.  This 
agrees  witli  the  scriptural  delineations  of  human  na- 
ture, the  use  of  the  word  above  referred  to,  and  its 
usual  antithesis,  when  the  ethical  meaning  is  intend- 
ed, viz.,  tiie  Spirit  of  (lod;  never  the  human  spirit 
irrespective  of  the  uifluence  of  the  Spirit  of  God. 
This  auiitliesis  is  not  always  expressed,  but  it  is  in- 
variably implied.  (Comp.  Rom.  vii.  5  ;  viii.  3,  4  If. ; 
Gal.  iii.  3  ;  v.  IG,  17,  19,  24;  vi.  8  ;  Col.  ii.  18,  23.) 
If  it  be  chiimed  that,  in  Rom.  vii.  18,  25,  the  ex- 
pressed antithesis  is,  in  the  former  case,  the  inward 
man  (ver. '22),  then  we  reply,  that  tlie  real  antithesis 
is  stated  in  ver.  14  :  "  spiritual,"  "  carnal,"  and  that, 
under  the  influence  of  this  sjiiritual  law,  any  antago- 
nism to  the  tro^S  has  been  awakened.  Of  course, 
if  tiie  reference  to  tlie  regenerate  be  admitted,  tiiis 
objection  disappears.  So  in  ver.  25,  although  rors 
is  tlie  expressed  antithesis,  it  is  the  roTs  under  the 
influence  either  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  or  the  spiritual 
law.  ^tiiti,  in  its  ethical  sense,  therefore,  means, 
not  merely  an  earthly  or  fleshly  tendency,  or  direc- 
tion of  life,  but  the  whole  human  nature  ;  not,  as 
Olshauscn  thinks,  so  far  as  it  is  separated  from 
God,  but  as  it  is  separated  from  God,  body,  soul, 
and  spirit,  as  sinful.  Being  in  the  flesh,  is  being  in 
an  ungodly  state,  a  state  of  sin.  (This  view  has 
obtained  from  the  times  of  Augustine  until  now, 
among  the  mass  of  theologians.) 

B.  What,  then,  is  the  precise  significance  of  this 
ethical  sense  of  adui  V 

1.  Its  usual  antithesis  indicates  what  the  Scrip- 
ture doctrine  of  sin  so  strongly  asserts,  that  iiuman 
nature,  thus  described,  has  become  alienated  from 
God.  As  love  to  (iod  is  the  only  true  moral  ini- 
puLse,  apostasy  from  God  is  sin,  and  the  natural,  car- 
nal condition,  is  thus  to  be  regarded.  The  Deea-  i 
logue,  lioiri.  i.  5,  are  sulficient  t(j  support  this  posi- 
tion.  In  the  law,  holy,  just,  and  good,  love  to  God 
is  tiie  chief  requiuemeiit ;  in  Rom.  i.  21,  wilful  rejec- 
tion of  God  is  described  as  the  seed  of  all  the  vices, 
subsetiueiitly  catalogued,  ending  in  the  most  fearful 
sensual  excesses;  in  Rom.  v.  12-21,  sin  is  described 
as  entering  tlirough  one  man,  tlirough  his  act  of  dis- 
ot)edienee,  and  this  is  the  immediate  cause  of  the 
carnal  condition  of  humanity.  Yet  this  does  not 
exhaust  the  meaning ;  it  is  rather  its  negative  ex- 
pression. 

2.  The  positive  principle  of  sin  and  the  ruling 
principle  of  the  flesh  is  undoubtedly  xclfinhncuSy  for, 
God  being  rejected,  some  personal  object  is  re(|uire(l 
by  the  human  personality.  It  is  found  in  self;  its 
interests  become  paramount.  This  is  not,  however, 
very  priuuineiit  in  the  ethical  term  under  eonsidera- 
tion,  bi't  must  be  assumed  in  order  to  reach  the  fur- 
ther idea  which  it  involves. 


•  [Comp.  Drlitsscli,  Bib.  Psyrh.,  pp.  M\  t.,  Enpr.  ed.,  np. 
440  if.,  au'ionst  th(r  view  of  UQnilicr,  tijat  there  in  a  Uuslily 
soul  lu  distnctiun  from  tbc  tipirituul  liuul.— H.j 


3.  The  human  nature,  thus  alienated  from  Godj 
with  sel(ishne.s.s  as  its  ruling  principle,  must,  how. 
ever,  seek  gratification.  There  is  but  one  resource, 
the  ere  dure.  As  (Ta<j;  means  man  in  his  entire 
earthly  relations,  which  are  relations  to  the  creature, 
its  moral  significance  must  include  devotion  to  the 
creatun\  if  the  use  of  the  term  is  to  be  fully  jusli. 
fied.  This,  then,  im[)lies  slavery  to  the  creature  in 
the  search  for  self-gratitication.  Carnality,  then,  is 
as  truly  the  moral  state  of  one  ab.sorbed  in  intellect- 
ual and  testhetie  pursuits,  as  of  one  sunk  in  sensual- 
ity. But  as  sensuous  and  sensual  are  cognate  terms, 
so  we  find,  not  only  in  the  teachings  of  the  Scrip- 
ture, but  in  the  history  of  humanity,  that  the  de- 
velopment of  selfish  devotion  to  the  creature  is  in 
the  direction  of  sensuality  (fleshly  sins,  in  a  narrower 
sense).  "  Without  God,"  has,  as  its  positive  expres- 
sion, "in  the  world"  (Eph.  ii.  12).  And  the  very 
want  of  satisfaction  in  worldly  things  leads  to  ever 
fiercer  longing  after  the  creature,  to  sin  in  its  lowesi 
forms.  Sinking  God  in  the  material,  or  natural 
world,  over  which  He  rules,  is,  in  ett'ect,  sinking 
man  into  the  deepest  slavery  to  the  creature.  To 
be  "  in  the  flesh,"  is  therefore  to  be  under  "  the  law 
of  sin  and  death."  Sin  is  not,  in  its  essence,  devo- 
tion to  the  seusuoUvS,  nor  is  carnality  essentially  sen- 
suality, but  toward  these  as  their  manifestations  they 
inevitably  tend.  We  thus  guard  against  both  asceti- 
cism and  materialism. 

Flesh  is,  then,  the  rchole  nature  of  man,  turned 
away  from  God,  in  the  supreme  interest  of  self,  Je- 
voU'd  to  the  creature.  It  is  obvious  that  this  is  bib- 
lical,  in  linking  together  godliness  and  morality,  un- 
godliness and  sin,  in  implying  both  the  inability  of 
the  law,  and  the  necessity  of  the  renewing  influence 
of  the  Holy  Spirit,  in  order  to  human  holii.ess. 
Hence  the  propriety  of  the  choice  of  this  term  to 
express  man's  sinful  nature  in  this  part  of  the  Epis- 
tie,  where  sauctitication  and  glorification  are  the 
themes. 

On  ff«(>5,  see  J.  Miiller,  Christliche  Lehre  von 
der  Si/nde,  especially  pp.  434  if.  ;  Delitzsch,  IJibl. 
Psi/cholor/ie,  pp.  373  fll.  ;  Tholuck,  liomerbrief,  pp. 
288  ft'.  ;  Wieseler,  Galaierbrii f,  pp.  443  ff.  (a  very 
clear  discussion) ;  Lange's  commentary  on  Galatians, 
p.  142,  Amer.  ed.  Tliis  list  might  ije  increased  by 
referring  to  works  on  Doctrinal  Theology  and  I->thie<, 
but  it  is  limited  to  discussions  of  an  exegetieal  char- 
acter.— R.] 

Thiud  Paraorapb,  VEU8.  14-23. 
The  Sinner  in  relation  to  the  Law, 

Ver.  14.  Por  vre  know.  O'tWnufv,  not 
otfJa  /itv  (Jerome,  &e.).  [The  former  n^ading  ia 
almost  univer.sally  adopted.  Dr.  Hodge,  who  in- 
clined to  the  latter  in  earlier  etlitions,  now  rejects  it, 
on  the  grounil  that  there  is  no  M  to  correspond 
with  /(  iv.  The  singular  wouM  imply  that  the  sub- 
ject was  aware  of  the  spiritual  nature  of  the  law  at 
the  time  of  the  conflict ;  lieiiee  it  would  favor  the 
reference  to  the  regenerate.  The  plural,  trr  hiow, 
simply  means   that  Christians   recognize    this. — R.] 

That  the  law  is  spiritual  [or*  o  rd//o« 
nvf  !•  II  fiT  ixui;  trrru'].  It  is  the  specific  knowN 
edge  peculiar  to  Christians  that  religion  is  hiward 
ne.-ss ;  that  the  law  is  incorrectly  understood,  when 
it  is  changed  by  the  <t«o;  of  external  feeling  into 
a  ntxiii  of  external  preeept.s — a  eoniplieation  of  finite 
objects,  while  its  nature  is  of  a  spiritual  character; 


CHAPTER  VII.   7-25. 


231 


that  is,  revealing  in  every  tittle  the  infinity  of  God's 
Spirit,  and  relating  to  tlie  Spirit.  The  yuQ  de- 
clares the  stiff-neeked  and  malignant  nature  of  sin. 
Tlie  law  is  y  ij  «  ii  fi  a  only  in  form  ;  its  nature  is 
divine  and  spiritual  (Meyer).     Explanations  : 

1.  Inspired  by  the  Holy  Spirit  (Theodoret). 

2.  Requiring  a  heavenly  and  angeUc  righteous- 
ness (Calvin). 

3.  Relating  to  the  higher  spiritual  nature  of  man 
(in  different  applications,  by  Beza,  Reiche,  De  Wette, 
and  Riickert). 

4.  In  suo  ffenere  praclarum  et  egregium  (Koppe, 
and  others). 

5.  The  spiritual,  and  not  the  literal  sense  of  the 
law,  is  meant  (Origen). 

6.  Operating  spiritually,  Si,Sda/.a}.o<;  a^fT^?,  kc. 
(Chrysostom). 

7.  Presupposing  the  presence  ot"  the  Spirit  as 
the  condition  of  its  fulfilment  (Tholuck). 

8.  Identical  in  its  spirit  with  that  of  the  Holy 
Spirit  (Meyer).  II  v  f  v/i  ar  t  z  6  c;  describes  its  whole 
spir'ilnalitii  (James  ii.  10),  the  absolute  unity  of  its 
origin,  its  elements,  and  its  purpose  in  the  Divine 
Spirit  (which  reveals  itself  in  the  human  spirit),  in 
contrast  with  the  presupposition  of  its  finite  force, 
its  finite  and  sundered  parts  of  membership,  and  its 
finite  design.  [The  view  of  Meyer  is  the  simplest 
and  best :  in  iU  nature  it  is  divine.  (So  Hodge.) 
This  undoubtedly  accords  best  with  the  antithesis, 
ad^Kt'VOi;,  made  of  flesh. — R.] 

Sut  I  am  carnal  [tj/w  Sk  aaQxivot;  fl^i,. 
See  T(xtual  Kote*,  auA  below.]  The  tyw,  in  ac- 
cordance with  the  ii)l(i)(n^  mentioned  above,  is  Paul 
himself,  in  the  exhibition  of  his  standpoint  under 
the  law,  for  the  exhibition  of  the  historical  develop- 
ment of  man  standing  under  the  law.  Meyer :  "  The 
still  undelivered  iyi'n,  which,  in  the  great  need  tiiat 
presses  upon  it  in  opposition  to  the  law,  groans  for 
deliverance ;  "  ver.  24.  The  same  writer  properly 
maintains,  against  Pliilippi,  that  the  subject  is  iden- 
tical through  the  entire  section.  On  the  other  hand, 
Meyer  incorrectly  distinguislies  the  past  tenses  of 
vers.  7-13,  and  the  present  tenses  of  vers.  14  fF.,  by 
saying  that,  in  the  former  ca.se,  Paul  has  described 
hia  psychological  history  before  and  under  the  law, 
and  in  the  latter,  that  he  portrays  his  nature  stand- 
ing in  opposition  to  the  spiritual  character  of  the 
law.  But  down  to  ver.  13  he  has  rather  portrayed 
the  genesis  of  the  really  internal  and  legal  stand- 
point. But  after  ver.  14,  he  describes  the  whole  de- 
velopment of  this  standpoint ;  that  is,  the  inward 
conflict  of  the  sinner  who  has  perceived  the  inward 
character  of  the  law. 

Carnal  { fleiHchern).  2  ccq  xtvo<;,  made  of 
flesh,  like  flesh  (2  Cor.  iii.  3  ;  1  Cor.  iii.  1).  The 
■word  could  also  be  translated  fleshly,  if  this  were 
not  a  conventional  term  for  carnalhi  minded,  (ya()/.i,- 
KO?.  Meyer  thinks  that  (Tccfjzu'ot;  "  gives  a  deeper 
shade"  than  (Tnfji-.moc,  with  reference  to  John  iii. 
6  ;  but  the  case  is  about  the  reverse,  since  we  must 
understand  by  (rwf^ztzoc-,  carnally  inindcd,  and  by 
od^y.t,vo(;,  carnally  formed,  inclined,  and  disposed  ; 
a  being  whose  natural  spontaneity  and  view  of  things 
are  external,  according  to  the  (tk^jS.  (On  the  oppo- 
sition of  the   readings,  comp.    Tholuck,  p.  363.)* 

♦  [The  Greek  adjectives  ending  in  -tvos  (with  the  accent 
on  the  antepenult)  describe  the  material  out  of  which  any 
thing  is  made  (comp.  the  English  -rn,  wooden,  earthen). 
'S.a.pKivo'i  is  therefore  ccrnfus,  made  of  flesh  ;  crapxtKot, 
criirtlis,  fl'shly,  of  this  character.  Adopting  the  tormer 
reading,  three    modes  of  view  present  themselves :    (1.) 


The  auQ  ntv  oi;  is  immediately  afterwards  ex 
plained  as : 

Sold  under  sin  [ntTTQafiivoi;  v n 6  t^i 
ci^(  a()  Ti'ai'].  On  the  one  hand,  this  state  of 
slavery  declares  the  complete  subjection  of  the  ein. 
ner  to  sin  ;  but,  on  the  other,  we  must  not  overlook 
his  uiiiciUinguess  and  opposition  to  his  being  sold. 
This  will  probably  be  the  case,  if,  with  Tholuck  and 
Meyer,  we  regard  the  aa.{>/.i,v<i<;  merely  as  a  higher 
degree  of  (7a(j/.i,/.6^_.  Therefore  Tholuck  regards 
Bengel's  expression  as  too  refining :  Servua  vendiim 
miserior  est  quani  verna,  et  venditus  dicitur  homo, 
quia  ab  initio  non  fuerat  serviis.  Meyer  correctly 
observes,  that  this  opinion  is  in  conflict  with  Augus- 
tine's  explanation  of  the  passage,  as  referring  to  the 
regenerate.  Similar  passages,  2  Kings  xvii.  17 ; 
1  Mac.  i.  15. 

Revelation  of  the  obscuration  of  perception  (vers. 
15,  16), 

Ver.  15.  For  that  which  I  perform  I  know- 
not  [o  ya^  /.  axf^  y.«  C  o  /t  a  t  ov  yivo'xjxo)  ]. 
There  is  wanting  in  this  condition  the  authority  of 
the  conscious  spirit ;  but  the  consciousness  of  this 
want  has  made  its  appearance.  Meyer  calls  up  the 
analogy  of  the  slave,  who  acts  as  the  instrument  of 
his  master,  without  knowing  the  real  nature  and  de- 
sign of  what  he  does.  But  this  slave  here  is  not 
altogether  in  such  a  condition,  for  he  knows  at  least 
that  he  cannot  effect  {n^daaa))  what  he  will,  or 
would  like,  and  that  he  ratlier  does  (ttouT))  what  he 
hates.  Thus  one  thing  dawns  upon  him — tliat  he 
acts  in  gloomy  self-distiaciion,  and  in  contradiction 
of  a  better  but  helpless  desire  and  repugnance.  The 
sense  of  the  passage  is  removed,  if,  with  Augustine, 
Beza,  Grotius,  and  others,  we  explain  yi,vi!ia/.«>  to  be, 
/  approve  of*  (Appeal  to  Matt.  vii.  23  ;  John  x. 
14  ;  2  Tim.  ii.  19,  and  elsewhere.)  Here,  moreover, 
the  emphasis  does  not  yet  rest  on  the  ffi/.fiv  (which 
Tholuck  applies  to  a  mere  velleitas,  and  Meyer  to  a 
real  and  decided  wish,  but  which,  after  all,  reimdna 
only  theory  !)  and  /nfTflv,  but  on  the  o  i'    ytv m a/.o). 

[For  not  w^hat  I  Avish,  that  I  practise  ;  but 
what  I  hate,  that  do  I.  0  v  yaQ  o  0  i /.  w  , 
T  0  r T o  n Q  da  <T  If) ,  a  ).).  o  fi  v (t iT) ,  t  o  "•  t  o 
no  kT).  Although  yaQ  is  explanatory  of  the  pre- 
ceding clause,  there  seems  to  be  an  advance  here,  a 
step  toward  the  light  of  self-knowledge. — The  mean- 
ing of  &  i ).  (.)  is  open  to  discussion.  It  means,  / 
will  (within  the  sphere  of  spontaneity.  Dr.  Hitch, 
cock  claims).     The  two  questions  to  be  decided  are  ; 

That  the  Apostle  has  here  pnrposely  chosen  the  stronger 
word  (so  ilcyer),  and  thus  a  reference  to  the  regeneiMte, 
spiritual  man  is  necessnrily  excluded.  (2.)  That  here,  trap- 
Ktvo?  is  =  <T(ipKi.K6is.  (So  'Lange.)  This  is  also  adoptetl  in 
the  interest  of  the  reference  to  the  believer.  (3.)  Delitzsch 
even  finds  the  former  the  weaker  word  :  "  cropKivos  is  one 
who  has  in  himself  the  bodily  nature  :ind  the  sinful  tend- 
ency inherited  with  it ;  but  o-apxtKos  is  one  whose  personal 
fundamental  tendency  is  this  sintul  impulse  of  the  flesh." 
I  prefer  (1.) ;  but  (U.)  should  be  adopted  by  those  who  insist 
on  the  Augustinian  view.  Otherwise,  the  first  time  th« 
present  tense,  upon  which  so  much  stress  is  laid  as  indi- 
cating a  change  in  the  state  of  the  eubject,  occurs,  tha 
predicate  must  be  tampered  with,  and  made  to  mean,  not 
simply,  I  am,  carval,  but,  I  was,  J  am  so  In  a  crtaii)  ex!eiit, 
J  am  sliU  carnal,  though  not  as  formcrJy.  Dr.  Hodge  deems 
the  extreme  (i.  e.,  simple)  sense  of  the  word?,  "  inconsistent 
wi  h  the  context,"  but  the  immediate  context  has  to  be 
limited  in  the  same  way  to  make  this  applicable,  especially 
exclusivel}'  applicabli',  to  a  regenerate  person. — R.] 

*  (Thi-  interpretation  is  altogether  untenable  on  philo« 
logical  grounds.  Dr.  Hodge  justifies  it,  by  saying  :  "With 
regard  to  moral  objects,  knowledge  is  not  mere  cognition. 
It  is  the  apprehension  of  the  mural  quality,  and  involves, 
of  necessiiy,  approbtition  or  disapprobation."  liut  a  cor« 
rect  inference  is  not  always  a  correct  interpietation. — R.] 


238 


THE    EPISTLE    OF   PAUL   TO    THE   ROMANS, 


(1.)  Has  it  hore  a.  reference  to  the  will  In  the  strict 
sense  (eiilier  =  veHeitas,  Tlioluek,  and  othei-a,  or 
=  a  full  (leterniination  of  tlie  will,  Pliilippi) ;  or 
does  it  mean,  I  desire,  irixli  ?  The  former  is,  per- 
haps, favored  by  the  psyeliologieal  character  of  the 
whole  passage  ;  but  the  latter  is  preferable,  since 
ftiaut  is  so  opposed,  that  both  words  must  be  re- 
ferred to  the  same  faculty  ;  and  it  is  easier  to  class 
Oii.io  witiiin  the  region  of  the  emotions,  than  to 
transfer  inao)  to  that  of  the  will.  (2.)  IIuw  intense 
Ls  its  meaning  V  Here  ii  kt  m  is  undoubtedly  in 
itself  a  stronger  word.  Perhaps  the  use  of  two  dif- 
ferent verbs  (^rocirrio,  nou'i)  in  the  main  clauses 
would  justify  a  ditt'erence  of  intensity  in  the  anti- 
thetical verbs  Oi/.m,  /itrnTi  {i.  e.,  the  desire  for  good 
is  less  strong  than  the  hatred  of  evil) ;  or  /iht(7)  may 
be  taken  as  —  or  Oi/.^i  (/  (/"  not  wish).  Ver.  16 
strongly  favors  the  latter.  Either  of  these  views  is 
preferalile  to  tliat  which  strengthens  the  antithesis 
into  I  love,  I  hittc  (Hodge).  For  this  forces  a  mean- 
ing u[)on  (yi).<»  whicii  the  A[>()stle  could  have  ex- 
pressed far  more  plainly  by  another  term. — II.] 

Tlie  wish  here  is  the  better  desire  and  ett'ort  of 
tlie  man  awakened  to  his  inward  state.  First  of  all, 
tiie  sinner  becomes  a  gloomy  enigma  to  liimself  in 
the  contradictions  ot  his  doing  ami  leaving  undone. 
(See  Meyer  on  the  odd  explanation  of  Reiche,  that 
the  sinful  Jew  does  the  wickedness  which  the  sinle.«s 
Jew  does  not  approve  of.  Also  on  statements  kin- 
dred to  the  foregoing,  in  Epictetus :  o  fikv  Qihi, 
(6  aiiaitrdviitv)  ov  nouT,  xcu  o  tiij  dihi,  TTOin; 
and  in  Ovid  :  I'jV^o  tmliora  prohoque,  deteriova  se- 
qttoi:  Still  other  examples  in  Tiioluck,  p.  366.)  On 
Phililipi's  interpretation  of  this  passage  as  applica- 
ble to  the  regenerate,  see  Tiioluck,  p.  355.*  The 
choice  of  the  expressions  is  very  delicate  ;  from  the 
real  ,9i/.nv  in  si)irit  he  does  not  come  to  the  con- 
sistent and  vigorous  rt(>r'iafsn.v ;  but  even  the  inatZv 
cannot  prevent  a  weaker  noulv  of  the  rebellious 

OQC. 

Ver.  16.  But  if  what  I  wish  not,  that  I  do 
[ti  rf  t  o  or  ft  i  '/.  «) ,  T  or  T  o  not,  I't .  J  i  is 
perhaps  logical,  and  marks  a  step  in  sell-discovery 
with  respect  to  the  law. — R.]  The  mental  consent 
to  the  law  now  appears  above  the  perceived  dissen- 
sion between  willing  and  doing.  As  the  sinner 
places  himself,  with  his  judgment,  on  the  siile  of  his 
awakened  will,  h(^  places  himself,  with  his  judgment, 
on  the  side  of  the  law. 

[I  agree  with  the  law  that  it  is  good,  nvn  - 
If' ^1  II L  r  iji  V  f>  n  lit  oTt  x  «  /  d  v  .  The  verl)  may 
not  here  imply  more  than  an  intellectual  acquies- 
cence in  the  high  moral  character  of  the  law,  yet 
that  acquiescence  extends  as  far  as  the  !)i}.n,v.  That 
this  muxt  be  actual  in  the  case  of  an  awnkt-ned  man, 
is  evident,  llow,  else,  could  the  sense  of  sin  arise? 
— R.]  This  is  the  first  step  on  the  way  of  .-^elf- 
knowledge :  Acquiescence  in  the  law  in  opposition 
to  his  own  actions.  Hut  at  the  same  time,  the  law 
is  acknowledged  to  be  good  in  an  eminent  sense,  as 

•  [Dr.  ITodfro  \i  ccrtiiinlj'  correct  In  sayinj?,  "  that  ovory 
rhri-<fiai>  o<in  :iilopt  tin-  lanijiiiijrt;  nf  this  vcise;"  l>ut  vhen 
Alfonl  (f ■r.  iwinjr  rhiUppi)  assort-*,  that  nn  mnh  w  II  irUlt 
in  ihi-  riri.il,  iiiirrgfiifia't  ni'in,  iho  ri'm;irk  i»  iiiro'^roct, 
UQleN.s  9i/i.>  br  roforied  rlther  tii  n  full  (lt-lprmin:itlon  of 
tUo\vill,i>rto  the  stroncoi't  piws  bio  iln-irc.  Th:it  noiihorof 
thi-ep  H  n  ni'ii-Ksary  rom-lm  on.  i«  evident  not  only  from  the 
luii^iai;c  of  Epictetus,  but  from  the  rXo^c  couiicctioii  with 
ver.  tl  (yap  .  .  .  yip),  ii«  wi-ll  lui  from  vor.  Id,  when; 
ob  9«Aoi  iM  fvidently  u-od  im  cxplainin);  nivi).  It  in  a 
gnitultoui)  infercnco,  that  n  icf«-riiicc  of  tliis  vorso  lo  thr- 
unriRoniT.ito  imi)llc«  a  contnidiotlon  of  tb*  depravity  of 
ttu  human  will.~U.] 


noble,  st^inding  ideally  above  the  life — xa/i.oi;.  Mey- 
er :  "  The  usual  construction,  /  grant  thai  the  law  i» 
f/ood,  neglects  the  mv."  Against  the  reference  of 
the  Ti7)  vuiKi)  to  ai'v,  see  Tiioluck  ;  see  him  also  for 
quotations  from  Chrysostom  and  Hugo  St.  Victor  on 
the  innate  nobility  of  the  soul. 

The  iJluiiiination  of  the  darkness  of  the  wiU 
(vers.  17,  18). 

Ver.  17.  Now  then  it  is  no  longer  I  that 
perform  it  \^v  wi  i)  e  o  v  k  i  r  i,  t  y  oi  y.  ar  f  (>  y  d' 
<  oil  a  I,  airu.  Nvvi  is  logical,  not  temporal 
(so  all  modern  commentators).  If  temporal,  then  it 
might  mark  the  transition  into  a  state  of  grace. 
The  same  is  true  of  ovntTi.  See  Winer,  p.  574. 
"  Since  I  consent  to  the  law,  that  it  is  good,  it  can 
no  fo>i(/er  be  affirmed  that  7,"  &c.  (Meyer). — R.l 
Tholucic :  "  A rri  Aug.  nnnc  in  statu  grutix — rath- 
er a  designation  of  the  inference."  But  it  denotes 
not  merely  a  continued  movement  in  the  tre;itment, 
but  also  in  the  subject  discussed.  The  understand- 
ing has  first  entered  upon  the  side  of  the  law  ;  now 
this  is  done  also  by  the  real  will  of  the  ego.  The 
sinner  distinguishes  between  his  ego  —  which  now 
emerges  from  the  darkness  of  the  personality — ;md 
the  sin  [the  principle  of  sin  personified]  dwelling  in 
him  —  now  like  a  foreign  and  wicked  co-habitant. 
lie  places  himself,  with  his  e(/o  and  his  will,  on  the 
side  of  the  law,  and  abjures  the  bad  part  of  his  con- 
dition. The  f  j'">,  as  well  as  the  xar  f(j  yci  wO/(  at, 
must  be  emphasized.  The  «('to  is  that  whicli  he, 
according  to  ver.  16,  now  no  more  wills  with  his  real 
will.  [As  yet,  however,  there  is  no  indication  that 
this  state  of  things  docs  or  can  lead  to  "  what  is 
good,"  save  in  powerless  desire,  even  if,  with  Meyer, 
we  take  the  erfo  here  sis  =  the  moral  sell-conscious- 
ness.    Ver.  18  acknowledges  this. — R]. 

But  sin  dwelling  in  me  [«/./.«  //  oixoTnc* 
i  v  ifini  f</(«^)T(«].  The  Apostle  <iistingui.-hea 
between  the  tyilt  and  an  individuality  in  a  wider 
sense,  described  by  in  me,  in  wiiicli  sin  dwells. 
[Stuart  takes  in  me  as  referring,  not  to  the  wider  in- 
dividuality, but  to  the  carnal  self,  which  here  begins 
to  appear  over  against  tlic  better  self.  It  may  be 
doubted  whether  there  is  such  a  better  self  as  is  re- 
ferred to  in  the  first  clause  of  this  verse,  in  the  un- 
regenerate  man.  Rut  all  men  under  the  law  feel 
such  a  discord  as  this. — As  the  attributing  of  the 
dnivg  to  indwelling  sin  l>y  the  Christian  is  not  a  de- 
nial of  responsibility,  so,  in  the  case  of  one  not  yet 
a  Cliiistian,  it  is  not  the  assuni]ition  of  a  power  to 
do  right.  There  is  no  sign  of  release  as  yet.  Even 
if  we  limit  in  me  to  the  narrower  sense  it  has  in  ver. 
18,  the  whole  jiersonulity  seems  to  be  under  the 
power  of  sin. — Wordsworth  finds  here,  and  in  the 
succeeding  verges,  a  vindicaiion  of  Ood  from  the 
charge  of  being  the  author  of  sin  I — R.j 

Ver.  IH.  For  I  know  that  in  me,  that  is,  in 
my  flesh,  good  doth  not  dwell  I  o  i  <)  a  y  n  q 
i>  r  I.  nix  n  t  y.  t  I  i  y  t  n  n  i ,  r  o  r  T  i  a  t  i  v  l  V 
T  "ij  n  0.(1X1  /I  n  I' ,  d  y  ci  {}  d  v .  For  I  k.iow,  ia 
regarded  by  Philippi  as  an  expression  of  Christian 
consoiousnt'ss  ;  yet  some  such  consciousness  is  the 
veiy  result  which  the  law  is  designed  to  produce. — 
R. I  More  special  definition  of  the  dwelling  of  sin 
in  him.  This  arises  fi-oin  the  fact  that  gooil  does  not 
dwell  in  him — that  is,  in  his  Hesh.  The  negaiivo 
ex|>reSf'ir>n  is  noteworthy  :  If  in  a  moral  being  no 
good  dwells,  the  opposite  (sin)  does  dwell  in  him. 
The  auoi  is  here  established  as  the  other  side  of 
the  ego,  which,  with  this,  constitutes  the  whoh'  man. 
liut  we  cannot  identify  the  aci^ij,  cither  with  th« 


CHAPTER   VII.    7-26. 


239 


body,  or  with  tlie  lusts  of  tlie  body  alone  (tlie  Greek 
fathers).  Tholuck  cites,  in  favor  of  this  view,  the 
different  expressions,  "  in  my  members,"  "  body  of 
death,"  ver.  24.  But  these  terms  must  not  be  un- 
derstood materially.  Tlie  (tcc^J  is  the  external,  finite 
nature  and  mode  of  relation  and  view ;  it  is  the 
finite  tendency  in  both  its  immaterial  and  sensuous 
cliaracter,  which  certainly  has  its  substantial  basis  in 
the  external  arifjt.  Calvin  interprets  tra^S  here  as 
human  nature.  It  would  be  better  to  say:  in  my 
naturixlness. 

[See,  on  adfj^,  the  Excursus  above.  The  word 
may  be  here  used  in  the  physiological  sense  (Wie- 
seler).  But  this  seems  strangely  out  of  place.  It 
is  assumed  to  escape  the  difficulty  that  arises,  if 
tlie  reference  to  the  unregenerate  be  held.  In  tiie 
case  of  a  Christian,  the  limitation  is  made,  because 
he  has  a  spiritual  nature,  over  against  his  carnal  na- 
ture, in  wliicli  good  does  dwell.  But  since  <7«^i,  in 
the  ethical  sense,  includes  the  whole  natural  man, 
why  should  any  limitation  be  made,  if  the  reference 
be  to  the  unregenerate  ?  The  grave  objection  must 
be  admitted  ;  but  if  the  verse  be  referred  to  the  re- 
geneiate  man,  why  this  studious  avoidance  of  men- 
tioning the  ;Ti'tr',((a?  and  why  such  a  powerlessness 
as  is  expi'essed  in  the  next  clause?  The  only  satis- 
factory explanation  is,  that  the  distinction  between 
unregenerate  and  regenerate  is  not  in  question,  but 
the  n:an  of  the  law  is  here  represented  as  conscious 
of  being  a6i()xi,voi:,  made  so  more  fully  by  the  con- 
flict wliich  the  law  has  awakened.  The  immediate 
antithesis  (wliich  is  not  strongly  marked  here)  is  sim- 
ply the  better  desire,  the  effo  longing  to  be  better, 
powerless,  however,  in  evivy  caxc,  until  escaping 
from  the  law  to  Christ ;  yet  this  implies,  as  the  real 
ethical  antithesis,  the  spiritual  law  here  acting  on 
the  man. — R.]  Tlie  Apostle's  declaration  is  far  re- 
moved from  the  Flacian,  Gnostic,  and  Manichean 
definitions.  He  could  not  liave  sought  a  real  "  moral 
willing  and  doing"  (Meyer)  as  "good"  in  his 
"  flesh,"  but  only  religious  morality  and  excellence. 
But  he  does  not  even  find  this  in  it ;  and  hence 
there  arises  the  contrary  propensity,  a  pseudo-plastic 
will  of  the  flesh. 

For  to  "will  is  present  with  me  [to  yccQ 
S'ikfi^v  7za^dxet.ral  //o^].  Not,  "  is  present 
in  me,"  as  Meyer  says,  but  who  corrects  himself 
when  he  also  says  :  Paul  represents  the  matter  as  if 
he  were  looking  about  after  it  in  his  personality — as 
if  seeking  himself  in  a  spacious  sphere.  "  The 
&ihi,v  is  present  with  him — before  his  gaze."  To 
will  is  immediately  before  his  eyes,  but  he  can  no- 
where find  tlie  treasure  of  performing  that  wliich  is 
good. 

[To  perform  that  •which  is  good  I  find  not, 
TO  <)  £  xaTf(jydtf(TOai,  to  y.  a  '/.bv  o  v  / 
fv Q  ia  y.i»  .  See  2\'Ziual  Note  '.  If  the  briefer 
reading  be  accepted,  nccQaxfirau  must  be  supplied. 
Tiie  meaning  is  then  obvious. — R.]  Explanations  : 
I  do  not  ffain  it ;  I  can  not,  &c.  (Estius,  Flatt,  &c.). 
We  must  first  emphasize  the  y.arfQydLfaOai,, 
and  secondly,  the  y.a).6v.  The  question  is  not 
concerning  the  justifia  civilin,  but  the  carrying  out 
of  the  ideal.  The  iyo't  is  not  yet  the  new  man  of 
the  spirit  (Philippi) ;  it  is  tlie  better  self  as  an  awak- 
ened moral  will,  from  which  the  aim  is  removed  and 
the  way  stopped  up  by  the  accustomed  propensity 
of  the  flesh. 

The  revelation  of  the  obncuration  and  dinpension 
in  the  unconscious  pround  of  life — that  is,  in  the  life 
of  feelltig  (vers.  19,  20).     According  to  Tholuck  and 


Meyer,  we  have  in  these  verses  only  proofs  of  the 
preceding.  Meyer :  Ver.  19  is  a  proof  of  ver.  18, 
and  ver.  20  of  ver.  17.  [Stuart :  "  *  If  what  I  have 
said  in  vers.  18  and  19  be  true,  then  what  I  have 
affirmed  in  ver.  17  must  be  true.'  " — R.] 

Ver.  19.  [For  the  good,  &c.  i'  t^  is  con- 
firmatory.  "  I  find  not,"  is  proved  by  acts  which 
are  not  according  to  the  better  desire.  Dr.  Hodge 
presses  the  meaning  of  &iku).  That  Paul,  as  a 
Christian,  would  mean  more  by  these  words  than 
Seneca  or  Epictetus,  is  undoubtedly  true ;  but 
whether  he  does  mean  more  than  is  true  in  every 
case,  to  a  certain  extent,  of  a  man  awakened  under 
the  law^,  is  very  doubtful. — R.] — But  the  evil  which 
I  wish  not,  that  I  practise,  S  o  h  0  i  ).o)  x  a  z  6  r , 
T  0  Ti  T  o  n  ()  d(Ta  0) .  Tliis  strong  expression  ia 
new.  It  points  to  a  fountain  of  wicked  action  which 
proceeds  immediately  from  the  unconscious  life  in 
opposition.  And  this  is  the  darkness  of  tiie  sensuous 
[tlie  carnal]  life. 

Ver.  20.  [Now  if  I  do  that  I  would  not, 
*  ^  de  o  on  {)  i  /.  <))  t  y  o),  t  o  ~i  r  o  not (7i .  El  <)e 
=  since,  then,  hypothetical  only  in  form.  On  iyo'i, 
see  Textual  Note  **.  There  is  undoubtedly  a  progress 
in  thought.  Alford  thinks  the  e[!0  is  here  perceived 
to  be  the  better  ego  of  the  inward  man  ;  but  this 
progress  is  perceptible  in  the  case  of  the  awakened, 
only,  however,  to  produce  the  cry  of  ver.  24. — R.] 
This  verse,  then,  specifies  also  the  real  author  of 
these  actions  of  the  man  against  his  will :  it  is  sin 
dwelling  in  me  [r,  olyiovaa  iv  i/tot  diiaf)- 
Tt'ct],  the  habitual  life  of  sense  [i.  e.,  of  the  flesh]. 
This,  in  its  obscurity,  he  now  renounces  in  his  con- 
sciousness ;  in  his  /.  But  now,  to  a  certain  degree 
or  apparently,  a  foreign  personality  with  a  foreign 
law  arises  in  him,  against  the  awakening  personality 
of  his  inner  man.  [The  condition  is  not  in  itself,  as 
yet,  more  hopeful.  The  progress  is  still  toward 
wretchedness,  despite  or  even  because  of  the  better 
desire. — R.] 

Disclosure  of  the  itneard  rent  in  man  in  general ; 
the  dissension  between  the  tnie  personality  and  the 
false  pe7:sonality  with  its  false  law  (vers.  21,  22). 

Ver.  21.  I  find  then  the  law^  [fViJiaxM 
ctQa  rov  I'd, HOI'].  The  difficulty  of  the  passage 
has  led  Chrysostom  to  call  it  daaqei;  H^fjfiivov,  and 
Riickert  to  give  up  its  explanation. 

Explanations  :  a.  The  Moxnic  law  is  meant ;  on 
for  because.  "  I  find,  then,  the  law  for  me,  so  far 
as  I  am  willing  to  do  good,  because  evil  is  present 
with  me."  That  is,  the  law  is  designed  for  me,  be- 
cause I  have  the  will  to  do  good,  but  evil,  kc.  (Ori- 
gen,  Chrysostom,  Theodore  of  Mopsvestia,  Theophy- 
lact,  Bengel,  &c. ;  Meyer,*  and  even  Ulfilas.  See 
Tholuck's  Note,  p.  372  :  Invenio  nunc  legem,  volenti 
mihi  bonuin  focere,  nam  mihi  adist  malum).  We 
may  say,  in  favor  of  this,  that  it  certainly  describes 
also  the  origin  of  the  law  ;  that  contradiction  has 
made  the  law  necessary. 

Still,  this  exposition  is  thoroughly  untenable. 

1.  Since  the  beginning — that  is,  from  ver.  7— 


•  [Mcypr  (4th  ed.)  holds  that  the  ar+icle  requires  us  to 
understand  the  Mosnic  law,  but  his  -view  of  the  constinc- 
tion  is  as  follows  :  thr  law  is  joined  with  the  paiticiple,  the 
infinitive  is  the  infinitive  of  design,  nnd  the  last  clause  in- 
troduced by  oTt  is  the  object  of  I  find:  "I  find,  then, 
while  my  will  is  directed  to  the  law  in  order  to  do  good, 
th:it  evil  is  present  with  mc."  As  he  well  adds  :  "  What 
deep  misery ! "  But  this  seems  forced,  and  is  only  an  at- 
tempt to  preserve  consistently  his  dicUim,  th.it  tov  vo/xop 
mupt  mean  fly?  Mosaic  law.  See,  however,  \iis  full  gram- 
matical justification.— R.] 


240 


THE   EPISTLE   OF   PAUL   TO   THE   ROMANS. 


the  speaker  has  known  that  the  law  is  appointed  for 
Liui. 

2.  Here  the  question  is  no  more  concerning  the 
law  for  the  sinner,  but  the  relation  of  tlie  sinner  to 
the  law  ;  tlie  explanation  is  thus  totally  against  the 
connection. 

3.  The  explanation,  now  I  hm^e  dincovo-ed  the  law 
to  be  a  law  for  tw,  would  be  strange. 

4.  Tlie  law  is  [ireviously  for  hira  also,  whose 
willlngru'ss  to  do  what  is  good  has  not  yet  devel- 
oped, wliile  the  legal  stage  for  tlie  condition  liere  de- 
scribed Soon  teriuiiiales.  Uofniann's  modification 
does  not  lielp  the  matter :  That  to  do  evil  is  ever 
present  witli  me,  shows  me  that  the  law  is  good  to 
me,  wlio  am  willing  to  do  it.  He  lias  already  said 
this  more  plainly  in  ver.  12.  But,  strictly,  it  is  not 
yet  decided  here  that  the  law  is  also  good  to  him. 
Another  view  of  the  Mosaic  law :  I  find,  then,  for 
me,  who  w.  willing  to  do  the  law,  the  good  (namely, 
the  law)  ina:  evil  is  present  before  me  (Honiberg, 
Knajip,  Klee,  Olshausen,*  Fritzsche,  &c.).  Unim- 
portant repetition  of  the  foregoing.  Likewise  the 
710 1*  tr  TO    y.ai.uv   must  not  be  separated. 

6.  "  The  law  denotes  here  a  general  rule,  a  ne- 
cessity." I  find,  then,  for  me,  who  am  willing  to  do 
good — the  law — that  evil  is  present  witli  me  (Luther, 
Beza,  Calvin,  and  many  others ;  De  Wette  and  Plii- 
lippi  [Stuart,  Hodge]  ).  Tims  the  sense  would  be 
the  same  as  in  the  expression,  t'rf^o^-  rd/'o<,-  iv  roT^ 
fiihiTi..  ileyer  remarks,  on  the  other  hand,  that, 
according  to  th<j  whole  context,  vo/ioc  can  be  noth- 
ing else  than  the  Mosaic  law.  Another  law  appears 
first  in  ver.  23.  Also,  the  oTt  iuoi  to  y. «>cov 
7ict(>ay.nrcci.  could  not  be  described  as  rouoi;;  it 
is  something  empirical — a  phenomenon.  But  why, 
then,  can  the  Apostle  call  even  the  motions  in  the 
members  a  law  ?  Why  can  he  call  the  old  man,  who 
ia  nevertheless  not  a  man,  a  man  ? 

Accepting  this  view  in  general,  we  may  a«k 
whether  the  sense  is  :  I  find  in  me,  or,  for  me,  will- 
ing to  do  good — the  law,  &c. — as  formerly  ;  or,  I 
find  the  law,  that,  when  I  would  do  good,  &c.  (Gro- 
tius,  Limboreh,  Winer). j-  This  construction  Js  de- 
cidedly preferable,  because  it  suits  the  expression 
as  well  as  the  sense.  For  here  the  one  law  resolves 
itself  even  into  a  group  of  laws.  The  law  of  God 
now  becomes  to  the  Apostle  the  law  of  his  mind  ; 
the  foreign  law  in  his  members  becomes  in  its  elfect 
the  law  of  sin.  But  this  antagoaism  of  law  to  law 
is  80  fearfully  strong,  that  it  apjiears  to  the  Apostle 
himself  as  in  itself  a  law  of  moral  c<)ntra<lietion  ; 
and  this  a  terribly  strong  contradiction,  for,  just 
wlicn  he  woidil  do  what  is  good,  and  high,  and  great 
(for  exaniiile,  protect  the  Old  Testament  theouracy), 
evil  is  [)resent  to  Isim  (persecution  of  the  Christians). 
Therefore  the  one  law  is  re8olve<l  into  two. 

[This  view  invcjlves  a  slight  tr.ijection  of  oTt, 
and  then  th;;  dative  is  not  governed  by  f  I'^Jtrrxix, 
but  an  anaeolutnon  is  accepted,  which  causes  the 
repetition  of  ifoi.  Though,  in  general,  the  view 
is  the  same  as  that  of  Luther  an<l  Calvin,  yet  thii  Inw 
is  thus  distinguished  as  neither  the  law  of  the  mind 
nor  the  law  in  the  members,  but  the  contradiction 


•  (Olshausen  (2d  cd.,  p.  280)  rejects  this  view  as  hnnh  ; 
but  wnat  hiH  precipe?  npiiiinn  Is,  Is  not  very  obvious. — R. ) 

t  (Winer  (7th  cd.)  fiivors  tlie  othi^r  view  (that  of  Lu- 
therj,  while  Tholurk  (5th  ed.),  I'hilippi  (2(1  ed.),  and  nnpn- 
rpntly  Olslmusen  (2d  e<l.),  iulopt  thin,  which  is  that  or  the 
E.  V.  Our  KnKlish  and  Aniericiin  commeutarieB  combat 
tDiiTiT  authors,  who  have  already  (jivcn  up  the  opposed 
opinioim  on  this  verae. — It.] 


of  the  two.  Vers.  22,  23,  taking  up,  as  they  d'x,  the 
two  sides  of  this  contiariety,  favor  our  view  also. 
It  may  be  added  :  (L)  The  presence  of  the  article 
does  not  decide  that  the  Mosaic  law  is  meant ;  for 
the  article  occurs  in  ver.  23,  where  it  is  certainly  not 
mesmt.  (2.)  The  article  has  a  sufficiently  den  on 
strative  force  {this  law)  without  Torro)'  being  insei-t- 
ed.  (3.)  The  jjhrasc,  law  of  God  (ver.  22),  seems,  by 
its  definiteneas,  to  point  to  another  sense  here.  Our 
English  version,  therefore,  presents  the  best  sense 
-K.1 

Ver.  22.  For  I  delight  in  the  law  of  God 
\^<T t'vij do fi  ui  yujj  T <~)  voiio)  Tor  ')toT.  The 
yd()  introduces  the  two  verses  as  an  antithetical  ex- 
planation of  ver.  20.  The  ai'v  in  iTryi;du/4ui,  is  a3 
in  ar/./.fnor/(H'o<;,  Mark  iii.  5,  after  the  analogy  of 
ffrroifVa  //ot  =  apud  animnm  (Tholuck).  Xo  tiiought 
of  delighting  with,  as  Meyer  holds.  It  is  undoubt- 
edly stronger  than  (jrui/tiiii,  ver.  16  (against  Stuart). 
It  belongs  to  the  sphere  of  feeling.  See  further  be- 
low.— R.]  Tholuck  :  "  The  two  contending  forcea 
in  the  one  personality  (ver.  17)  are  loeallv  divided, 
one  being  in  the  inward  man,  the  other  in  the  out- 
ward members;  the  will  is  taken  captive  in  the  way 
from  the  inward  to  the  outward  man — that  is,  to  the 
executing  organs."  But  the  powers  named  here 
assume  a  concrete  form.  The  moral  judgment^  in 
vers.  15  and  16,  the  moral  inll,  or  the  /,  in  vers. 
17  and  18,  and  the  moral  inwardness,  in  vers.  19 
and  20,  have  now  become  the  inner  man,  who  de- 
lights in  the  law  of  God.  But  just  now  sin  in  the 
members  comes  in,  with  the  power  of  a  strange  law, 
so  that  a  chasm  pervades  his  whole  being,  in  which 
evi-n  he,  who  at  the  beginning  of  the  process  was  a 
slave,  is  now,  in  consequence  of  his  helpless  resist- 
ance, become  a  military  captive  of  sin. 

[After  the  irnward  man,  xara  rbv  'iaot 
av 0  i>ii)nov.'\  The  idM  cirO(iiii7TO(;  is  not  so  much 
the  ro's  or  to  vof(t6v  (Theod.  and  Gaunad.)  itself, 
as  the  man  choosing  in  the  rorq  his  stondji'iint,  iiis 
principle  (which  is  not  really  gained  until  the  con- 
clusion of  ver.  25).  It  is  also  so  far  the  inner  man 
as  that  he  withdraws  almost  desperately  from  tlie 
outwork  of  his  external  life.  Lyra  explains  similar- 
ly to  the  Greek  writers :  In  homine  diiii/ex  pars, 
ratio  et  sensualitas,  <jU(C  aliter  nominaidnr  vara  et 
s/iiritM,  homo  interior  et  exterior.  Tiiis  ri'iiiinds  us 
of  the  Platonic  use  of  language  :  In  Plato  and  Plo- 
tinus  we  find  the  termini,  6  tt'ffn)  arOino/Toq,  6  tv 
Toi;  a.,  6  a/.>jf>tji;  a.  Tholuck,  on  the  other  hand, 
understands  by  the  6  tam  arOg.,  after  the  anal- 
ogy  of  o  xttn'os"  «i'i)^().,  o  x(»i';7T0(;  t^^"  xrtoi).  a. 
(1  Peter  iii.  4),  rather  the  inward  I  of  the  man  than 
a  single  attribute — the  inward  man,  who  permits  him- 
self to  be  controlled  by  his  conscience,  the  man  of 
conscience.  Jhit  this  does  not  remove  the  difhcidty. 
For  the  question  is  not,  that  the  real  and  true  man 
is  created  for  God  ;  for  this  holds  good  of  flesh  and 
blood,  ontologically  considered.  But  it  may  be 
asked.  What  actual  stand])oint  does  the  Apostle  here 
denote?  According  to  his  antithesis,  it  is  this  :  he 
distinguishes  his  inward  nature,  as  the  true  man, 
from  the  antagonism  and  e(uifiict  of  the  law  in  his 
memliers.  It  is  in  this  self-comprehension  that  he 
now  has  his  delight  in  the  law,  which  is  more  than 
the  tTiiiqfjiii  of  ver.  16.  Meyer  also  sees  in  the 
(Tivt]i)o/i  ai.,  the  law  designated  as  also  rejoicing 
with  him  ;  on  which,  see  Tholuck,  p.  3()7.  Luther, 
Calvin,  and  others,  have  thoimlit  the  new-born  man 
here  describo<l.  The  standpoint  here  denoted  is  true 
as  a  point  of  transition,  yet  the  daalists  have  erro- 


CHAPTER  Vn.   '7-26. 


241 


neously  attempted  to  establish  it  as  theory  and  fun- 
danioiitjil  law. 

[The  strong  expression,  (Tvvi^(io/Lt(xi,  seems  to 
indicate  that  the  inward  mmi  is  the  new  man,  under 
the  influence  of  the  Spirit  (see  Philippi,  Hodge,  Al- 
ford  in  loco),  but  tliis  view  is  beset  with  difiiculties 
also.  Why  is  this  influence  purposely  kept  in  the 
background '?  Alford  answers :  To  set  the  conflict 
in  the  strongest  light.  But  that  is  not  like  Paul, 
who  can  hardly  refrain  from  his  references  to  grace 
in  Christ.  As  a  matter  of  fact,  the  conflict  under 
the  law  produces  a  divided  state,  where  something  in 
the  man  does  not  only  consent  to  the  law,  but,  in 
aroused  feeling,  delights  in  the  law.  Such  a  state 
may  be  the  result  of  gratia  prcevenienn,  or  niay 
always  result  in  delivei-ance  ;  but  its  present  effect, 
as  here  described,  is  only  "  captivity,"  helplessness. 
An  abnormal  condition  in  the  case  of  the  Christian, 
though  his  delight,  even  in  this  introspective  quasi- 
legal  condition,  is  more  pronounced.  This  inward 
man,  independently  of  gracious  influences,  leads  only 
to  misery.  Notice,  too,  that  when,  as  here,  an  ap- 
parent reference  to  the  Christian  occurs,  it  is  imme- 
diately followed  by  language  that  seems  totally  inap- 
plicable to  him.  This  confirms  the  view  that  this 
distinction  is  not  prominent. — R.] 

Ver.  23.  But  I  see  another  law  [pkino}  Sk 
iriqov  vo/iov,  Paul  here  represents  himself  as 
a  looker-ou  upon  his  own  personality  (Meyer).  J  i 
adversative  or  disjunctive. — R.]  His  seeing  indi- 
cates his  surprise.  Gal.  i.  6  and  7  serves  to  explain 
how  the  txf^ov  is  here  distinguished  from  the 
a?.}.ov.  As  there  the  'irf^ov  fvay.  is  not  a  true 
gospel,  so  this  etj^o^-  vo/ioq  is  not  a  true  vofioq. 
How  could  the  one  I'eal  law  of  God  be  in  perpetual 
conflict  with  the  other  ?  [As  indicated  above  (ver. 
21),  this  is  not  the  law  there  found,  but  that  law  is 
the  rule  of  contradiction  between  the  two  here  re- 
ferred to. — R.] 

In  my  members  [ev  toi(;  /ni/.tai  ftov. 
This  is  to  be  joined  with  vofiov,  ratlier  than  with 
the  participle  avTiffr^ar. — R].  Namely,  operative 
in  my  members.  Fritzsche  construes  thus  :  Which 
opposes  in  my  members.  Incorrectly  :  For  the  con- 
flict is  not  decided  in  the  members.  The  ijd()S, 
which,  being  spiritually  disordered,  has  become  the 
basis  of  the  desires,  has  its  essence  in  its  dismem- 
berment, in  the  division  of  its  members ;  therefore 
the  false  law  is  operative  in  the  members.* 

[Warring  against  the  law  of  my  mind, 
avrtffrQaTfiiOfifvov  tw  vo/lko  tov  vooi; 
(10  V.  The  form  vooi;  belongs  to  later  Greek 
(Meyer).  See  Winer,  p.  61. — R.]  Earlier,  this  law 
was  master,  and' the  tyd)  servant;  now,  after  the 
iyii)  has  become  distinct  from  the  sinful  rra^l  as  the 
inner  man  of  himself,  sin  carries  on  a  formal  war  by 
the  members,  but  with  the  force  of  a  law  which  it 
describes  as  the  law  of  nature,  or  one  similar  to  it. 
Simultaneously  with  the  fact  that  the  combatant  has 
recognized  the  Mosaic  law  again  as  the  expression 
of  his  inward  steadiness,  and  has  made  it  the  vonot; 
of  his  vo's,  of  his  personal  consciousness,  sin  has 
assumed  the  semblance  of  a  law  of  nature  dominant 
in  the  members. 

[And  bringing  me  into  captivity  to  the  law 
of  sin  which  is  in  my  members.     See  Textual 

*  [Philippi  holds  that  "members"  here  has  a  meaning 
between  the  phvsiological  and  ethical.  Hodge  maltes  it 
=:  in  my  flesh  ;  but  the  phrase  seems  puxposely  chosen  to 
Indicat*  the  locality  where  the  opposing  hiw  is  most  evident, 
rather  than  its  precise  seat. — E.J 

16 


Note  °.  The  participle  ai/|< a AoiTtkOvroe  (later 
Greek  :  to  take  by  the  spear  in  war,  to  take  prisoner) 
is  very  strong. — R.]  Sin,  in  this  semblance,  opposes 
the  inward  man,  and  conquers  him ;  the  I  finds 
itself  the  captive  of  another  law,  which  now  auda- 
ciously appears  as  the  law  of  sin  ;  that  is,  sin  will 
now  assert  itself  as  an  insurmountable  fatality. — 
Meyer  will  not  accept  the  genitive  ro/ioq  roT<  root; 
as  subjective,  but  local.  He  would  distinguish  it  fur- 
ther  from  the  r6/(0c;  rov  xOfo"'  (against  Usteri,  Koll- 
ner,  &c.),  without  observing  that  "  the  law  of  God  '* 
has  reproduced  itself  in  "  the  law  of  the  mind." 
[The  difference  is  thus  expressed  by  Bengel :  dic- 
tanien  mentis  mece  lege  divina  delcciatce.  There 
seems  to  be  two  pairs  of  laws  here,  each  pair  closely 
related  :  The  law  of  God,  with  its  answering  law  in 
the  mind  (taken  locally) ;  the  law  in  the  members, 
subservient  and  causing  subserviency  to  the  law  of 
sin.  The  parallelism  is  not  strict,  for  the  conflict  is 
evoked  by  the  law  of  God,  and  ends  in  the  law  of 
sin.  It  is  unlikely  that  this  is  a  peculiarly  Christian 
state.— R.] 

The  roTi;  denotes  the  thinking  and  moral  con- 
sciousness, which  constitutes  the  essence  of  person- 
ality. [Meyer  :  "  the  reason  in  its  practical  activ- 
ity." Olshausen,  and  others,  find  here  the  organ  of 
the  unfallen  spirit;  the  Augustinian  interpreters,  the 
organ  of  the  renewed  man,  the  spiritual  nature  ;  all 
agree  that  it  answers  to  the  inicard  ma?i  (ver.  22). 
If  that  means  renewed  nature,  we  would  expect  here 
some  expression  of  the  Spirit's  influence.  The 
choice  of  another  word,  as  well  as  of  another  phrase 
than  "  the  law  of  God  "  here,  where  it  would  seem 
so  appropriate  were  the  reference  to  a  Christian, 
confirms  the  view  held  throughout  in  our  exegesis. 
-R.] 

Meyer  says  further :  The  inward  man  is  not 
brought  into  captivity,  for  he,  considered  in  and  of 
himself,  always  remains  in  the  service  of  God's  law 
(ver.  25) ;  but  the  apparent  man  is.  Then  the  war- 
fare would  be  carried  on  by  the  apparent  man  !  It 
is  indeed  correct,  that  in  tw  ro/ioi  r/^i;  d/iaQ- 
rlaq,  the  dative  is  not  instrumental  (according  to 
Chrysostom,  and  others),  but  is  dat.  commodi* 

On  the  different  distinctions  between  the  law  in 
the  members  and  the  law  of  sin,  see  Meyer,  p.  288 
(Kollner :  Demands  of  the  desires,  and  tl;e  desires 
themselves).  We  distinguish  between  the  first  ap- 
pearance and  the  Jlnal  manifestation :  The  law  in 
the  members  passes  itself  off  for,  or  appears  to  the 
sinner  first  as,  the  law  of  nature  ;  therefore  it  brings 
him  into  captivity,  and  appears  to  him  finally  as  the 
law  of  sin — the  law  of  anomy,  of  unnaturalness. 
Parens'  understanding  of  the  /4t).rj  as  the  pars  noti- 
dum  regenifa,  coincides  with  the  reference  to  the 
new-born  man.  When  Calovius  and  Socinius  h"eld 
that  the  facultates  interiores  are  included,  they  inti- 
mated tliat  not  the  fnXrj  of  itself,  but  only  in  con- 
nection with  spiritual  dispositions,  could  form  the 
semblance  of  another  and  wicked  law. 


FoTJKTH  Paragraph  (vers.  24,  25). 

The  Transition  from  the  Law  to  the  Gospel. 

It  is  a  characteristic  of  the  interpretation  of  thia 
passage,  that  some  have  made  vers.  24  and  25  paren- 

*  [If  Iv  he  accepted  in  the  test,  then  this  would  not  b« 
instrumental,  hut  describe  the  department  in  which  the 
taking  captive  has  place  (Alford).— K.1 


242 


THE    EPISTLE   OF   PAUL    TO    THE   ROMANS. 


thetical  down  to  r;/t<7tv ;  Grotins  and  FI;itt,  ver,  26 
to  fjfii'n:  Tlioliick  :  "  As,  in  tlie  case  of  the  morally 
ickle,  such  an  expeiii.'nce,  daily  renewed,  calls  loitli 
the  lemiticiatory  exclamation  to  virtue,  '  Thou  art 
too  hard  for  nie  ;  take  away  my  crown,  and  let  me 
sin  ,'  so,  from  the  morally  earnest  warrior,  is  there 
called  forth  the  cry  of  distress  for  deliverance  and 
the  power  of  victory."  He  adds  to  this  :  "  Knight 
Michaclis  j;ivcs  this  cry  of  distress  a  very  moderate 
Bound  :  *  It  is  the  lamentation  of  a  distressed  Jew 
which  Paul  answers  thus :  I  thank  God  that  I  do  not 
have  to  lament  so.' " — But  the  deeply  moral  warrior, 
who  has  once  arrived  at  this  degree,  does  not  readily 
turn  back.  De  Wette  says,  very  pertinently :  "  From 
what  has  occurred,  there  now  follows  the  need  of  de- 
liverance, which  has  been  sutislied  by  the  grace  of 
God." 

Yer.  24.  O  wretched  man  [Ta?.atn(o()o^ 
iyv)  civ  fy(Jti;  noi,].  'I' a).ai  moi)  oq,  strictly,  ez- 
haustid  bii  Itard  liibor  (r/Jit'cu  mTniOi;,  calhiiii  pnti). 
Similar  to  the  expressions  in  Matt.  xi.  28.  [The 
nominative  is  the  nominative  of  exclamation  (Phi- 
lippi,  Meyer).  Tiie  word  occurs  only  here  and  Rev. 
iii.  17  (of  the  Laodicean  churcii) ;  there  joined  with 
t/.ffU'Ow,  to  which  it  is  almost  equivalent  in  popular 
uaxge.  The  corresponding;  verb  occurs  in  James 
iv.  9,  and  the  noun,  Rom.  iii.  16  ;  James  v.  1.  From 
these  passages  it  would  seem  that  here  the  promi- 
nent idea  is  of  helplessness  and  misery  ;  the  cry  for 
help  from  without  follows.  Bengel  is  certainly  in- 
correct:  "me  miscrwn,  qui  homosim!" — R.]  It 
is  the  desperate  cry  for  personal  righteousness,  and 
also  of  the  completed  repentance  now  about  to  be 
transformed  into  faith — but  a  faith  which  the  law 
cannot  give.  Repentance  iLsk.s,  faith  responds. 
(Reiciie's  explanation  :  The  cry  of  Jewish  humaidty 
for  help,  to  which  a  delivered  one  responds  in  chap, 
viii.  1.  With  this  view,  the  passage  I'rom  f!'/a()tarif) 
to  tj/i(7ir  is  said  to  be  a  gloss.) 

Who  shall  deliver  me  [n't;  /if  {ji'(TfT«t. 
Simple  future.  Not  =  would  that  I  were  delivered. 
Calvin  thinks  it  expresses  no  doubt,  but  only  the  ab- 
•aeace  of  the  deliverance  at  the  time.  Yet  OKshau- 
•Ben  seems  nearer  right  in  making  it  imply  :  who 
can,  with  a  reference  to  a  personal  deliverer. — R.] 
'Fvoiicu,  Soptuagint  for  ^X2 ,  ""X'ln,  &c.  It  re- 
fers both  to  the  fundamental  deliverance  (as  in  the 
present  passage),  and  to  the  continued  and  final  de- 
liverance ;  Matt.  vi.  13.  [Comp.  Col.  i.  13,  where 
the  reference  is  to  a  ddinite  act  of  deliverance. — R.] 

From  this  body  of  death?  ['Ey.  ror  no'i/ia- 
T0<,-  Toi"  fyavdxov  TO  I' TO  I',-].  Explanations: 
Connection  of  the   rovrov  with   (Th'iii  arot;. 

1.  The  univerxitas  vitiorum  (Ambrose,  Calvin) ; 
morn  ve/til  corpus  quasi  res  per  sc  xulsixtens  (Pisca- 
tor,  Crell).  As  the  RaV)binieal  Ti;  corpus  mortis 
pro  ipsa  rnorte  (Sooinius,  Sehottgen).  Wolf:  wior- 
tifera  jiecmta  mansa.  Flatt :  The  system  of  sensu- 
ous attectiouB,  which  is  the  cause  of  (leath.  Thohuk 
observes,  against  tlutsc  explanations :  But  the  read- 
er will  suppose  that  aunia  is  meant  in  no  other 
sense  than  as  niii/ia  u/khitIu;:,  to  Ovijjijv  (Totim  ; 
chap.  vi.  12.  We  have  already  remarked,  however, 
that  these  two  ideas  are  radically  <litrercnt.  The  ex- 
planatiot  before  us  needs,  however,  a  more  exact 
proof. 

2.  The  same  connection  of  the  toi'itoj'  with 
ff(T)//aTo^•.  The  sense  :  Mortal  hoihi.  a.  Longing 
for  death  (Chrysostom,  Theodoret,  Krasmus,  Koppe, 
and  otiiers),  aucocdlng  to  Meyer.     Tholuck,  on  the 


other  hand,  thus  sets  him  right :  They  have  not  in- 
tended, on  the  negative  side,  the  wish  for  deliver- 
ance i'T(h\i  the  boily  of  death,  but,  on  the  positive 
side,  the  wish  for  the  glorification  and  clothing-upoa 
of  tlie  body.  b.  Olshausen :  the  spirit  would  like 
to  make  the  mortal  body  living,  &e. 

3.  Death  as  a  monster  personified  with  a  body, 
which  threatens  to  swallow  up  the  lydi  (Reiche). 

Connection  of  the  toi'toi'  with   ()uvdrov. 

From  the  body  of  this  death.  (Yulgate, 
Ulfihis,  Luther,  Fritzsche,  De  Wette,  Tiioluck,  Mey- 
er.) [So  E.  Y.,  Hodge,  Alford,  Jowett.]  a.  Oura' 
to(,-  is  the  same  as  vitio.iitas  (Calvin,  and  others), 
b.  "  He  means  here  that  death  is  the  misery  and 
labor  endured  in  confiiet  with  sin  "  (Luther)  ;  c.  De 
Wette  :  Who  will  deliver  me  from  the  body  of  this 
death?  that  is,  from  the  body  which,  in  consequence 
of  sin  dwelling  or  reigning  in  it,  is  subject  to  death 
and  misery.  Reference  to  2  Cor.  v.  Fritzsche  simi- 
larly, d.  Meyer  gives  as  much  as  two  explanations : 
Who  will  deliver  me,  so  that  then  I  shall  be  no  more 
dependent  upon  the  body,  "  which  serves  as  the  seat 
for  so  ignominious  a  death  ?  "  Or,  in  other  words : 
"  Who  will  deliver  me  from  dependence  upon  the 
law  of  sin  to  moral  freedom,  so  that  then  my  body 
will  no  more  serve  as  the  seat  of  so  ignominious  a 
death  ?  "  If  we  understand  the  body  to  be  a  real 
body,  with  all  these  contortions,  we  do  not  find  our 
way  out  of  the  external  desire  of  death. 

Of  the  expositors  under  1,  Krehl  approaches 
nearest  to  our  view.  The  "  body  "  is  the  organism 
of  sin.  [The  most  natural  construction  is:  the  body 
of  t/iis  deatli.  The  stress,  then,  lies  on  the  word 
"  death."  The  context  forbids  a  reference  to  physi- 
cal death  and  future  glorification,  which  would  be 
far-fetched.  Death  seems  to  mean  :  the  whole  con- 
dition of  helplessness,  guilt,  and  mis<?ry  just  d&. 
scribed,  which  is,  in  effect,  spiritual  death.  How. 
then,  shall  "  body  "  be  understood  ?  Rejecting  the 
allusion  to  the  custom  of  chaining  a  living  man  to  a 
corpse,  but  two  views  remain  : 

(rt.)  The  literal  sense,  the  body  as  the  seat  of 
this  ileath  ;  agai«st  this  is  the  fact  that  this  gives  the 
word  an  ethical  sense,  which  is  unpauline.  In  its 
favor  is  the  preceding  phrase  :  "  the  law  of  sin  in 
my  mendjers."  If  it  be  adojited,'  we  nuist  limit  the 
meaning  thus :  "  the  body  whose  subjection  to  the 
law  of  sin  brings  about  this  state  of  misery  "  (Al- 
ford) ;  but  this  is  really  a  desire  for  death. 

(/).)  We  prefer  the  figurative  sense  (with  Calvin, 
Hodge,  and  others) ;  "  this  death  "  has  an  organism, 
which  is  not  oidy  like  a  body  in  its  organism,  but  in 
its  close  clinging  to  me ;  "  from  this  death  (thus 
representeil)  who  shall  deliver  mc  ?  "  The  genitive 
is  then  possessive  ;  the  unity  of  the  thought  is  pre- 
serveti,  and  many  difhculties  avoided.  This  figura- 
tive sense  of  ffiTiHrt  is  certaiidy  more  Pauline  than 
the  ethical  one  (comp.  Excursus  above,  and  vi.  6  ; 
viii.  lu).— K.] 

We  here  grotip  the  single  elements  of  the  idea 
of  a  psendo-|)lasmatic  human  image,  which  sin  haa 
set  up  as  a  power  that  has  become  inherent  in  human 
nature  : 

1.  The  old  man,  who  is  not  a  real  man  ;  chap, 
vi.  6,  and  elsewhere. 

2.  The  )'«"(,•  T/*s'  aaqxoq,  which  ia  not  a  reai 
yoK  ;  Col.  ii.  18. 

8.  The  mit'trr^na  t^?  ffn^xo;,  which  is  not  a  real 
ifiQovtjiin  ;  chap.  viii.  6. 

4.  The  (TiZiirt  rTjii  a/na^Ttai;,  which  is  not  a  real 
iriiifta  ;  chap,  vi,  6. 


CHAPTER  Vn.   7-25. 


243 


6>  The  ffw^tia  to*'  O-ardxoi',  which  is  not  a  real 
tSjfta ;  the  present  passage. 

6.  The  v6fio<;  iv  xolc,  ftehai,,  which  is  not  a  real 
v6/«o? ;  chap.  vii.  23. 

1.  The  fiihjy  which  are  not  real  juV.i];  Col.  iii.  5. 

8.  The  (Tcc^i,  which  is  something  else  than  the 
external  adij'i  ;  Kom.  viii.  8. 

9.  The  {yivuToii,  which  is  something  else  than 
physical  death  ;  Rom.  viii.  6.* 

Tliolucli :  On  the  exclamation  of  ver.  24  :  "  Tlie 
exclamation  does  not  appear  to  us  explicable  merely 
fr«  m  transition  to  earlier  occurrences,  but  only  be- 
cause the  continuously  felt  reaction  of  the  old  man 
has,  so  to  speak,  set  oft'  the  preceding  description." 
[Alford  thinks,  Avith  De  Wette,  that  the  cry  is  uttered 
"  in  full  consciousness  of  the  deliverance  which 
Christ  lias  effected,  and  as  leading  to  the  expression 
of  thanks  which  follows."  A  turning-point  is 
reached,  whatever  be  the  reference,  and  no  view  is 
correct  which  does  not  admit  that  Paul  here  ex- 
presses what  he  feels^  as  well  as  what  he  has  felt. 
-R.] 

Ver.  25.  Thanks  to  God  [/a()tt;  tw  &i(~i, 
Dr,  I  thank  God,  fv-/a(jvGrM  xm  dfio.  See 
Textual  JS'oie  ''].  This  reading  corresponds  to  the 
previous  exclamation  much  better  than  tvyuQiarm 
does.  Those  who  continue  the  reference  to  the  un- 
regenerate  to  the  conclusion,  get  into  difficulty  with 
this  second  exclamation.  Hence  the  adoption  of  a 
parenthesis  (Ruckert,  Fritzsche),  or  of  a  conditional 
construction  (Erasmus,  Semler).  If  that  had  not 
taken  phice,  I  would  have  been  snatched  asunder, 
with  the  spirit  to  serve  the  law  of  God,  but  with  the 
flesh  the  law  of  sin.  Meyer  observes  :  "  For  what 
he  thanks  God,  is  not  mentioned."  But  the  for 
what  is  plainly  enough  indicated  by  the  context,  as 
Meyer  himself  subsequently  brings  out.  It  is  also 
indicated  by  his  thanking  God  through  Jesus 
Christ. 

So  then  I  myself  with  the  mind  [  a  ^  a  ovv 
avToi;  iy('i)  nji  /lev  roiJ].  In  the  consideration 
of  this  difficult  passage  there  are  two  questions : 
1.  Is  what  is  here  said  connected  with  the  previous 
thanksgiving,  or  with  ver.  24  ?  2.  What,  accord- 
ingly, is  the  meaning  of  uvroi;   iyo')? 

1.  Some  think  that  the  thanksgiving  does  not 
come  at  all  into  consideration  ;  the  words  are  con- 
nected with  ver.  24  (Riickert,  Fritzsche).  This 
makes  the  passage  only  a  final  opinion  on  the  miser- 
able condition  under  the  law,  a  declaration  of  the 
consummated  dissension  in  which  man  is  situated 
under  the  law.  Others  (De  Wette,  Meyer,  and  oth- 
ers), on  the  contrary,  very  properly  take  the  thanks- 
giving also  into  consideration,  although  both  De 
Wette  and  Meyer  find  in  the  passage  only  a  recapitu- 
lation of  what  has  been  said  from  vers.  14-24, 
which,  according  to  Meyer,  should  follow  from  the 
immediately  preceding  tv-/aQi,isrM.  But  the  Apos- 
tle's language  does  not  declare  the  dissension  pre- 
viously described,  but  the  alternative  now  finally  es- 
tablished. By  accepting  the  probable  breviloquence, 
and  supplying  the  words  which  are  at  liand,  we  are 
relieved  even  here  of  the  apparent  obscurity.  We 
*ead    X  I'l    fi  e  V    voi    {dochvirtv)    6oi').ivu}\    the 

♦  [M-iny  will  feel  that  Dr.  Lange  here  gives  an  espla- 
jation  which  is  not  a  real  explanation.  Sin,  and  flesh,  and 
tlje  old  man,  are  real  enoup;n  ;  but  if  he  means  that  over 
against  tlc^tn  is  something,  which  is  the  ideal  man,  to  be 
made  real  .hrouch  the  grace  of  Christ,  then  his  remarks 
are  sifcnifioant..  That  the  true  explanation  of  this  pa-ssage 
is  to  be  sought  in  a  discovery  of  modern  science,  anticipated 
by  Paul,  is  improbable.    Cornp.  Doclr.  Note  '*. — R.] 


Apostle  has  even  omitted  the  SovXivo)  from  the  xi, 
de  accQxl — a  proof  that  both  can  be  mentally  sup- 
plied. Thus:  If  I  seme  in  the  roTe,  then  I  serve 
in  (he  law  of  God  ;  but  if  I  nerve  (or,  I  would  serve) 
in  the  flesh,  then  I  serve  the  law  of  sin.  Hither,  or  ! 
This  is  favored,  first  of  all,  by  tlie  avx6<;  iyoi. 
A  recapitulation  of  the  foregoing  cannot  be  utited 
with  this  view.  For  in  ver.  20  we  read :  vvvi  i)» 
ovxixi,  iyd),  &c.  (comp.  ver.  20).  The  folic  wing  is 
the  inference  from  the  previous  verses :  that  now 
there  is  a  definite  distinction  between  standing  in  the 
I'ors'  (that  is,  in  the  principle  of  the  vovq)  and  stand- 
ing in  the  flesh  (that  is,  in  the  principle  of  the 
flesh) ;  but  that,  through  Christ,  he  has  gained  the 
power  to  stand  in  the  principle  of  the  voZi;.  From 
this  there  arises  the  following  thesis :  I,  the  same 
man,  can  have  a  double  standpoint.  If  I  live  with 
the  voZi;,  I  serve  the  law  of  God  in  truth ;  but  if  I 
live  in  the  flesh,  even  in  the  form  of  the  service  of 
the  law,  I  serve  the  (false)  law  of  sin.  In  other 
words,  the  life  in  the  rorq  is  the  life  in  Christ,  the 
life  in  the  Spirit,  and,  like  love,  the  fulfilment  of  the 
law  (see  chap.  xiii.  8).  It  follows,  therefore,  on  the 
one  hand,  that  there  is  nothing  condemnatory  in  the 
man  of  this  standpoint.  But  there  also  Ibllows  the 
conclusion  that  they  must  live  decidedly  in  harmony 
with  their  principle.  But  if  they  live  purely  in  the 
I'orc,  the  bod)',  as  a  principle,  must  be  dead — that 
is,  rendered  merely  indifferent  as  a  principle,  and 
have  nothing  to  say,  on  account  of  the  sinfulness  in- 
herent in  it  (see  chap.  viii.  10).  But  this  applies 
only  to  the  present  body,  which  is  burdened  with 
the  propensity  to  sin.  It  is  not  to  be  trusted  ;  it  ia 
devoid  of  pure  harmony  with  the  law  of  the  Spirit, 
and  therefore  the  Christian  must  keep  it,  as  a  bond- 
servant, under  discipline  and  oversight.  But  this 
order  is  also  temporary,  so  far  as  mortal  bodies  shall 
again  be  made  alive  by  the  Spirit  of  the  risen  Christ. 
As  now  the  resurrection  itself  belongs  to  the  future 
and  the  one  period,  so  also  does  the  completion  of 
the  purity  of  the  body,  its  removal  to  the  glorious 
liberty  of  the  children  of  God,  belong  to  the  same 
future.  But  as  the  germ  of  the  resurrection-body 
has  already  been  made  alive  and  increased  in  the  be- 
liever in  this  life,  so  is  it  also  the  case  with  religious 
and  moral  purity  in  his  body.  In  every  conflict  of 
the  body  with  tiie  law  of  the  Spirit  this  alone  sliould 
be  decided  ;  yet  not  carnally,  in  legal  mortiflcations, 
but  spiritually,  in  a  dynamical  rtckonivci  of  ourselves 
to  be  dead  (see  chap.  vi.  1  ff.).  That  is,  in  a  power- 
ful departure  beyond  the  7r(jaJft?  of  tlie  body  with 
the  works  of  the  Spirit  (see  chap.  viii.  13). 

2.  Different  explanations  of  the  avxoq  iyo). 
(1.)  /  myself,  Paul.  The  Apostle's  description  of 
himself  as  an  example  for  others  (Cassian,  Pareus, 
Umbreit) ;  (2.)  Ego  idem.  The  dissension  in  one 
and  the  same  man  made  prominent  (Erasmus,  Cal- 
vin, and  others) ;  (3.)  Ille  ego.  Reference  to  what 
he  had  earlier  said  of  himself  (Fritzsche,  De  Wette) ; 
(4).  1  alone  ;  that  is,  so  fiir  as  I  am  without  the  me- 
diation of  Christ  (Meyer,  Baur,  Hofmann) ;  (5,) 
What  he  had  heretofore  described  as  the  experience 
of  mankind,  he  now  describes  as  his  own  (KoUner).* 

Olshausen's  explanation  is  the  nearest  approach 


•  [The  explanation  of  Jowett  is  altogether  untenable : 
"  lin  my  true  self  serve  the  law  of  God  ;  the  remainder  of 
the  sentence  may  be  regarded  as  an  afterthought."  The 
presence  ot  ij.ev  totally  overthrows  this.  Jowett  accepts 
it  in  his  text,  too,  without  even  taking  advantage  of  it« 
omission  in  N.  F.,  to  give  a  seeming  propriety  to  his  inter* 
pretatlon ! — R.] 


244 


THE   EPISTLE    OF   PAUL   TO   THE   ROMANS. 


to  correctness  :  "  He  thanks  the  Author  of  the  work 
of  redumption,  God  tliu  Father,  througli  Chrisit, 
whom  he  can  now  call  hin  Lurd  from  the  heart. 
With  this  experience  there  now  appears  a  totally 
changed  condition  in  the  inward  lite  of  the  man, 
whose  nature  the  Aiiostle  describes  in  what  follows, 
until  its  perfect  completion,  even  the  completion  of 
the  mortal  body"  (chap.  viii.  11).  He  further  holds, 
that  the  Divine  law  was  reflected  in  the  voT% ;  and 
in  the  inward  man  there  arose  the  vmh^  yea,  even 
thejoy,  tobe  al)le  to  observe  it ;  but  the  princi[)al 
thinj;  was  wanting — the  xciTf(jyd^faOcu.  "  But  by 
experiencing  the  redeeming  power  of  Christ,  by 
which  the  rori,-  is  strengthened,  man  finds  himself 
aljle,  at  least  by  the  highest  and  noblest  power  of 
his  nature,  to  serve  the  Divine  law."  Yet  the  a<ii>i 
etill  remains  subject  to  the  law  of  sin.  Therefore 
the  conflict  in  the  regenerate  still  continues,  but  yet 
it  is  generally  victorious  in  the  strength  of  Christ. 
Here  Olshauscn  is  led,  to  a  certain  extent,  away  from 
the  Apostle's  train  of  thought.  As  the  Christian 
should  die  on  the  supposition  of  his  being  dead  with 
Christ,  so  should  he  live  on  the  supposition  of  his 
resurrection  with  Christ,  and  therefore  he  should 
fight  on  the  supposition  of  victory  (see  1  John  v.  4). 
"  This  is  the  victory  that  overcometh  the  world,  even 
our  faith."  If  the  watchword  for  the  sanctification 
of  the  Christian  gains  its  point,  lo  ffiht  fur  victor;/, 
it  is  nevertheless  in  conformity  with  the  gospel 
standpoint  that  this  takes  place  on  the  supposition 
of  Jiijlithi'i  froiii  victori/^  or  in  conformity  with  the 
principle,  fivai,  iv  Xi^nari').  But  Olshausen,  not 
without  reason,  regards  ver.  25  as  the  beginning  of 
the  section  commencing  with  the  fii-st  of  chap.  viii.  ; 
it  constitutes,  at  least,  the  transition  to  it. 

Serve  the  laTsr  of  God  [<)oi').fv(>)  v6ni;> 
&foT<\  It  is  wiu'ti  man  has  Ijccome  free  from  the 
law  in  its  external  form,  that  he  truly  serves  the  law 
of  God  in  its  real  import  (see  chap.  iii.  31  ;  xiii.  8). 
(Reiche  :  the  voTi;  is  the  i<knl  Jew  ;  the  flesh,  as  it 
were,  is  the  cm/iirical  Jew.)  Yet  we  may  remark, 
that  the  auro-;  iyu'i  expresses  the  fact,  that  the  time 
for  deciiiion  is  now  come.  A  vacillation  between  the 
better  and  the  fal.^e  tyo'i  could  take  place  under  the 
law ;  but,  after  acquaintance  with  Christ,  the  real 
and  complete  tyio  will  live  either  in  the  voT\;,  or  in 
the  flesh  ;  will  either  serve  (lod,  or  sin.  But  exter- 
nal legality,  plarrd  over  affaiu.it  C/irist,  is  now  also 
a  life  in  the  flesh  (see  chap.  vi.  14  ;  Gal.  v.  3  If. ; 
Col.  ii.  18). 

[Note  on  the  final  sentence  of  ver.  25.  The  in- 
terpretation is  beset  with  difficulties. 

1.  Taking  n(ta  ovv  as  summing  up  the  whole 
preceding  section,  and  referring  it  to  the  regenerate, 
the  service  with  the  mind  is  of  course  the  result  of 
the  new  spiritual  life,  and,  with  the  flesh,  the  result 
of  indwelling  sin.  But  why  such  a  statement  as 
this  between  the  thanksgiving  and  the  triumphant 
utterances  of  chap.  viii.  ?  It  looks  like  taking  this 
discord  as  the  normal  condition  of  the  Christian 
life.  If  /  niifself  be  taken,  with  Meyer,  and  others, 
as  opposed  to  "in  Christ  Jesus,"  then  Forbes' 'ex- 
planation is  satisfactory :  "  I  in  myself,  notwith- 
standing whatever  progress  in  righteou.<<ncss  the 
Spirit  of  ('hrist  may  have  wrought  in  me,  or  will 
work  in  this  life,  am  still  most  imperfect ;  with  my 
mind  in<leed  I  serve  the  law  of  (iod,  but  with  my 
iesh  the  law  of  sin  ;  and,  tried  Ijy  the  law,  could 
not  be  justified,  but  would  come  under  condemna- 
lion,  if  viewed  in  myself,  and  not  in  Chri»t  JemiH." 
But  this  view  of  /  mtjaslf  is  somewhat  forced,  as  De 


Wette,  who  formerly  adopted  it,  confesses.  On  doc- 
trinal grounds,  this  interpretation  is  open  to  the 
same  objections  as  those  which  refer  the  section  to 
the  unregenerate. 

2.  We  may,  with  Lange,  accept  a  future  refer- 
ence, in  consequence  of  the  turning-point  being 
reached  in  the  thanksgiving.  But  this  reciuires  ua 
to  supply  a  great  deal,  and  to  force  the  alternative 
meaning  on  /liv,  dt.  It  also  confuses;  for  roT<; 
and  (lutJi,  already  used  in  contrast,  on  this  ^-iow  pre- 
sent a  new  distinction  ;  and  yet  that  new  distinction 
is  immediately  afterwards  repeatedly  set  foith  by  the 
terms,  xpiril,  flrxli.  The  only  escape  from  this  con- 
fusion is  the  assumption  that,  all  along,  the  voT%  was 
really  in  th?  interest  of  spiiitual  life,  and  now,  being 
delivered,  it  acts  out  its  impulses.  This,  for  obvious 
reasons,  we  reject. 

3.  We  may  take  So  then,  as  summing  np  the 
preceding  (as  is  done  by  the  Augustinian  exposi- 
tors), /  myse/f  as  the  same  niayi—ri.  c,  I,  the  man 
there  described,  under  the  law,  with  my  mind,  &c. 
It  is  not  necessary  to  suppose  a  parenthesis  ;  but, 
having  depicted  the  experience  up  to,  and  inclusive 
of,  the  deliverance,  he  gatliers  up  in  meaning  words 
the  whole  conflict,  to  contrast  with  it  the  normal 
state  of  the  Christian  ;  chap.  viii.  To  this  it  will, 
of  course,  be  objected,  that  "  with  my  mind  I  serve 
the  law  of  God  "  is  too  strong  an  expression  to  be 
referred  to  the  man  of  the  law ;  but  it  is  precisely 
this  service  to  the  law  that  is  the  aim  of  the  awak- 
ened conscience,  the  better  desire,  and  it  is  pre- 
cisely this  he  finds  he  cainiot  do,  because  the  flesh  is 
the  ruling  power  by  which  he  is  brought  into  cap- 
tivity, ill  even/  case  where  the  mere  service  of  law, 
even  of  the  law  of  God,  is  all  that  is  sought  for. 
Sho>dd  he  seem  to  reach  this  aim,  and  be  "  touching 
the  righteousness  which  is  in  tlie  law,  blameless" 
(Phil.  iii.  6),  yet  the  service  of  the  7ni7id  is  not,  by 
any  means,  the  service  of  the  Spirit.  And,  more- 
over, we  must  expect  to  find  here,  even  after  the 
thanksgiving,  a  quasi-confession  of  defeat  as  the 
point  of  connection  with,  "  There  is  now,  therefore, 
no  condemnation,"  &c.  Were  the  reference  pre- 
viously solely  to  the  Christian,  this  would  seem  un- 
necessary. There  are  diflicuhies  attending  this  view, 
it  must  be  granted,  but  they  are  not  so  numerous  aa 
those  I  find  in  the  others.  The  whole  passage  seems, 
by  its  alternations,  its  choice  of  words,  as  well  as  its 
position  in  the  Epistle,  to  point  to  an  experience 
which  is  produced  by  the  holy,  just,  and  good  law 
of  God,  rather  than  the  gospel  of  Jesus  ("hrist  ;  so 
that  even  the  outburst  of  Ciiristian  gratitude  is  fol- 
lowed  by  a  final  recurrence  to  the  conflict,  wliich  is, 
indeed,  ever-recurring,  so  long  as  we  seek  holiness 
through  the  law  rather  than  through  Christ.  See 
Doctr.  Note  '.— R.] 


DOCTRINAL   AND   EXniCAL. 

1.  See  the  above  Summary;  also  the  Prelimi' 
nan/  Ixaiiark'K. 

[Paul  here  enters  into  a  very  remarkable  psycho- 
logical analysis  of  the  working  of  the  law,  in  order 
to  show  that  it,  although  holy  and  good  in  itself, 
caiHiot  effect  the  sanctification  of  man,  on  account 
of  the  power  of  indwelling  sin,  which  can  be  over- 
come otdy  through  redeeming  grace.  He  gives  a 
chapter  out  of  his  own  experience,  especially  out  of 
the  transition  period  from  the  law  to  the  gospel.  Id 
this  experience,  however,  is  reflected,  to  a  certata 


CHAPTER  VII.   '7-25. 


245 


extc'ut,  the  history  of  the  religious  development  of 
humanity  as  a  whole.  What  is  here  so  vividly  indi- 
vidualized, repeats  itself  also  in  the  experience  of 
every  earnest  Christian.  The  law,  instead  of  slay- 
ing sin,  first  brings  it  to  a  full  manifestation  (vers. 
7-13) ;  in  the  internal  contest  it  is  proven  power- 
less ;  it  but  leads  to  the  painful  confession  of  help- 
lessness (vers.  14-24) ;  no  other  hope  remains,  save 
the  grace  of  Jesus  Christ  (ver.  25). 

Those  expositors  who  follow  the  later  Augustin- 
ian  view,  refer  vers.  14-25  to  the  regenerate.,  because 
they  are  unwilling  to  ascribe  to  the  natural  man 
ever,  this  powerless  longing  after  higher  and  better 
things.*  On  the  other  hand,  those  who  refer  them 
to  the  nnrei/eneraie,  urge  this  reason,  th;i*  the  regen- 
erate man  is  not  so  powerless,  so  captive  to  sin,  as 
the  person  here  described,  but  has  overcome  the 
dominion  of  sin,  as  the  Apostle  clearly  indicates 
both  in  chaps,  vi.  and  vii.  The  correct  interpreta- 
tion lies  between  these  two.  Pnul  describes  his 
state,  not  when  sunk  in  sin,  but  when  awakened  to 
earnest  struggles  against  sin  under  the  scourge  of 
the  law,  under  preparation  for  a  state  of  grace — i.  e., 
in  the  peiiod  of  transition  from  the  law  to  the  gos- 
pel, in  the  Judaico-kgalidic  state  of  awakening. 

Thus  nmch,  however,  must  be  conceded  to  the 
Augustinian  view,  that  this  contest  is  repeated  in 
modified  form  in  the  regenerate.  So  long  as  they 
are  in  the  flesh,  the  old  life  of  Adnm  rules  beside 
the  new  life  in  Christ.  Temptations  from  the  world, 
assaults  of  Satan,  disturb ;  not  unfrequently  sin 
overcomes,  and  the  believer,  feeling  deeply  and 
painfully  his  own  helplessness,  turns  in  penitence  to 
Christ's  grace,  to  be  the  victor  at  last.  It  must  be 
remembered,  too,  that  there  are  many  legal,  de- 
spondent, melancholy  Christians,  who  never  pass  out 
of  the  contest  here  described  into  the  triumph  of 
grace,  the  full  freedom,  the  peace  with  God  and  hs- 
surance  of  salvation.  The  temperament  and  physi- 
cal condition  have  a  great  influence  in  mnny  such 
cases,  but  the  main  reason  is,  that  such  Christians 
depend  too  much  upon  themselves,  and  do  not  look 
Buflicienlly  to  the  cross  of  Christ. — P,  S.] 

2.  According  to  the  above,  the  passage  treats 
throughout  neither  of  the  uni'egenerate  nor  the  re- 
generate, nor  partially  of  the  former  and  of  the 
latter ;  but  it  describes  the  process,  the  living  tran- 
sition, of  a  man  from  the  unrcgenerate  to  the  regen- 
erate state,  who  inwardly,  and  therefore  properly, 
understands  the  law,  and  regards  the  commandmenr, 
Tlion  shdlt  not  covet,  as  the  root  of  all  command- 
ments. The  quesiiou  is  not  concerning  a  permanent 
condition,  but  a  movement  and  a  crisis ;  therefore 
first  in  the  preterite,  then  in  the  present  tense.  The 
cooperation  of  the  promise  as  well  as  the  hope  in 
this  process  of  death  which  leads  to  life,  is  indeed 
assumed,  but  not  described  with  it,  because,  to  the 
combatant  of  the  law,  every  thing,  even  the  prom- 
ise, the  gospel-element  itself,  is  transformed  first  of 
all  into  law  ;  while,  reversely,  the  finally  triumphant 
faith,  and  then  even  the  law  (according  to  Origen), 
are  transformed  into  pure  gospel, 

3.  We  must  not  overlook  the  fact  that  the  Apos- 
tle here  describes  a  gradation,  whose  stages  are 
brought  out  prominently  in  the  explanations — a  gra- 
dation which  apparently  leads  backward  to  despair 
and  tlie  sense  of  death,  but,  at  the  same  time,  truly 

•  [Hence  the  Arminian  controversy  really  bepan  upon 
fhe  esecesis  of  this  passage.  It  cannot  be  doubted  that 
this  controversy  ha?  led  to  extreine  views  in  both  directions 
respecting  the  meaning  of  thia  chapter.— R.] 


upward  to  the  true  life.  It  is  the  way  of  godly  sor. 
row  to  salvation  ;  according  to  Luther,  the  descen: 
of  self-knowledge  into  hell,  which  is  the  preliminary 
condition  to  ascension  to  heaven  with  Christ.  "Alas, 
what  am  I,  my  Redeemer  ?  I  find  my  state  of  soul 
daily  worse."  The  full  appearance  of  the  leprosy  on 
the  surface  of  the  body  is  the  symptom  of  its  healing. 
["  Paul  means  to  show  how  utterly  unavailing 
are  all  efforts  to  get  rid  of  sin  by  mere  nature,  1  ow- 
ever  much  intensified  by  views  of  law  and  the  Act- 
ings of  conscience,  until  the  power  of  sin  is  broken 
by  faith  in  the  Source  of  spiritual  life.  No  convic- 
tions of  the  excellence  of  the  law,  no  acknowledge 
meut  of  its  purity  and  rightful  obligation,  no  assent 
or  consent  to  it  as  good,  no  approbation  of  it  in  the 
real  ego,  no  preference  for  it  nor  teniporary  delight 
in  it  as  commending  itself  to  the  judgment,  and  no 
strivings  alter  obedience  to  its  precept  nor  fear  of 
its  penalty  admitted  to  be  just,  will  avail  against  the 
law  of  sin  and  death,  till  it  is  .superseded  by  another 
law  of  spiritual  life  derived  from  Christ  by  faith." 
-R.] 

4.  The  law  effects  not  only  the  knowledge,  but 
also  the  revelation  of  sin — its  full  dev  lopriient  at-d 
manifestation ,  but  not  its  genesis.  It  accelerates  its 
process  to  judgment,  in  order  to  make  the  sinner 
susceptible  of,  and  fully  in  need  of,  deliverance. 
Thus  it  corresponds  with  the  trials  and  appointmenta 
of  God's  government,  which  also  impel  nian  more 
and  more  to  the  development  of  his  inward  stand- 
point. The  only  difterence  is,  that  the  law,  as  a 
spiritual  effect,  inipels  to  the  ideal  saving  judgment 
("  for  if  we  would  judge  ourselves,  we  should  not  be 
judged  "),  while  the  guidance  of  man  by  trials  and 
temptations  results  principally  in  real,  condemnatory 
judgment  a.  But  here,  too,  God's  law  and  ordina- 
tion agree.  To  the  elect,  the  ray  of  the  law  be- 
comes a  flash  of  lightning  which  prostrates  them 
before  the  throne  of  grace  ;  to  harder  natures,  the 
flash  of  lightning  which  destroj-s  their  earthly  glory 
must  first  become,  in  many  forms,  an  illuminating 
beam.  It  is  a  fundamental  thought  of  the  Apostle, 
that  the  afiufjriu,  which  has  unmasked  itself  in  the 
nature  of  man,  is  compelled  by  the  law  to  reveal 
itself  in  human  life  as  na^dfj'u(Ti.c — as  deadly  un- 
naturalness.  Thi^  the  law  drives  the  serpent  from 
its  concealment. 

5.  On  the  different  definitions  of  the  idea  of  the 
unrcgenerate  and  the  regenerate,  see  Tholuck,  p. 
344.  From  Rom.  viii.  it  is  [ilain  that  the  liufhnia 
is  the  result  of  the  original  new  birth,  which  is  thus 
decided  by  justification.  This  new  birth  must  be 
distinguished  prospectively  from  the  broader  and 
final  new  birth  in  the  resurrection  (Matt.  xix.  28),  and 
retrospectively  from  the  spiritual  production  of  man 
by  the  word  of  God  as  the  seed  of  the  new  birth, 
which  begins  with  the  strong  and  penetrating  call  of 
man  by  law  and  gospel  (1  Peter  i.  23).  It  must 
be  distinguished  laterally  from  its  sacramental  sym- 
bolization  and  sealing,  which  i.«,  at  the  same  time,  ita 
normal  foundation,  as  the  ideal  and  social  new  birth, 
as  in  the  apostolical  sphere  it  coincid(d  identically 
with  it,  and  it  accords  with  it  in  normal  ecclesiastical 
relations,  but,  amid  ecclesiastical  corruptions,  can 
also  go  to  ruin  with  it. 

6.  A  description  of  three  stages  of  the  vita  sane 
forum,  in  Bucer,  see  Tholuck,  p.  337.  See  also  the 
views  on  the  practical  effects  of  the  twofold  exposi- 
tion of  this  passage,  as  applying  to  the  regenerate 
and  the  unrcgenerate,  in  the  note,  p.  338.  Also,  a 
further  treatment  of  this  question,  Tholuck,  p.  341  flE 


24G 


THE   EPISTLE   OF   PAUL   TO   THE   ROMANS. 


[Dr.  Hodge  rightly  reprobates  the  saying  of  Dr. 
A.  Clarke  {(luoted  approvingly  by  Tlioluck  in  the 
Qote  n-feneti  to  by  Lauge) :  "  Tliis  opinion  has  most 
pitifully  and  shanitliiUy  not  only  lowered  the  stand- 
ard of  Cliri.-'tiunity,  but  destroyed  its  influence  and 
di^graeed  its  character."  The  danger  from  an  ex- 
clusive reference  to  the  unregenerate,  is  discourage- 
ment to  weak  believers  ;  but  that  from  the  other 
reference  is  not  false  security  in  sin,  so  much  as  a 
tendency  to  keep  the  Cliristian  under  the  scourge  of 
the  law.  It  does  encourage  a  morbid,  unrelieved 
state  of  conscience,  and  legal  elforts  after  sanctifica- 
tion.  (Comp.  the  latter  part  of  Jtuclr.  Note  ',)  To 
refer  it  to  a  movement  possible  both  Ijcfore  and  after 
conversion,  a  state  with  reference  to  the  law,  encour- 
ar/e.t  unbelievers  to  go  to  Clir.st,  and  rmmes  believers 
to  go  to  Ilim,  since  the  existence  of  the  conflict 
shows  that  the  sci)Oolin;uster  is  nearer  than  the  de- 
livering Master.  Here  Delitzsch  is  excellent :  "  Every 
Christian  is  compelled  to  confirm  what  the  Apo.stle 
here  .<ays,  from  his  own  personal  experience.  And 
well  for  him  if  he  can  also  confirm  tlie  fact  that 
God's  law,  and  therefore  God's  will,  is  his  deliglit — 
tliat  he  desires  the  good,  and  hates  tiie  evil ;  and, 
indeed,  in  such  a  way  that  the  sin  to  whicii,  against 
his  will,  he  is  hurried  away,  is  foreign  to  his  inmost 
nature.  But  woe  to  him,  if,  from  his  own  personal 
experience,  he  could  conlirm  only  this,  and  not  also 
the  fact  that  the  spirit  of  the  new  life,  having  its 
source  in  Christ  Jesus,  hius  freed  him  from  tlie  urgen- 
cy of  sin  and  the  condition  of  death,  which  were  not 
abrogated  through  the  law,  but  only  brought  to 
light ;  so  that  liis  will,  wliich,  althcjugh  powerless, 
was  by  the  law  inclined  toward  what  is  good,  is  now 
actually  capable  of  good,  and  oi)ijosed  to  the  death 
still  working  in  him,  as  a  predominating,  overmas- 
tering power  of  life,  to  be  liiiallv  triumpliant  in 
glory."— II.] 

7.  The  prohibition,  "  Thou  shalt  not  covet " 
(ver.  7),  is  known  to  be  of  very  great  weight  in 
dividing  the  Ten  Commandments.  If  it  be  divided 
into  two  commandments,  the  objects  of  the  lust 
(coveting)  are  the  principal  thing.  But  the  Apostle 
views  it  as  a  prohibition  of  wicked  lust  itself,  and 
thereby  it  becomes  a  complete  commandment,  which 
extends,  in  sense,  even  through  all  the  command- 
ments.  (Comp.  Tholuck,  p  8.")0.)  On  the  shallow 
constructions  of  the  doctrine  of  the  sinfulness  of 
wicked  lust,  by  the  Rabbins,  see  the  same,  p.  3r)l. 
In  a  similar  way,  a  regard  lor  a  life  of  feeling  re- 
cedes to  an  ever-increasing  distance  in  the  dogmatics 
of  the  Middle  Ages,  in  consequence  of  the  stress 
laid  on  the  merit  of  good  works. 

8.  On  ver.  8.  Dirterent  variations  of  the  niti. 
mur  in  vfiflfum  among  the  classical  writers  (see  Tho- 
luck,  p.  35.'?,  note  ;  I'rov.  i.\.  17).  The  law  produces 
reflection  on  the  forbidden  object,  curiosity,  doubt, 
distrust  of  the  lawgiver,  imaginations,  hist-s,  suseefk- 
til>ility  of  the  seed  of  tem|)tation,  and  of  seduction, 
and,  finally,  the  production  of  rebellioji — the  7Tn(in- 
Scini^.  The  history  of  chihlhood,  of  Israel,  and  the 
Antinomianism  of  the  early  Christian  period  (Nitzsch, 
Di".  (Je-iatinntrrHcfuinini;/  d'S  A)i(iiioinii<iiiii.i)  \  the 
history  of  Antinomianism  in  the  time  of  tlie  Refor- 
mation (the  Miinstcr  Anabaptists,  the  (Jent-van  l.'dt- 
ertines,  &c.) ;  and  the  whole  history  of  Divine  and 
human  legislation  furnishes  proof  of  the  Apostle's 
propo.Mtion  (Baliuimites,  Nicolaitans).  Nevertheless, 
the  law  is  holy,  just,  and  good  (see  the  A>'.7- 
Koten) ;  iU  design  and  0[urntion  are  saving.  Be- 
cause Christ  wajj  the  law  of  God  per:joniHed,  He  has 


experienced  in  Himself  the  full  Divine  revelation  of 
the  opposition  of  sinful  humanity  to  the  law  ;  He 
was  proscribed  as  if  He  had  been  f-in  personified. 
But  with  this  complete  revelation  of  the  power  of 
sin,  grace  attained  its  still  more  powerful  revela- 
tion. 

9.  On  the  reference  of  ver.  9  to  the  age  of  eiiild 
hood,  see  Tholuck,  p.  350,  and  the  above  Hxeg. 
Notes. 

10.  On  ver.  13.  On  the  different  meanings  of 
the  commandment,  "  This  do,  and  thou  shalt  live," 
see  the  Exert.  Notes.  This  d<>,  and  thou  shalt  live^ 
means  :  1.  Living  in  the  outward  blessing  of  exter- 
nal obedience ;  2.  DifitKj  in  order  to  live ;  3.  First 
really  livin^after  this  death. 

11.  The  law  is  holy  in  its  principle  (the  will  of 
God) ;  just  in  its  method  (establishing  and  adminis- 
tering  justice);  good  in  its  design  (promoting  life 
itself  by  the  ideal  death  in  selt-knuwledge).  The 
sinner  had  to  be  delivered  from  death  by  death  — 
objectively  by  the  death  of  Christ,  subjectively  by 
the  reception  of  the  death  of  Christ  in  his  own  life 
— by  his  spiritual  dying.  Calovius :  Sancta  dicltnr 
lex  ratione  caiisce  ejficieiitis  et  mater ialis :  quia  a  dec 
sanciis-iimo  est  et  circa  ohjecta  saiic/a  occujiatur ; 
jiista  est  formaliter:  quia  juslitice  diviiicc  a/Tuxo- 
vt-afia,  iiostree  reyufa  est ;  bona  est  ratione  Jinis, 
quia  bona  teniporalia  tt  wterna  prornittit.  The  last 
definition  is  the  weakest.  Oi  justa,  Tholuck  uses 
these  words :  "  more  correctly,  since  it  produces 
'  righteousness.' " 

12.  On  the  manner  in  which  sin  misconstrues  the 
law,  in  order  to  make  it  minister  to  its  own  ends, 
and  also  on  the  gradual  development  of  self-knowl- 
edge, see  the  Exrg.  Notes. 

13.  Unless  we  have  a  definite  idea  of  the  false 
forms  in  organic  life,  we  cannot  gain  the  Apostle's 
complete  view,  which  we  have  sketched  in  the  lixerj. 
Notes.  Either  the  individual  figures  in  question  are 
volatilized  into  hy[ierbolical  metaphors,  or  people 
have  fallen  into  dualistic  and  Manicha'an  notions, 
which  have  been  made  to  underlie  the  Apostle's 
thoughts,  now  in  order  to  appeal  to  him,  now  to 
govern  him.  See  "  Sydenham,"  by  Jalin,  Eisenach, 
1840,  p.  56  :  As  diseases  in  the  vegetable  world  are 
known  to  show  themselves  in  inferior  and  pariLsitical 
organisms  (fungi,  mosses,  mistletoes,  &e.),  so  does 
dise;use  in  man  show  a  lower,  half-independent  vital 
process  and  inferior  organism,  secreted  like  a  germ 
and  parasite  in  the  original  life.  Similar  expressions 
by  Paracelsus,  on  the  inferior  organisms  undern)ining 
the  healihy  life. — Comp.  Sclr.ih's  J'alliolo,,ic  nnd 
Tliernpie  der  Pscu  toplasutcn,  Vienna,  1854. — False 
organic  forms  pervert  the  functions  and  material 
sub.-Uince  of  natural  life  into  noxious  shapes  and 
poisons.  The  false  s|)iritual  form — sin — perverts 
the  true  life  of  iMan  into  a  luxuriant  growth  of  false 
spiritual  images  of  this  life. 


nOMILETIOAL  AND  rEACTIOAL. 

Acquaintance  with  sin  is  effected  by  the  law,  so 
far,  1.  as  the  law,  as  a  prohibition,  jirovokes  sin  ; 
2.  but  also  that  the  consciousness  of  sin  be  complete 
(vers.  7-12). — What  does  sin  take  from  and  give  to 
man  ?  1.  It  takes  life  from  him  ;  2.  It  gives  him 
death  (vers.  7-12). — The  abu.se  of  what  is  holy, 
1.  is  indeed  horrilde,  but  yet,  2.  what  is  holy  is  not 
itself  destructive  (vers.  7-12). — The  destruclion  of 
the  state  of  innocence  :    1    Apparently  produced  bj 


CHAPTER  VII.   7-26. 


247 


the  Divine  prohibition ;  2.  Actually  produced  by 
human  sin  (vers.  7-12). — How  the  best  teacher  can 
become  a  tempter  against  his  will,  wiien  he,  1.  ex- 
empts from  a  well-meant  proiiibition  ;  2.  but  wlien 
this  very  prohiliition  awakens  the  desire  for  trans- 
gression (vers.  7-12). — We  should  not  prohibit  chil- 
dren from  too  much. — The  best  thing  we  have  is 
corrupted  by  sin  (ver.  10). — The  feuiful  deception 
of  sin  (ver.  11). — The  holiness  of  the  Divine  law. 
It  is  shown  to  us  when  we,  1.  look  at  the  lawgiver ; 
2.  carefully  prove  the  principal  statements  of  the 
commandments ;  3.  have  in  mind  the  design  for 
which  it  was  given  (ver.  12). — Whence  does  it  come 
that  what  is  good  is  made  death  unto  me  ?  1.  The 
fault  does  not  lie  in  the  law,  which  is  spiritual ;  but, 
2.  in  me,  who  am  carnal  (properly,  "  Hesh-like  "), 
sold  under  sin  (vers.  13,  14). — Proof  of  how  sin, 
aiming  at  the  ruin  of  man,  prepares  its  own  over- 
throw (ver.  13). — What  is,  "  to  be  sold  under  sin  ? " 
1.  Not  to  know  what  we  do — blindness  of  self- 
knowledge  ;  2.  Not  to  do  what  we  will,  but  to  do 
what  we  hate — perversion  of  our  own  spontaneity 
(vers.  14,  15). — Even  in  his  sin,  man  mu.^t  testify  to 
the  goodness  of  the  law  (ver.  16). — In  the  flesh  there 
dwelleth  no  good  thing  (ver.  16). — To  will  and  to 
perform  !  1.  How  near  the  willing  of  what  is  good 
is  to  us  ;  2.  But  how  far  from  us  is  the  performance 
of  it  (vers,  18,  19) ! — The  deep  sorrow  expressed  in 
the  confession,  "  for  to  will  is  present  with  me,  but 
how  to  perform,"  &c. ;  because  we  then  say  as  much 
as :  1.  I  wish  the  good  very  much  ;  but,  2.  I  am 
just  as  much  devoid  of  the  power  to  do  it  (ver.  18). 
— The  surprising  discovery  of  man  on  tlie  way  to  his 
conversion   (ver.    21). — The    double    law   in  man ; 

1.  The  true  law  in  the  mind ;  2.  The  false  law  in 
the  members  (vers.  22-25). — The  divided  state  of 
the  human  heart:    1.  Caused  by  sin  (vers.  13-20); 

2.  Manifesting  itself  in  the  ccmflict  of  the  two  laws 
(vers.  22,  23,  25) ;  3.  Calling  forth  the  longing  for 
deliverance  (ver.  24).  —  The  thanksgiving  of  the 
Apostle  for  the  peace  of  deliverance  (ver.  25  ;  comp. 
chap.  i.  25). 

Luther  :  To  do  does  not  mean  here  to  perform 
the  work,  but  to  feel  the  excitement  of  the  lusts. 
But  to  perform,  is  to  live  without  lust,  totally  pure  ; 
this  does  not  take  place  in  this  life  (vers.  18,  19). — 
He  here  calls  death  the  misery  and  pains  endured  in 
the  conflict  with  sin  (as  Exod.  x.  17).  Pharaoh 
Bays :  "  That  he  may  take  away  from  me  this  death 
only  "  (this  was  the  locusts). 

Starkk  :  The  natural  man  is  like  the  earth  since 
the  curse  has  been  pronounced  upon  it.  The  earth 
has  the  seeds  of  all  kinds  of  weeds  in  it ;  and 
although  they  seem,  in  Winter,  to  lie  perfectly  dead 
in  the  earth,  yet,  by  the  warm  rain  in  the  Spring, 
they  will  again  germinate  and  grow  (ver.  8). — Sin  is 
a  real  highway  robber ;  it  associates  in  a  friendly 
way  with  u.s,  and  strives  to  lead  us  off  from  the  right 
road,  but  afterwards  kills  us  (ver.  11). — When  sin 
has  become  suddenly  powerful,  do  not  despond  ;  God 
does  not  wish  the  death  of  the  sinner.  Flee  in  peni- 
tence to  Christ,  and  you  shall  be  holy  (ver.  13). — 
Believers  do  many  good  works,  but  not  all  that  they 
should  ;  and  what  they  do,  is  far  from  being  as  per- 
fect as  it  should  be  (ver.  18). — Believing  Christians 
lament  more  over  the  weaknesses  still  cleaving  to 
Jhem,  than  over  temporal  torments,  chains,  and 
bonds  (ver.  20). 

OsiANDER  ;  The  law  is  a  beautiful  mirror,  which 
Bhows  us  our  sins,  in  order  that,  when  we  perceive 
Buch  great  evil,  we  may  get  counsel  and  help  from 


Christ   (ver.    7). — If   believers    sin,    and   it   occurs 
against  their  will,  they  do  not  lose  the  favor  of  God 
(ver.  17). — Cramer  :  Innate  wicked  lust  a  fountain 
of  all  sins,  and  it  is  also  against   God's  law  ;    we 
should  not  allow  ourselves  to  lust  at  all  (ver.  7).— 
T'hei-e  are  two  characteristics  of  true  Christians,  so 
ng  as  they  are  in  the  world  :  they  give  themselves 
luble  about  their  wretchedness,  but  they  rejoice 
1  take  comfort  because  of  the  deliverance  (re- 
iption)  that  has  taken  place  through  Jesus  Christ 
.  25). — Nova  Bibl.  Tab. :   There  is  nothing  so 
that  it  cannot  become  evil  by  abuse.     In  this 
..__,  Jie  blessed  gospel  becomes  to  many  a  savor  of 
death  unto  death  (ver.  10). — Speker  :  Our  nature  is 
so  sinful  that  we  do  not  take  as  much  pleasure  iu 
any  thing  as  in  what  is  forbidden  (ver.  8). — It  is  a 
most  eminent  attaiimient,  and  one  necessary  for  a 
right  understanding   of   the  law  and  sin,  that  we 
properly  understand  the  spiritual  character  of  the 
law  (ver.  14). — Those  can  profit  by  this  Pauline  ex- 
ample (ver.  25)  who  strive  with  all  earnestness  to  do 
what  is  good  ;  but  those  who  do  not  strive  with  all 
earnestness  to  do  what  is  good,  but  still  sin  frequent- 
ly with  the  wull,   cannot  employ  the  language  of 
Paul,  for  they  are  not  in  harmony  with  his  example. 
— In  short,  if  one  will  have  a  pattern,  let  him  take 
this :  No  one  must  lay  claim  to  any  comfort  in  this 
chapter  whose  counterpart  is  found  in  chaps,  vi.  or 
viii.  ;  but  these  three  chapters  must  harmonize. 

Bfngel  :  We  have  here  a  figure  from  military 
life  :  The  soul  is  the  king,  the  members  are  the  sub- 
jects, and  sin  is  the  enemy  whom  the  king  has  ad- 
mitted. Tl'.e  king  is  now  punished  by  the  insurrec- 
tion of  his  subjects,  who  rise  in  rebellion  with  the 
enemy. — Gerlach  :  The  law  is  sph~itual,  means  :  it 
is  an  emanation  from  God,  who  is  a  Spirit  (John  iv. 
24) ;  that  is,  omnipotent,  personal,  and  holy  love. 
It  is,  further,  spiritual  in  its  import — that  is,  divine 
and  holy.  It  pertains  to  the  inmost  being  of  man, 
which  it  would  fully  conform  to  God. — There  stands 
in  opposition  to  it  the  carnal  sense  of  man  ;  that  is, 
his  desire,  which  is  directed,  by  virtue  of  sin,  to  the 
world,  finiteness,  and  sensuousness,  and  makes  him 
who  is  sundered  from  his  Creator  a  servant  of  the 
creature  (ver.  14). — An  Apostle  glowing  with  love, 
like  Paul,  hum))le8  himself,  and  trembles  and  groans 
under  the  law  of  sin ;  and  shall  we,  who  are  like  ice 
in  comparison  with  him,  foolishly  expose  ourselves, 
and  boast  of  whatever  can  awaken  lust  in  us  ?  (ver. 
14.) — The  incapacity  of  man  to  do  good,  is  an  inca- 
pacity of  the  will ;  this,  and  not  an  incapacity  of 
spiritual  disposition,  has  necessitated  it ;  it  is  there- 
fore a  weakness,  which  is  continually  attended  by 
the  sense  of  guilt  (ver.  18). — The  exclamation  of 
the  Apostle  is  the  cry  for  help  of  all  humanity, 
which,  in  despair  of  all  help  through  and  of  itself, 
looks  for  aid  from  without.  The  law  leads  to  this 
desire,  but  it  cannot  deliver  from  the  wretcheducss 
(ver.  24). — He  who  sighs  most  deeply  over  the 
bondage  in  the  body  of  this  death,  stands  nearest  to 
deliverance  (ver.  24). 

Lisco  :  What  Paul  here  makes  clear  in  itself,  is 
a  truth  of  universal  human  experience — namely,  that 
there  are  two  successive  states  (the  third  is  described 
in  chap,  viii.) :  one  (ver.  9),  where  sin  slumbers  in 
us,  because  we  are  not  fully  conscious  of  the  moral 
law  ;  the  other  (vers.  14-24),  where,  having  a  clear 
knowledge  of  the  law,  but  yet  without  the  grace  of 
redemption,  we  become  acquainted  with  the  pro- 
found corruption  of  our  heart,  which  is  opposed  to 
the  law  of  God,  and  feel  wretched  in  this  condition. 


248 


THE    EPISTLE    OF   PAUL   TO   THE    ROMANS. 


— The  conflict  described  in  vers.  14-25  occurs,  be- 
fore the  new  birth,  in  the  heart  of  a  man  awakened 
by  tiie  law  ;  yet,  in  the  life  of  the  regenerate  per- 
8o;i,  diniilar  eontlicts  and  phenomena  arise,  in  which, 
however,  he  is  ever  triumphant. — Tlie  Apostle  was 
far  from  holding  tlie  erroneous  view,  tiiat  sin  dwells 
only  in  man's  body,  ami  not  also  in  his  soul  (ver. 
24). — I  thank  (Jod  thnmgli  Jesus  Christ  our  Lord  ! 
Through  llim,  He  has  delivered  me  in  and  froin  all 
this  wretchedness  (ver.  25). — IIkubnkk  :  The  best 
thing  can  l)e  made  an  injury  to  the  wicked  will  (ver. 
13). — Every  thing  become.'?  impure  in  the  impure 
heart.  Corruplio  np(:ini  est  geiieratio  pensiini  (ver. 
la). — Description  of  the  evil  propensity  (vers.  14- 
25). — It  is  the  best  people  who  confess,  that  strong 
sensuous  impulses  in  tliem  are  sinful  (ver.  14). — 
Tlie  inward  contradiction  of  man  with  himself. 
The  conflict  between  knowing,  willing,  and  doing 
(rcr.  15).  —  Even  the  immoral  man  feels  that  it 
would  have  been  better  if  he  had  kept  the  law 
(ver.  If.). 

Besser  :  The  twofold  way  in  which  sin  becomes 
exceeding  sinful  by  the  commandment:  1.  Its  wick- 
ed, ungodly  nature,  plays  a  prominent  part  in  the 
tran.<gi-ession  of  the  plain  conmiandment ;  2.  Tlie 
sentence  of  death  wiiich  tran.sgression  eH'ects,  drives 
sin  into  the  conscience  of  man,  so  that  lie  feels  and 
perceives  it  to  be  a  horror  and  abomination  before 
God  (ver.  13). — The  conflict  between  spirit  and  flesh 
in  believers  (vers.  14-25). — "  Believers  know  and 
feel,"  says  Luther  ( IVork-x,  viii.,  2747),  "  tiiat  no 
good  thing  dwells  in  their  flesh,  .so  that  they  may 
become  more  humble,  and  let  their  peacock-tail  fall ; 
that  is,  do  not  depend  on  their  own  righteousness 
and  good  works,"  &c.  (ver.  18). 

La.nge  :  Tlie  way  of  the  law  from  sin  to  grace  : 

1.  Apparently,  ever  darker  and  deeper  toward  (ieath  ; 

2.  Really,  always  nearer  to  light  and  life. — The  sad 
revelation  of  sin  a  preliminary  condition  of  the  joy 
— bringing  revelation  of  salvation. — The  develop- 
ment of  self-knowledge  under  the  law :  1.  Clear 
view  which  reason  has  of  the  authority  of  the  law  ; 
2.  Earnest  wrestling  of  the  will  ;  3.  Outburst  of 
deeply-alVected  feeling  (oh,  wretched  man  that  I 
am). — How  the  proverb,  "  Man's  extremity  is  God's 
opportututy,"  is  most  gloriou.sly  verified  in  the  con- 
version of  man. — The  sti'uggle  Ijetween  sin  and  the 
law  :  1.  The  deception  which  sin  practises  with  the 
law;  2.  The  unmitsking  efl'ected  liy  the  law  through 
the  ap|)arcnt  charm  of  sin. — How  the  law  becomes 
alway.s  more  inward  to  the  candid  person,  until  he 
haa  perceiveil  it  as  his  spiritual  I,  his  consciousness, 
his  reason. — The  fearful,  fal.se  |)0wer  <jf  evil :  1.  Ir, 
assumes  all  the  features  of  personal  life  ;  2.  In 
order  to  exhaust  and  destroy  personal  life  in  all 
its  featun.'s. — The  cry  for  deliverance  occurs  in  close 
proximity  with  thank.sgiving  and  praise  to  God. — 
3u  ver.  25  :   h'ilher,  or  I 

[Jeiiemy  Taylou  (condensed  from  sermon  on  the 
ChriatiarCt  Conquetl  over  the  Body  of  Sin,  Rom.  vU. 


19):  The  evil  natures,  principles,  and  manners  of 
the  world  are  the  causes  of  our  imperfect  willinga 
and  weaker  actings  in  the  things  ol  God.  Let  no 
man  please  himself  with  perpetual  pious  conversa*' 
tion  or  ineffective  desires  of  serving  God  ;  he  that 
does  not  practise,  as  well  as  talk,  and  do  what  ho 
desires  and  ought  to  do,  confesses  himself  to  sin 
greatly  against  liis  conscience ;  and  it  is  a  prodigiouj 
folly  to  think  that  he  is  a  good  man,  because,  though 
he  does  sin,  it  was  yet  agiunst  his  mind  to  do  so. 
Every  good  man  can  watch  always ;  running  from 
temptation  is  a  part  of  our  watchfulne.'«s ;  every 
good  employment  is  a  second  and  great  part  of  it 
and  laying  in  provisions  of  reason  and  religion  be- 
forehand is  a  third  part  of  it ;  and  tlie  conversation 
of  Christians  is  a  fourth  part  of  it. — Mait.  Henrv, 
on  vers.  24,  25  :  When,  under  the  sense  of  the  re- 
maining power  of  sin  and  corruption,  we  shall  see 
reason  to  bless  God  through  Chri.st  and  for  Christ. 
Through  Christ's  death,  an  end  will  be  put  to  all 
our  complaints,  and  we  shall  be  wafted  to  an  eter- 
nity without  sin  or  sigh. — It  is  a  special  remedy 
against  fears  and  sorrows,  to  be  much  in  praise. — • 
Scott  :  A  proper  knowledge  of  the  holy  law  of  God 
is  the  two-edged  sword  which  gives  the  death-wound 
to  self-righteousiie.<s  and  to  Antinomianism  ;  for  it 
is  perfectly  tit  to  be  the  rule  of  our  duty,  written 
in  our  hearts,  and  obeyed  in  our  lives. — Clarke: 
We  never  find  that  true  repentance  takes  place 
where  the  moral  law  is  not  preached  and  enforced, 
Tiie  law  is  tlie  grand  instiument,  in  the  hands  of  a 
faithful  minister,  to  alarm  and  awaken  sinners ;  and 
he  may  safely  show  that  every  sinner  is  under  the 
law,  and  consequently  under  the  curse,  who  has  not 
fled  for  refuge  to  the  hope  held  out  by  the  gospel. — 
HoPGK  :  It  is  an  evidence  of  an  unrenewed  heart  to 
express  or  feel  opposition  to  the  law  of  God,  as 
though  it  were  too  strict ;  or  to  be  disposed  to 
throw  the  blame  of  our  want  of  conformity  to  the 
Divine  will  from  ourselves  n\un\  the  law,  as  unrea- 
sonable.— The  Christian's  victory  over  sin  cannot 
be  achieved  by  the  strength  of  his  resolutions,  nor 
by  the  plainness  and  force  of  moral  motives,  nor 
by  any  resources  within  himself.  He  looks  to  Jesus 
Christ,  and  conquers  in  His  strength.  The  victory 
is  not  obtained  by  nature,  but  by  grace. — Barnes  : 
We  have  here  :  1.  A  view  of  the  sad  and  iiainful 
conflict  between  sin  and  God.  They  are  opposed 
in  all  things ;  2.  We  see  the  raging,  withering 
effect  of  sin  on  the  soul.  In  all  circumstances  it 
tends  to  death  and  wo  ;  3.  We  see  the  feebleness 
of  the  law  and  of  conscience  to  overcome  this.  The 
tendency  of  both  is  to  produce  conflict  and  wo ; 
4.  W^e  see  that  the  gospel  oidy  can  overcome  sin. 
To  us  it  should  be  a  subject  of  ever-increasing  thank- 
fulness, that  what  could  not  lie  accomplished  by  the 
law,  can  be  thus  effected  by  the  gospel ;  and  that 
God  has  devised  a  plan  that  thus  effects  complete 
deliverance,  and  gives  to  the  captive  in  sin  an  ever 
lasting  triumph. — J.  F.  H.] 


CHAPTER  VIII.   1-17.  249 


Sixth  Section. — Christian  life^  or  life  in  the  Spirit  of  Christ  as  the  new  life  according  to  the  laiv  of  the 
Spir,t,  is  a  blessed  lifeiri  the  adoption  of  God;  is  free  from  eo7ideiiinaiion  and  death;  and  leads 
to  perfect  bUnsedness  in  the  glory  of  God.  Tlie  principle  of  the  new  life  as  the  principle  of  the  free- 
doiii  and  glorification  of  the  Christian,  of  believing  humanity,  and  even  of  the  creature  ;  chap.  viii. 

Divisions  :  I.  Life  in  the  Spirit  a  life  of  opposition  to  the  flesh  ;  and  the  Spirit  as  witness  of  adoption  ; 
vers.  1-17.  //.  The  renewal  of  the  body  by  the  life  in  the  Spirit,  and  the  Spirit  as  the  security  for 
glorification  ;  vers.  18-39. 

I.     Life  ill  the  Spirit  in  opposition  to  the  flesh,  and  the  Spirit  as  the  witness  of  adoption. 

Chapter  YIII.  1-17. 

1  There  is  therefore  now  no  condemnation  to  them  which  [those  who]  are  in 
Christ  Jesns,  who  walk  not  after  the  flesh,  but  after  the  Spirit  \omii  aii  cfur  Christ 

2  Jesus].'      For  the  law  of  the  Spirit  of  life  in  Christ  Jesus  hath  made  me  free 

3  [freed  me]  °  from  the  law  of  shi  and  death.  For  what  the  law  could  not  do,  in 
that  [because]  it  was  weak  tlirough  the  flesh,  God  sending  his  own  Son  in  the 
likeness  of  sinful  flesh  [iiuravy,  the  flesh  of  siu],  and  for  [or,  on  account  of]  sin, 

4  condemned  sin  in  the  flesh  :  That  the  righteousness  [or,  requirement]  '  of  the 
law  might  be  fulfilled  in  us,  who  walk  not  alter  [accordmg  to]  *  the  flesh,  but 
after  [according  to]  the  Spirit. 

6  For  they  that  [those  who]  are  after  [according  to]  the  flesh  do  mind  the 
things  of  the  flesh  ;  but  they  that  [those  who]  are  after  [according  to]  the  Spirit, 

6  the  things  of  the  Spirit.  For  to  be  carnally  minded  [the  mind  of  the  flesh]  ^  is 
death  ;  but  to  be  spiritually  miiided  [the  mind  of  the  Spirit]  is  life  and  peace. 

V  Because  the  carnal  mind  [the  mind  of  the  flesh]  is  enmity  against  God :  for  it 
is  not  subject  [doth  not  submit  itself]  °  to  the  law  of  God,  neither  mdeed  can 

8  be  [it].  So  then  [And] '  they  that  [those  who]  are  in  the  flesh  cannot  please 
God. 

9  But  ye  are  not  in  the  flesh,  but  in  the  Spirit,  if  so  be  that  the  Spirit  of  God 
dwell  in  you.      Now  if  any  man  have  [hath]  *  not  the  Spirit  of  Christ,  he  is 

10  none  of  his.     And  [But]  if  Christ  be  [is]  in  you,  the  body  is  dead  because  of 

11  sui ;  but  the  Spirit  [spirit]  is  life  because  of  righteousness.  But  [And]  if  the 
Spirit  of  him  that  raised  up  Jesus'  from  the  dead  dwell  [dwelleth]  in  you,  he 
that  raised  up  Christ  from  the  dead  shall  [will]  '"  also  quicken  [quicken  even] 
your  mortal  bodies  by  [on  account  of]  ''  his  Spirit  that  dwelleih  in  you. 

12  Therefore,  brethren,  we  are  debtors,  not  to  the  flesh,  to  live  after  the  flesh. 

13  For  if  ye  live  after  the  flesh,  ye  shall  die  :  but  if  ye  through  [by]  '^  the  Spirit 

14  do  mortify  the  deeds  of  the  body,"  ye  shall  live.     For  as  many  as  are  led  by 

15  the  Spirit  of  God,  they  are  the  ["mu  the]  "  sons  of  God.  For  ye  have  not 
received  [did  not  receive]'^  the  spirit  of  bondage  again  to  fear ;  but  ye  have 
[omrt  have]  received  the  Spirit  of  adoption,  whereby  [Iv  o),  wherein]  we  cry, 

16  Abba,  Father.     The  Spirit  itself  beareth  witness  with  [or,  to]  "  oui-  spirit,  tliat 

17  we  arc  the  [omit  the]  children  of  God  :  And  if  children,  then  [also]  heirs;  heirs 
of  God,  and  joint  heirs  with  Christ ;  if  so  be  that  we  suffer  with  him.,  that  we 
may  be  also  glorified  together  [glorified  with  him].^'' 

TEXTUAL. 

*  Ver.  1. — [The  clause,  added  in  iZcc. ;  /otrj  Kara  capxa  TrepirraTovaiv,  aXka.  Kara,  wvivfia,  is  now  rejected  i)y  the  best 
critics  as  a  gloss  from  ver.  4.  It  is  not  found  in  X.  B.  C.  D.'  F.,  most  older  versions  and  fathers.  The  first  half  only  is 
edded  in  A.  D.',  some  versions.  N.'  adds  the  whole.  The  MS.  authority  is  sufficiently  against  it  to  warrant  a  decided 
rejection.  Forbc-s  :  "  The  results  of  Parallelism  coincide  with  the  decisions  of  criticism,  and  •nith  the  authority  of  thfl 
b^  MSS.,  in  rejecting  the  words." 

1.  OvSev  apa  vOv  Karaxpiiia 

T019  kv  "S-piaTtZ  'Itjctou. 

2.  'O  yap  I'd/.io!  Tou  wevixaTOt  rrji  ^(>>^$ 

fv  Xpi<7Tu>  'Itjo-ou  ri\ev6epu}<Tev  fxe 
ano  ToO  voiiov  T^s  ajoiapTias  Koi  ToC  Oavarov, 

3.  To  yap  aSvvaTOV  Tov  vdfiou. 

€1*  w  »)o"0eVei  6tci  T^9  (TapKO?, 
6  0e6?  Toi'  eavTOu  viov  TTGfJupa^ 

ev  QixoLujfjLaTt  uapKot;  afxapria^  Koi  irept  a/iapTiaf 
KariKpivev  Trjv  o/ixapTiai'  iy  Tjj  aapK. 


250 


THE  EPISTLE   OF   PAUL  TO   THE   ROMANS. 


The  first  nnd  tenth  lines  ccrrespond  ;  the  parallelisms  of  second  and  fi>urth,  third  and  fifth,  sixth  and  eighth,  eerenth 
and  ninth,  are  obvious,  and  the  gain  iu  interpretation  is  eonsiderabli-.     Fritzsche  avails  himself  of  it  also. 

'  Ver.  2. — iThe  weighty  MSS.,  N.  B.  i'.  O.,  and  some  fathers,  read  o-e  ;  but  this  niiglit  readily  l>e  repeated  from  th6 
precedini?  syllaVle,  -vtv.  A.  C.  JD.  K.  L.,  most  versions,  give  n-e,  now  generally  adopted.  There  is  slifiht  authority  fo» 
^fiat.     Friid  III!-,  is  liienil,  and  to  be  prefeiTed  to  hulk  mude  me  free,  set  rrn:  /me.     It  refers  to  a  definite  past  act  (iu;)rist). 

•  Vor.  4. — ['I'he  K.  V.  uses  right' ousiie-is,  very  indeliuitely,  to  translatu  several  words  of  kindred  meaning.  Here  it 
is  obviously  incorrect,  as  jticaiu/ia  means,  literally,  a  righteous  decree,  ordiiianci',  statute,  act  (see  pp.  'i,  184);  and 
iu  this  case  refers  to  the  summing  up  of  all  the  requirements  of  the  law,  as  iulfilled  by  C'hri.-^t.  Lange:  G'ticfilMin, 
reqiiir'-iii'nl,  is  not  strictly  exact,  but  is  adopted  by  Al ford,  Amer.  Bible  Union.  Version  of  five  English  clergymeB: 
righlenui  demand.    See  Ex^g.  yotes. 

•  Ver.  4. — {Arcnrdhig  lo,  is  the  phrase  which  now  beat  expresses  the  meaning  of  Kara,  though  nfler  (Geimaa, 
tiach)  is  literal.     It  is  becoming  unusual  in  this  sense. 

•  Ver.  ().— [The  K.  V.,  with  its  usual  fondness  for  hendiadys,  has  departed  from  a  literal  rendering  in  vers.  6  and  7, 
ftt  the  expense  of  both  accuracy  and  force. 

•  Ver.  6.— [Is  not  subject  (E.  V.),  is  correct,  but  the  above  emendation  brings  out  the  middle  force  of  uitotoo-- 
fftrai. 

'  Ver.  8. — [So  then,  is  a  gloss,  rather  than  a  translation.  It  is  a  difficult  matter  to  reproduce  all  the  delicate  shades 
of  antithetical  force  expres^ed  by  the  frequently  recuiriiig  hi.  Some  alterations  in  the  verses  immediately  succeeding 
hare  been  made  with  this  in  view. 

»  VcT.  \).—[Uiive  is  conditional,  but  hath  is  preferable,  as  intimating  more  decidedly  that  the  state  of  thiugs  really 
exists.    For  the  same  reason,  dwrili/h  is  preferable  to  dw>:U,  in  ver.  11. 

•  Ver.  11. — [The  better  supported  reading  is  'Itjaouv,  the  article  is  inserted  in  some  MSS.,  as  also  before 
yipKTrov.    There  is  also  the  usual  number  of  variations,  so  common  when  these  words  occur  in  the  text. 

'"  Ver.  11. — [  Will,  to  express  the  simple  future  in  the  third  person.  The  E.  V.  seems  to  prefer  shall  in  such  cases, 
and,  indeed,  some  still  defecd  it.    The  usage  of  the  present  time  is  undoublediv  against  it. 

"  Ver.  11.— [Here  two  readings  present  themselves,  supported  by  authorities  of  equal  weight.  The  genitive:  SiA 
ToG  e  votKoui'Tos  aiiTou  iri-eu/LiaToj  is  found  in  Ric,  N.  A.  C,  many  versions  and  fathei's,  as  is  adopted  by 
Lachinann,  De  Wette,  Krehl.  The  accusative:  5to  to  ivoiKovv  avrov  TrveOfio,  is  suppoi-ted  by  M.  1>.  E.  l. 
K.  L.,  maiiy  cursives  and  fathers,  by  Griesbach,  .^choiz,  Fritzsche,  Mill,  Bcnirel,  Tiscliendorf  (in  later  editions),  Mi'yer 
(who  cites  Lachmann  also  in  its  favor),  Tholuck,  liuckert,  Alford,  Wordsworth,  Trcgelles,  Langc  It  will  be  seen  that  a 
majority  of  critical  editors  adopt  the  latter  reading.  The  reasons  which  have  determined  this  decision  seem  to  be,  that 
two  such  readings  could  not  have  existed  without  one  being  a  premeditated  corruption.  The  question  then  arises, 
"Which  readint;  would  best  serve  a  polemic  purpo.-e,  and  hence  be  most  likely  to  have  been  the  corrupted  one?  That 
question  is  answered  by  the  controversy  between  the  M.-iccdonians  and  Orthodox  (latter  ](art  of  the  fourth  century) 
respecting  the  Divinity  of  the  Holy  Spirit.  The  Macedonians  charged  the  Orthodox  with  an  alteration  of  the  text 
Into  the  genitive.  The  gei.itive  can  only  moan,  by  mei'tia  of  Hix  Spirit,  &c.  ;  while  the  accusative  ni;iy  include  that 
idea  of  agency  iu  connection  with  the  thought,  on  accmuit  of  His  /Spirit,  &c.  It  is  plain  that  tlie  Macedonians  had 
less  motive  to  alter  the  text  than  tiie  Orthodox.  Alford  thinks  the  variation  dates  back  of  this  controversy,  and  is  not 
due  to  either  of  the  then  disputant  parties  ;  but  the  same  reason  would  hold  good  at  a  previous  point  of  theological 
discussion.  Langc  well  remarks,  that,  in  any  case,  "the  raising  act  of  God  is  distinguished  in  this  verse  Irom  the 
working  of  the  Spiiit."  Hodge  sums  U))  the  internal  evidence  in  favor  of  llic  common  reading;  but  all  liis  remarks 
only  prove  th.at  the  other  is  a  more  unusual  reading,  and  hence  likely  to  have  been  altered.  It  is  better  to  follow 
the  current  of  criticism,  and  ado^^t  the  accusative. 

"  Ver.  13. — [The  simple  ilative  irvtv  fjiari  is  best  rendered,  by  tfie  Spirit.  TArouyA  should  be  reserved  as  a  trans- 
lation of  £id. 

"  Ver.  13.— [D.  E.  F.  G.,  many  fathers,  have  toO  o-apxov;  but  toC  (rufiaroi  is  supported  by  N.  A.  B.  C.  K.  L., 
and  nearly  all  modem  editors.  The  former  was  probably  a  correction,  arising  out  of  a  misunderstanding  of  the 
passage. 

•<  Ver.  H.—[I{er.,  K.  L.,  have  ei(n.v  viol  0eov  ;  N.  A.  C.  D.,  vioi  Beou  ti<nv,  B.  F.  G.,  vioi  el<riv  fl«oO.  The 
last  reading  is  adopted  by  Iiachmann,  Tischendorf,  Meyer,  Alford,  Wordsworth,  TregiUes.  It  is  supported  by  the  ma- 
jority of  the  fathi-rs,  and  the  variations  are  more  readily  accounted  for  on  the  supposition  that  it  is  the  original  read- 
ing ;  eitrii',  if  once  passed  over,  would  be  inserted  at  the  beginning  or  end  (Meyer). 

'*  Ver.  15. — [The  aorist   e  A  a  ^  <  t  <  refers  to  a  definite  past  time ;  hence,  did  not  receive,  received. 

'•  Ver.  16.— [Si'C  Exeg.  j\oles. 

"  Ver.  17.— [  With  him,  is  as  proper  here  as  in  the  preceding  clause.    See  Exeg.  Si'otes.—'B..] 


KXKGETICAL  AND   CEITICAL. 

First  Skction, — 77te  life  in  the  Spirit*  an  the  new 
life,  in  opposition  to  the  life  in  the  flesh  (vers. 
1-17). 

Summary. — a.  The  vital  principle  of  Christians, 
or  the  law  of  the  Si)irit  as  freedom  irom  the  antago- 
nistic law  of  sin  (ver.s.  1-4).  b.  The  principle  of 
carnal  life  in  contradiction  to  the  Spirit  and  to  God 
(vers.  5-8).  c.  Application  of  what  ha-s  been  said 
to  the  fundamental  standpoint  of  believers  (vei-s. 
9-11).  Their  life  in  the  Spirit  excludes  life  in  the 
carnal  princi[)le.  Their  Christianity  amounts  to  nolh- 
iiif.',  if  tiie  Spirit  is  wanting.  If  Ciirist  is  in  the 
spirit,  the  body  i.s  nntiiing.  But  the  body  shall  be 
"enewed  at  the  resurrection  by  the  Spirit,  d.  Tran- 
lition  fnjtii  the  ideal  and  fundamental  standpoint  to 
the  practical  application.  The  conflict  resulting 
from  the  victory,  and  the  maxims  of  this  conflict 
(vers.  ri-lH).  Xo  obligation  to  the  fle.sh. — Spiritual 
life  the  means  of  destroying  the  surprises  of  invol- 
untary carnal  motions. — Following  the  guidance  of 

lP[It  ficems  doubtful  whether  Dr.  Lnngo  means  the 
lloly  Spirit  here;  i>ut  as  he  certainly  insists  that  the  Holy 
Bpiiit  is  till!  agint  proiluoing  this  life,  it  is  better  to  indi- 
cate It  by  printing  this  word  with  a  capital  letter.— B..] 


the  Spirit. — No  fear  of  the  power  of  the  flesh 
Childlike  recourse  to  the  Fatlier. — The  sense  of 
adoption  strengtliened  by  the  Spirit  of  God.  Ver. 
17  :  transition  to  the  following  section.* 

Meyer :  chap.  viii.  Happy  condition  of  man  in 
Christ. — Dc  AVettc  :  Blessed  results  of  newly-ani- 
mated morality.  Tlioliick  :  For  thus  the  Christian, 
who  has  become  freed  from  the  law,  has  also  become 
free  from  condemnation,  and  i.s  subject  to  the  guid- 
ance of  the  Spirit  of  adoption,  by  virtue  of  which 
he  will  become  a  joint-heir  with  Christ  (vei-s.  1-17). 
Tlie  same  :  "  We  are  here  at  the  climax  of  the  Epis- 
tle, '  at  the  heart  and  kernel  of  the  whole  Epistle  ; ' 
as  Spener  says :  »S'/  script iiram  sacram  amiulo  com- 
fiiirer/mn,  ejiistulaui  Paull  ad  Jiomatio.s  f/fiiniiain 
crcdi),  aijim  KUiiimitin  faslii/iuin  in  capite  octavo  rx- 
sur(/it  (Spener,  Cotmilia  Theol.  Lot.,  iii.  696)." 
[Bengel :  Suae  veiiit  ad  liberationetn  et  libeitalem. 

Ver.  1.  There  is  therefore  now  no    [Ovdip 

•  f  Alford  thus  heads  the  section  :  "  Although  the  flesh 
is  still  subject  to  the  law  of  sin,  the  Christian,  serving  not 
the  flesh,  but  walking  according  to  the  .'Spirit,  »hnll  not 
come  into  condemnation,  but  to  glory  with  C'liri.st."  Hodse, 
making  the  theme  of  the  Apostle  "the  security  of  be- 
lievers." yives  the  first  verse  a  wide  reference,  both  pres* 
em  and  future,  and  c^insidi'rs  the  whole  chapter  a  seriea  of 
]>roofs  of  this  propubition. — U.] 


CHAPTER   VIIL    l-l*?. 


251 


uQu  vvv.  The  force  of  oidiv  must  not  be  over- 
looked— ail  absolute  negation,  with  au  undoubted 
reference  to  the  compleieness  of  the  freedom  from 
condemnation  (Forbes). — R.]  The  n^a  is  quite 
phiin,  if  we  have  perceived  the  alternative  in  the 
preceding  verse :  If  I  am  in  the  voT%,  I  serve  God. 
If  we  ignore  this  alternative,  the  meaning  of  the 
present  passage  must  be  doubtful.  Tlioluck  :  The 
older  expositors  do  not  generally  furnish  any  proof 
of  the  connection  of  this  a^ja  with  the  preceding 
chapter.  Yet  the  follo\vi«g  comiection  of  it  with 
chap.  vii.  25,  by  Augustine,  is,  in  the  main,  correct : 
"  To  him,  now,  who,  as  a  Christian,  non  amplius 
coiisentil  pravis  des.deriis,  and  is  planted  in  Christ 
by  baptism,  tlie  pravu  d'siJeria  can  no  more  be  con- 
demnation." The  Catholic  expositors  follow  him. 
Bueer,  Bcza  [Aliord],  and  others,  connect  ver.  25 
with  the  thanksgiving ;  but  this  assumes  that  the 
second  half  of  ver.  25  is  an  interruption,  Calixtus, 
Beugel  [Stuart],  and  others,  go  back  even  to  chap, 
vii.  6  ;  others  [Hodge,  Haldane],  to  the  whole  argu- 
ment for  justification  by  faith.  Meyer:  If  I  am  left 
to  myself  to  serve  the  law  of  God  with  my  reason, 
bat  the  law  of  sin  with  my  flesh,  then  it  follows 
that,  since  Christ  has  interposed,  there  is  no  con- 
demnation, &c. — [The  question  of  connection  is  main- 
ly decided  by  the  view  of  the  preceding  section. 
Those  who  refer  it  to  the  i-cgenerate,  connect  this 
either  with  the  whole  preceding  argument,  or,  with 
Philippi,  with  the  preceding  verse,  in  the  sense  :  Al- 
though I  am  thus  divided  in  service,  still,  being  in 
Christ  Jesus,  there  is  now,  therefore,  &c. ;  or  with 
the  thanksgiving.  If  Lange's  view  of  the  alterna- 
I  five  be  admitted,  we  must  also  accept  his  view  of 
the  connection.  It  seems  to  be  an  unwarranted 
breaking  up  of  the  current  of  thought,  to  go  back 
as  far  as  chap.  vii.  G  ;  and  to  refer  to  the  whole  train 
of  argument,  seems  out  of  keeping  with  the  con- 
tinuous experimental  character  of  the  whole  passage. 
It  is  best  to  connect,  therefore,  with  the  thanksgiv- 
ing.— R.] — NT'v,  the  intervening  state  of  faith,  ex- 
pressed last  in  ver.  25.  \^Nvv  is  temporal,  in  dis- 
tinction from  oi'v  (ver.  25),  which  is  inferential. 
Hence  the  continuance  of  this  state  is  implied. — R.] 

No  condemnation  [■/.ardxgi./ia,  Venlam- 
murifff-wf/icil,  -"entence  of  condemnation  (Lange). 
See  p.  184  (v.  Iti),  where  it  is  used  in  antithesis  to 
diy.ainjiia.  It  may  be  limited  to  the  justifying  act 
of  God  at  the  beginning  of  the  Christian  life,  but, 
joined  with  ol<)ii',  seems  to  have  a  wider  reference 
here. — R.]  Origen,  Erasmus,  Luther,  and  others, 
explain  :  nothing  worthy  of  condemnation ;  but  this 
is  opposed  by  the  toiM  See  also  ver.  34.  Comp. 
chap.  v.  16.  Koppe  generalizes  nulla/  pcence  [Al- 
ford :  no  penal  consequence  of  sin,  original  and 
actual],  which  so  far  at  least  belongs  to  the  affair 
that  even  the  temporal  punishment,  as  /  nnixhtncnt, 
and  as  prelude  to  the  final  condemnation,  is  abol- 
ished in  the  case  of  Christians.  And  t!iis  is  so,  not 
only  because  their  sins  are  forgiven  (Parens),  but 
because  they  are  in  Christ  in  consequence  thereof, 

[The  question  of  the  reference  to  justification 
or  sanctification  must  affect  the  interpretation  of 
condemvalion,  since  ver.  2,  beginning  with  ya^, 
seems  to  introduce  a  proof.  The  position  of  the 
chapter  in  the  Epistle,  as  well  as  a  fair  exegesis  of 
the  verses,  sustain  the  reference  to  sanctification. 
(Not  to  the  entire  exclugion  of  the  other,  any  more 
than  they  are  sundered  in  Christian  experience.) 
We  must,  then,  take  no  condemnation  in  a  wide 
sense,  either  as  deliverance  both  from  sin  and  death 


(Forbes),  or  as  having  indeed  a  reference  to  the  ju* 
tifying  act  already  past,  but  meaning,  rather,  the 
continuance  in  a  state  of  justification,  culminating 
in  finiil  acquittal  and  glory.  The  point  of  connec- 
tion with  ver.  24  ("  death  "),  is  the  former  refer- 
ence ;  with  the  succeeding  proof,  the  latter,  Thia 
avoids  sundering  salvation  into  two  distinct  parts. 
The  significant  phrase  which  follows  favors  this 
view.  Still,  the  position  of  the  verse  warrants  us  in 
finding  a  very  distinct  reference  to  the  act  of  par- 
don, as  preceding  (and  involving  as  a  gracious  con- 
sequence) the  work  of  sanctification. — R.] 

[To  those  vrho  are  in  Christ  Jesus,  t  o  1 1; 
iv  X(ji,aTi')  'J/jo-oT'].  This  does  not  mean  pre- 
cisely, to  have  the  Spirit  of  Christ,  or  Christ  in  you 
(Meyer),  but  it  denotes  the  permanent  continuance 
in  justification — a  life  whose  efiect  is  the  life  of 
Christ  in  us.  [This  deeply  significant  Pauline  phrase 
must  never  be  weakened  or  limited.  As  to  its  be- 
ginnings, Augustine  is  excellent :  Christus  in  homi- 
ne,  ubi  fides  in  corde.  As  to  its  continuance,  Bueer : 
A  Chrisio  pendere  atque  ejua  spiritus  in  omnibus 
ac/i.  But  the  best  explanation  is  John  xv.  l-V,  and 
Eph.  i.  23,  &c.  Hodge  says :  in  Him  federally, 
vitally,  by  faith ;  but  the  vital  union  seems  always 
prominent ;  especially  is  it  so  here. — R.] 

On  the  addition,  see  Textual  IHote.  [Besides 
what  is  there  remarked,  the  question  of  connection 
suggests,  that  the  interpolation  may  have  been  occa- 
sioned by  a  desire  to  relieve  the  apparent  difficulty 
in  making  ver.  2  prove  the  justification  of  the  be- 
liever. To  do  this,  the  clause  which  makes  promi- 
nent the  Christian  walk,  so  easily  borrowed  from 
ver.  4,  was  inserted. — R.] 

Ver.  2.  For  the  law  of  the  Spirit  of  life, 
&C,  [6  J' n ^  v6 n  Oi;  X ov  nv t  v /<  a t o <,■  t  ^ i;  t  w  >7 C 
iv  Xq  i,GT ot  ' J  »/  ff  o  T' ].  Yer.  2  specifies  the 
ground  *  why  Christians  are  free  from  condemna^ 
tion.  The  principal  question  here  is,  whether  ly 
A'^KTTw  is  to  be  referred  to  the  following  tj'/.ndi- 
QiDCtv,  or  to  the  foregoing,  and  how  far  to  the  fore- 
going ?  Meyer,  in  accordance  with  Theodoret,  Eras- 
mus, Riickert  (not  "  Tholuck  "),  Olshauseu,  Philippi, 
and  De  Wette,  has  also  connected  the  iv  X(>iarm 
with  tj'/.fvS.  But  this  distorts  the  thought,  as  if 
that  Spirit  of  life  could  possibly  deliver  without 
Christ.  Certainly  iv  X^t-anZ  refers  not  alone  to 
the  foregoing  u»;'(,-  (Luther,  Beza,  and  others) ;  and 
uor'j  here  is  not  the  believer's  subjective  life  in 
Christ,  but  Christ's  original  divine-human  life  itself. 
We  must  also  not  go  back  to  toT  nvir/it.  rtjc;  i^o)tjq 
alone  (Flatt),  but  to  the  whole  6  ro/ioi,-  toT  nvivfi. 
T.  c.  (Calvin,  Kollner,  Tholuck).}  The  fulness  of 
life  in  Christ  is  the  Spirit  (see  John  vi.  63) ;  it  is 
complete  in  itself,  conscious,  actual,  and  communi- 
cates itself  as  a  unity  with  the  Holy  Spirit.  It  is 
just  for  this  reason,  also,  the  glorification  of  the 
i'o/(Oc,  the  personal  righteousness;  and  as  it  has 
proved  it.self  to  be  the  completed  ro/ioc,  the  ideal 
and  dynamical  principle  of  the  Divine  law  in  the 
obedience  of  Christ,  so  does  it  now  prove  itself  to 
those  who  are  in  Christ ;  that  is,  justification  be- 
comes in  them  the  principle  of  sanctification.     But 

*  [Br.  John  Brown  renders  yap,  moreover,  or  would  con- 
nect it  with  the  thanksgiving  m  ver.  2o.  He  refers  this 
verse  to  sanctification,  nnd  ver.  1  to  justification;  lience 
would  avoid  making  the  former  the  ground  of  the  latter, 
-E.] 

t  [The  ahsence  of  the  article  is  not  decisive  apiiinst  this 
cornection,  though  it  favors  more  the  connection  with  ^u^s. 
Still,  the  parallelism  strongly  supports  that  view  which 
joins  it  with  the  verb. — K.] 


252 


THE   EPISTLE   OF   PAUL   TO   THE   ROMANS. 


beciiiise  this  life-giving  law  takes  the  place  of  the 
Mosaic  law — wliieli  could  not  deliver,  but  was  com- 
pleted by  sin  and  death — there  lies  iu  tlie  a{)|)ropria- 
tion  of  tills  glorified  law  freedom  from  the  law  of 
em  and  death.* 

'J7ie  law  of  the  Spirii  is  not  identical  with 
the  rii/io,-  Tor  roiis'  (KiJllner,  Schriider),  but  still 
the  latter  is  connected  w'ah  the  former.  Tlie  runoi; 
of  the  »'or,-  is  the  ontological  disposition  which  has 
attained  its  cohiplete  historieal  and  concrete  reidiza- 
tion  in  the  vouo^  of  the  Spirit.  Meyer  observes, 
that  the  Christian  institution  of  .salvation  is  not 
meant,  as  voim^  niartini;  in  chap.  iii.  27.  Yet  it  is 
6urely  identical,  to  a  certain  degree,  with  the  v6/io(; 
.riuT.,  but  not  with  the  Christian  institution  of  sal- 
vation, f 

0/  the  Spirit.  Mej'er  explains :  of  tiie  Holy 
Spirit.  And  this  is,  indeed,  substantially  the  fact ; 
but  the  Holy  Spirit  is  spoken  of  so  far  as  He  reveals 
himself  concretely  iu  the  vital  plenitude  of  Clirist. 
Tiiuluck's  exposition  is  in  the  same  direction  :  "  The 
Spirit  of  life  is  tliat  by  which  the  spiritual  life  is 
effected  in  believers."  The  law  of  the  Sjiirit  is  the 
impulse  and  guidance  of  the  Spirit,  under  the  recip- 
rocal action  between  the  principle  of  faith  and  the 
administration  of  God's  government  in  the  occur- 
rences of  life. 

Freed  me  [tj  ).f  ttOiQioaiv  ^t.  The  verb 
is  aorist,  referring  to  a  past  act,  viz.,  the  deliverance 
both  from  sin  and  from  deatii,  wiiicli  took  i)lace  at 
regeneration.  Not  completed,  but  begun  when  in 
Christ  Jesus,  and  to  be  completed  in  llim. — R.] 
This  expression  constitutes  an  antithesis  to  the 
briur/i)!!/  ine  into  capttviti/,  just  as  the  law  of  the 
Spirii  of  I'fi-  is  an  antithesis  to  the  Izvr  of  sin 
and  death  [tor  j-o/ior  t^^-  a/i  aijr  ia(;  x«t 
ToT  i9^«i'rt  TO  I'.]  :j:  Because  the  false  law  of  sin- 
ful propensity  in  the  members  is,  according  to  chap, 
vii.  23,  a  law  of  sin,  so  is  it  also  a  law  which  tends 
to  deatii,  according  to  ver.  24.  Altliougli  the  Apos- 
tle designs  to  say  that  this  freedom  is  followed  by 
freedom  from  tlie  Mosaic  law  (chap.  vi.  14),  it  is 
nevertheless  utterly  wrong  to  understand,  by  the  ex- 

aression  before  us,  tlie  moral  law  (Wolf),  or  the 
losaic  law  (Parens,  and  others).  How  far  has  the 
believer  been  wade  free  fr>)m  this  law  ?  Evidently, 
freedom  from  the  dominion  of  sin  (fireek  and  Ro- 
man Catholic  expositors),  eflecled  by  freedom  from 
the  penalty  of  sin  (Protestant  expositors),  is  meant. 
Yet  the  vonoq  nvfvfi.  is  not  altogether  identical 
with  tlie  vo/M>s  TritTT.  (Calovius).  In  the  law  of 
faith,  the  empha.sis  rests  on  the  faith,  but  here  on 
the  j'o/(o<; ;  there,  the  question  is  the  principle  of 


*  [L'w  is  here  to  bo  taken  in  the  wide  sense  as  ^ 
norm,  principle,  ruling  power  (comp.  iii.  27  ;  ^nL  21-23).— 
1'.  S.J 

t  [Dr.  Tlodprc,  foUowinK  Witsius,  takes  the  law  of  the 
spirit  of  life  OS  ^  the  Rospel.  Ilin  ohjcctions  to  the  otiier 
vii'Ws  nnt^o  ni'iinly  from  h  too  exclubive  refon-nce  of  vit.  1 
to  the  loren-ic  idea  of  jn.stificatioii.  It  cort:iijily  confuscH 
(inew  the  meiininir  of  the  word  l"w,  to  iidoj)t  this  inti-r- 
pietation.  Kven  !<hould  it  mean  ko^P^'i  it  niiiHt  moan  the 
K'fspel  in  i*s  /./ -//^ixnj;  OMpout,  aa  wrounlit  l)y  ilio  Spirit;  or 
I'aul  would  not  have  chosen  sucli  UTins.  If  wi  Vhriil 
Jr.-iif  he  joined  with  /red,  tlien  the  rofercncc  to  tlic  ol)- 
ipctive  (ground  of  juHtiflciition  is  inijilicd  in  the  statement 
of  our  siilijociive  possession  of  it  m  Christ  Jesus.  (See 
Ijaiipe,  above.)  ARrceinpr  with  C:ilvin,  in  the  main,  we  in- 
terpri't :  "The  power  of  the  ifc-irivinj);  Sjiirit  ilelivircd  mo 
l:i  Christ  .IesUH(iu  virtue  of  iininn  to  llini  the  fuliilh  r  of 
tho  hiw  iind  the  deliverer  from  the  hiw)  from  the  law  of 
Bin  and  death."— U.] 

I  [Alford  pMriphraseR  :  all  claim  of  sin  on  liiin  is  nt  an 
♦nd-  he  is  no.iulttid  ;  but,  n«  lie  admits,  "  wo  are  on  higher 
ground  now."— K.] 


justification,  but  here,  the  principle  of  holiness. 
The  individualizing  /u  ceases  here. 

Ver.  3.  For  what  the  law  could  not  do 
[to  ycc()  «()  I' I'ctTo  r  toi*  i'okoi].  Tlie -Mosaic 
law  was  incapable  of  effecting  this  liberation  ;  there- 
fore  redemption  took  its  place.  On  account  of  the 
connection  of  thought  with  the  forego i ng,~llTe"ex- 
jilanatory  and  a[ipositioiial  conclusion,  y-hut  to  JJm 
law  was  impoM-ibtr^  is  made  antecedent  as  apposition ; 
by  Winer,  it  is  defined  as  an  accusative,  governed 
by  inuitj(Tf  (Winer,  p.  217,  g  32.  7);  by  Ulshausen, 
as  accusative  absolute  (''  as  tar  as  the  possiliility  of 
the  law  waii  concerned  ") ;  [Hodge  :  in  view  of  the 
impoteiicy  of  the  law". — R.]  ;  and  by  Riickert,  Mey- 
er, Fiitzsche,  and  De  Wette,  as  an  antecedent  nomi- 
native. For  analogous  forms,  see  Meyer*  and  Tho- 
luek  ;  particularly  y.Kid).uiuv  (Vt,  lleb.  viii.  1.  Aa 
nominative,  the  word  acipiires  the  character  of  a 
superscription,  to  be  introduced  with  a  colon  ;  yet 
not  as  "  rhetorical  cmplui-sis,"  but  as  making  promi- 
nent the  difference  between  law  and  gospel.  Eras- 
mus and  Luther  supply  an  inoii^df  before  Of6<;,  not 
agreeably  to  the  forms,  yet  certainly  in  harmony  with 
the  thought.  The  genitive  vonoi'  denotes  the  inca- 
pacity of  the  law  to  deliver  from  sin  (Vater  has  ra- 
ferred  the  v6,u.  to  the  law  of  tlie  Spirit;  Schulthess, 
to  the  law  of  Divine  and  human  love). 

In  that  it  w^as  w^eak.  The  iv  m  cannot 
mean  while  here  ;  Meyer  translates,  in  so  far  <m, 
which  appears  too  limited.  [Luther,  Calvin,  Tho- 
luck,  De  Wette,  Philippi,  Stuart,  Hodge,  render 
because,  which  is  demanded  by  tlie  context. — R.] 
The  tjadivn  again  takes  up  the  idea  of  inca- 
pacity. 

Through  the  flesh  [Jta  t^?  ffa^ixd?]. 
Meyer:  Tliiough  the  guilt  of  the  flesh.  Besser: 
Through  effect  of  the  flesh.  We  must  not  forget 
the  fact,  that  the  division  of  the  (TU(ii  has  also  made 
out  of  the  law  a  division  of  the  carnal  letter.  [The 
preposition  did  with  the  genitive  here  marks  the 
meiliimi  through  which  the  law  proved  its  weakness 
and  inability,  viz.,  the  flesh  (in  its  strict  ethicid 
sense).  The  law  acted  not  on  spiritual,  but  carnal 
men,  and,  through  this  medium,  its  inability  to  do 
what  (jod  did  in  sending  His  Son  was  i)roven.-j-R.] 

God  sending  Ris  own  Son.  The  Apostle  de- 
scriiies  the  reiiceming  act  of  (iod  both  in  its  perti- 
nent meaning  and  in  its  medium.  The  mediuiu 
was :  God  sent  His  own  Son  (in  antithesis  to  the 
.^ending  of  the  law  by  angels  ;  (ial.  iii.  19  ;  Heb.  li. 
2) ;  and  He  sent  him  in  the  lik-eiiej<8  of  xiiil'ul  flexh, 
■or,  of  the  fesh  of  siii,  and  on  account  of  sin. — fie 
xait  him.  Declaration  of  preexistence.  [Pliili|ipi 
rightly  finds  in  this  verse  not  only  a  declaration  of 
the  prei'xisteiice  of  Christ,  lint  of  His  existence  as 
Son  ;  the  deseri|)tion  which  follows  having  a  sofe- 
riolin/ical,  rather  than  a  christological  reference, 
-R.] 

In  the  likeness  of  sinful  flesh  { iv  o  ./<  o » c)  • 
/I  an  aa(ix6^  a/t  (tftr  im;.  Sinful  jh^sh  is  not 
altogether  exact.     — «^j  must  mean  the  whole  hu- 


•  [The  simplest  explanation  is  that  of  Meyer  and  Phi- 
lippi :  "God  condemned  sin  in  the  flesh— a  thii'K  which 
W:i8  impossible  nn  the  tide  of  the  law."  This  takes  il  a4 
nominative  absdlufe,  piu-jslng  iudmnent  in  advance  on  what 
Ood  did,  so  as  to  (rive  pr<inilnenee  to  the  iiialdlily  of  tha 
law,  US  well  as  a  reason  why  (Sod  did  it.  On  the  pntmmati- 
ral  objections  to  takio);  it  iis  accusntivo  absolute,  gee  Meyer. 
'Kivvarov  mny  he  ether  active,  =  q  aJvca/itta,  or  |>nx»ivo« 
=  what  was  impossilile.  Tholuck  urires  the  penitive  ia 
favor  of  the  former,  while  Meyer  contends  that  usage  su[^ 
ports  tho  latter.— 11.] 


CHAPTER  Vm.    l-ll. 


253 


man  nature ;  the  ethical  force,  however,  lies  in  the 
genitive,  wliich  defines  it :  whoxe  attribvie  and 
character  was  sin  (Alford).  The  Orthodox  fathers 
(coriip.  Theodorct,  Tiieophylact,  Tertullian)  rightly 
use  tliis  text.  "  Christ  did  not  appear  in  the  flesh 
of  sin,  which  was  the  Eljionite  view,  nor  in  the  like- 
ness of  flush,  which  was  Docetic,  but  in  the  likeness 
of  the  flesh  of  sin,  which  is  the  Biblico-Pauline 
view"  (Philippi). — K.]  As  He  became  truly  man, 
He  appeared  in  the  full  likeness  of  sinful  flesh  (Phil. 
ii.  7),  and  yet  not  in  equality  witii  it.  Meyer  :  "  So 
that  He  appeared  in  an  external  form,  which  was 
similar  to  human  nature,  contaminated  with  sin. 
Christ  did  not  appear  iv  aao/.i  ct/iaQT.,  but  also 
not  Docetically  (contrary  to  Krehl)."  See  Tholuck's 
citation  of  the  views  of  the  Doeetag,  and  of  the 
Mystics  (for  example,  Valentine  Weigel,  who  held 
that  the  external  body  of  Christ  came  from  the  Vir- 
gin,* but  His  inward  body  from  heaven),  as  well  as 
the  opposite  views  of  Dippel,  Hasenkamp,  Menken, 
and  Irving.  "According  to  them,  o/ioiiofia  does 
not  denote  likeness,  but  equality.  But  although 
Ofioioi:  combines  both  meanings,  yet  that  of  like- 
ness alone  belongs  to  the  substantives  ofioiio/ia  and 
Ofioloxni; ;  besides,  the  other  meaning  is  contradicted 
by  the  analogy  of  Scripture  in  Heb.  iv.  15." 

And  on  account  of  sin  [y.ai  ttiqI  «//«(>- 
tlaq.  The  xai  connects  with  the  preceding.  If 
this  be  forgotten,  the  interpretation  may  be  too 
largely  affected  by  the  clause  which  follows. — R.] 
This  was  the  motive  of  His  mission.  But  the  con- 
nection by  xal  expresses  a  second  condescension 
of  God  and  His  Son.  The  first  was,  that  Christ 
appeared  in  the  form  of  a  sinner,  of  the  servant  of 
ein  (see  chap,  vii.),  of  the  da^S  a/ua()riai;,  of  the 
false  (Td()i  ;  the  second,  that  a  mission  on  account 
of  sin  was  undertaken  by  the  Son  of  God  himself  (see 
Matt.  xxi.  37).  ^^  Kal  TtfQi  a./LiaQr.  has  been 
connected  with  xariy.(ji,vf  by  the  Itala  ( per  carnem), 
Tertullian  (de  res  cam.,  c.  66),  the  Vulgate  {de  pec- 
cato),  Chrysostom,  Theodoret,  Luther,  Baldwin,  and 
Bengel.  But  the  xal  is  against  this ;  "  Tholuck. 
The  anatjrici  in  nfi>l  cifiatjr.  itself  has  been  vari- 
ously interpreted.  Thomas  Aquinas,  of  the  passion. 
of  Christ  on  account  of  its  likejess  to  sin  ;  Her.| 
VcBus,  of  death  ;  Origen,  Pelagius,  Melanchthon,  Cal-f, 
vin,  Bucer,  Baumgarten-Crusius,  of  the  sin-offering  -j- 
rxisn  ;  Theophylact,  Maier,  and  others,  the  de- 
struction and  removal  of  sin.  Meyer  :  "  It  is  rather 
the  wh'le  relation  in  which  the  mission  of  Christ 
stood  to  human  sin ; "  but  this  is  already  indicated 
by  the  foregoing  explanation  (see  1  John  iii.  5). 
The  mission  of  Christ  was  related  to  sin  ;  itfe  aim  on 
every  side  was  its  abolition.  But  the  immediate 
effect  of  His  mission  was,  that  God,  by  the  inno- 
cence of  Christ's  life  in  the  flesh,  distinguished  and 
eeparated  sin,  as  a  foreign  and  damnable  object, 
from  the  flesh. 

Condemned  sin  in  the  flesh   \xaTixqi,viv 
TTjV  afiaQtiav   Iv   T'^    aaqxi.      The  article   is 

*  ['Wordsworth  finds  in  our  phrase  an  argument  against 
the  dogma  of  tlie  Inim;iculate  Conception. — R.] 

f  [This  interpretation,  adopted  by  Hodge  and  Stuart,  is 
rejected  by  every  Gennan  commentator  of  note,  even  by 
Philippi  and  Alford.  The  passages  in  the  New  Testament 
(Hebl  X.  fi,  8,  18  ;  xiii.  11  ;  Gal.  i.  ■))  which  seem  to  favor  it, 
nil  contain  a  distinct  reference  to  sacrifices,  independently 
of  rtepi  kfj-ap.  In  Gal.  ».  4  (see  in  Inco  p.  13),  the  "gave 
himself"  introduces  the  same  thought.  The  wider  mean- 
ing, of  course,  implies  such  an  expiation ;  but  it  is  not 
brought  prominently  forward  in  this  expression.  (Philippi : 
tim  die  Suiide  suhntiid  zn  Uigend ;  to  which  Meyer  unne- 
Bcssarily  objects,  since  his  own  view  includes  this.) — E..] 


used  here  with    anaqriav,    the   sin   already  re 
Yv  CO.     This  is  a  final  argument  against  inter 

prcuiig  "sin"  as  =  sin-offering,  in  the  clause  above. 
Whether  "  in  the  flesh  "  is  to  be  joined  with  "  con 
demned,"  or  with  "  sin,"  is  a  matter  open  to  discus- 
sion  (see  below). — R.]  To  the  general  idea  of  the 
mission  of  Christ :  on  account  of  sin,  this  declara- 
tion is  now  added,  as  a  specific  idea,  to  describe 
what  His  mission  effected  in  relation  to  sin  in  the 
flesh.  And  we  must  criticise  the  diflFerent  interpre- 
tations accordingly.  Since  the  Redeemer,  or  God 
through  Him,  performs  a  condemnatory  deed,  wt 
must  especially  avoid  an  incorrect  generalization  of 
the  idea.  Erasmus,  De  Dieu,  and  Eckerniann,  have 
very  appropriately  pointed  out  the  thought,  that  He 
represented  shi  as  damnable  ;  yet  we  must  empha- 
size sin  in  the  flesh,  and  add  :  He  separated  it  from 
the  flesh  fundamentally  in  Christ,  in  order  thereby 
to  cast  it  out  from  the  flesh  in  the  life  of  believers. 
This  is,  therefore,  the  sense :  Christ,  by  becoming 
man  in  the  flesh  (which  appeared  to  be  the  source 
of  sin),  and  yet  having  a  sinless  fleshly  nature,  so 
maintained  this  sinlessness,  and  even  holiness  of  His 
flesh,  through  His  whole  life,  that  He  could  give  His 
flesh  to  His  followers  as  a  seal  of  His  favor  and  as 
the  organ  of  His  Spirit.  By  this  means  He  made  it 
manifest :  1.  That  sin  does  not  belong  to  the  flesh 
in  itself,  but  is  inherent  in  it  as  a  foreign,  unnatural, 
condemnable,  separable,  alienable,  and  abstractly 
spiritual  element ;  2.  That  sin  in  the  flesh  is  con- 
demned  and  rejected  in  its  carnal  appearance ;  3. 
That  sin  in  the  flesh  should  be  separated  from  the 
entire  human  nature  by  means  of  the  Spirit  proceed- 
ing  from  Christ. 

Other  explanations :  1.  Allusions  to  the  eradi- 
cation of  the  guilt  of  sin.  This  "  is  the  prevailing 
ecclesiastical  view  in  Origen,  Chrysostom,  &c.  So, 
too,  the  Catholic  expositors,  with  the  exception  of 
Justin  ;  the  Protestant,  with  the  exception  of  Beza  ; 
even  the  Arnnnian  and  Socinian  writers,  and,  in- 
deed, the  most  of  the  later  ones — Usteri,  Riickert, 
Baumgarten-Crusius,  Philippi,*  and  Schmid  {Bibl. 
Thcol^) ;  "  Tholuck.  For  what  has  been  and  can  be 
said  in  favor  of  this  explanation,  see,  at  length,  in 
Tholuck,  p.  S92  ff".  "  Yet  the  absence  of  the  avtov 
from  tv  T^  aaQxi  (comp.,  on  the  contrary,  Eph.  ii. 
5)  is  an  obstacle."  We  may  add,  that  the  context 
is  also  an  obstacle.  The  question  has  been,  chap, 
iii.,  concerning  Christ  as  the  propitiator.  Here  He 
is  represented  as  a  "  fountain  of  holiness." 

2.  Allusions  to  the  removal  of  sinfulness.  "  The 
procession  of  the  delivering  Spirit  of  life  from  Christ 
is  only  clearly  proved  by  ver.  3,  in  case  there  is  in 
tins  verse  the  thought  that  Christ  'has  gained  the 
victory  over  sin  by  His  pure  and  holy  personality  in 
His  own  humanity,  and  that  this  sinless  Spirit  now 
passes  over  by  faith  to  believers  ;  "  Tholuck.  The 
same  writer  adduces  a  number  of  the  defenders  of 
the  oledienfia  actha  ;  especially  Beza,  of  the  Refor- 
mation period  ;  the  following  later  expositors  seem 
also  to  belong  here  :  Winzer,  Stier,  Neander,  Meyer, 
De  Wette,  and  Hofmann.f — Yet  Tholuck  finally 
turns  to  the  allusion  of  this  passage  to  the  guilt  of 

*  [See  Philippi's  view  below.  Hodge  is  decided  in  his 
preference  for  this  interpretation,  regarding  all  others  aa 
arbitrary,  and  cuntrary  to  the  context. — R.] 

t  [So  Alford,  Schaff.  Stixart  makes  this  antithesis  with 
ver.  1:  "There  is  now  ro  icoTaKpiM<»  for  Christians;  but 
there  is  a  KaraKptfia  of  their  carnal  iippetites  and  desires." 
This  he  justifies  by  finding  here  "a  pnranomasial  use  of 
words ; "  but  this  mode  of  interpretation  is  of  doubtful 
propriety.— R.] 


254 


THE    EPISTLE    OF   PAUL   TO    THE   ROMANS. 


Bin,  and  thus  wo  must  underetand  by  erct^J  (p.  894) 
not  the  (!«(';  of  Christ,  but  "  the  sinful  human  na- 
turc,  whicli,  although  only  y.aft^  6ii(tti»iia,  was  also 
possessed  by  Clirist  (Pliilippi,  De  Wette)."  The  lat- 
ter does  not  belong  here.  But  tlien  there  would  also 
follow  from  tliis  an  atonement  y.aO^  6iioi«>fict.  The 
interpretation  of  the  xctTtx^ui-f  by  intr/ccit  (Grotius, 
Reiclie,  &c.),  does  not  suit  the  nature  of  Clirist. 
Meyer  properly  ol>serves,  that  the  xarixoiVf  has 
been  el'.osen  in  reference  to  tiie  ■/.aTcty.i)iitn  in  ver.  1. 
If  we  thus  condemn  ourselves,  we  shall  not  be  con- 
demned ;  and  if  that  condemnatory  process  against 
sin  in  the  Hesh  has  passed  from  Christ  upon  us,  the 
object  of  the  futm-e  condemnation  is  removed. 

[Besides  these  views,  Philippi  advocates  a  pri- 
mary  reference  to  the  death  of  Christ,  but  includes 
the  fact  that  thus  sin  is  eo  ipso  done  away  and  extir- 
pated, so  that  those  who  are  in  Christ  Jesus  have 
both  the  pardon  and  the  removal  of  sin,  because  of 
the  indissoluble  unity  of  both  in  Him.*  This  suits 
the  wider  meaning  of  no  condonnation  (ver.  1).  All 
interpretations  deviate  from  the  strict  meaning  of 
the  verb ;  the  reference  to  punishment  involves  an 
added  tiiought,  not  less  than  that  to  the  extirpation^ 
of  sin.  Besides,  the  law  rouhl  condemn  sin,  and,  to 
a  certain  extent,  punish  it ;  but  its  great  weakness 
wa.s  its  inaliility  to  remove  sin.  It  is  perfectly  gra- 
tuitous to  infer  that  the  modern  interpretation  im- 
plies that  we  are  justified  on  the  ground  of  inherent 
goodness,  since  this  assumes  that  ver.  1  refers  only 
to  declarative  righteousness,  and  overlooks  the  fact 
that  the  controlling  thought  is  xmion  to  Christ. 
Still,  should  any  prefer  to  find  here  an  allusion  to 
Ciirisi's  pa.«sion  as  a  penal  condemnation  of  sin,  it 
must  lie  allowed  as  involved,  though  this  must  not 
then  be  used  to  force  the  same  meauing  on  the  next 
verse. — R.] 

[In  the  flesh.  This  is  referred  by  many  to  the 
human  nature  of  Christ.  Were  this  the  exclusive 
reference,  we  would  pr()l)al)ly  find  al'Tor.  Tiie  ethi- 
cal sense  must  be  adojjted  l)y  those  who  join  it  with 
sin  ;  but  against  tliis  is  the  meaning  of  sin  as  a  prin- 
ciple (Alford),  and  also  the  imliHetent  sense  o{  trdijl 
in  the  earlier  part  of  the  verse.  It  is  I  tetter,  then, 
to  join  it  with  the  verh,  and  include  in  it  human  na- 
ture, our  human  nature,  which  Christ  shared. f  This 
seems  to  be  Dr.  Lange's  view,  though  he  ad<ls  to  it 
some  remarks  which  seem  to  echo  his  pseudo-plas- 
matic  interpretation  of  chap.  vii.  We  parajihrase 
the  whole  verse  :  "  What  could  not  be  done  by  the 
law  (was  thus  done),  (!od  sending  His  own  Son  in 
the  likeness  of  that  flesh,  winch  was  characterized 
by  sin,  and,  on  account  of  sin,  condemned  entirely 

Sbr)th  as  to  punitive  and  polluting  etlccti)  in  that  Hesh 
which  He  shared  with  us)  that  sin."  ^  et  this  is  not 
an  accomplished  fact  as  respects  our  release  from 
the  powi-r  of  sin  ;  that  is  to  be  fulfilled,  and  this  end 
('(»'«)  is  set  forth  in  the  next  verse. —  K.] 

Plainly,  this  verse  declares  the  condemnableness 
Df  the  sinful  propensity.     An  expression  of  Irenajus 

•  [So  "WofflHWorth,  "WiOiifor  and  Wilkinson,  Forties. 
Thin  viow  is,  iuducfl,  open  to  the  cliarpc  of  irnloflnitfnws; 
but  iiJi  lli'^  rlini.ti-  MctM  forth  li')th  whiil  till'  law  could  not  ilo, 
ami  wli.it  O.mI  ilid  dn  in  sendinir  .Ii>sii«  Cliri-;f,  tticre  can  )>(• 
Htlln  oSjei-tion  to  n  wide  m'Si  dni;  liorc,  provided  vor.  I  bo 
appl'ecl  definit*'!)-  to  llie  work  of  s:inctiflriilion.  Kr.  Lnnso 
luiiiv(  If  in  the  ni'Xt  prtmu'riiph  ro:ichi'.-<  the  samo  point.— U.) 

t  [ W'ord.iworth  :  "Sin  lind  tyniunized  over  >i9  hi  our 
f1i".li,  :\-i  the  ^(vit  of  its  r'tnpiro  ;  iind  hv  our  tiesli,  as  Its  in- 
strument and  weiiiion.  Hut  Ood  u.-od  our  Hesh  iib  :in  in- 
Hiruinrnt  for  o-ar  delivcnincr,  and  for  t\w  condi'innntion  of 
•  n,  and  for  the  oot:>l  li-hirwiit  of  lii ;  own  i  inniri'  in  us." 
-H.) 


Ls  important  for  the  interpretation  of  this  passage . 
condeinnavit  peccatum  et  jam  (jnasi  condnnnatum 
ejecit  extra  cantem.  The  beautiful  words  of  Augus- 
tine denote  the  objective  medium  by  which  the  sin. 
lessness  of  Christ  becomes  our  liberation  :  Quoinodo 
libiTavit?  Kisi  quia  reatum  juccatorum  omnium 
remissione  dissolvtt,  ita  u\  quamvis  adhuc  nta:ieat, 
in  peci-alnm  non  imputelur.  Yet  Beza  properly  ob- 
serves: Keqnc  nunc  Apostolus  eujit  de  Christi  morte, 
<i  nostroruin  peccatoru/n  tx/finlione,  scd  de  Christi 
incnrnatione,  et  naturee  nostreB  corntptione  per  earn 
sublatn.  Only,  as  far  as  the  transmission  of  sinless- 
ness  from  Christ  to  us  is  concerned,  we  must  bear  in 
mind  chap.  vi.  1  If.  By  virtue  of  the  connection  of 
Christ  with  us,  He  has  redeemed  us ;  by  virtue  of 
His  connection  with  us  in  otn-  guilty  misery,  He  has 
atoned  for  us ;  and  by  virtue  of  the  coimection  of 
His  nature  witli  our  flesh.  He  has  given  His  flesh  to 
die,  in  order  that,  in  His  spiritual  position  toward 
us,  Uc  might  make  us  free  from  the  flesh  by  the 
communion  of  His  Spirit  as  spiritual  man,  and,  with 
the  flesh  of  His  risen  life,  imjilant  in  us  a  sanctified 
nature  for  the  future  resurrection. 

Ver.  4.  That  the  righteousness  [or  reqtiire* 
thent]  of  the  lavr  [iiTt  to  (Vixkmi)/*  «  toi" 
voitoi'.  Jva,  telic,  introducing  the  purpose  of 
the  condemnation  of  sin  iu  the  flesh.  Lange  ren- 
ders {ii.r.aiii)i(a;  Gereclvtsein.  On  the  word,  see 
p.  184.  Stuart:  the  precept  of  the  law;  Hodge: 
the  demands  of  the  law  (and  also,  the  sentence  of 
justification);  Alford  (following  Meyer):  all  the  re- 
quirements of  the  law  combined  here  as  one.  Per- 
haps it  is  more  exact  to  paraphrase :  that  righteous 
act  (viewing  all  the  acts  as  a  unit)  which  meets  the 
requirements  of  the  law.  This  is  Lange's  view. — H.]. 
Meyer  explains  the  dixcti'DiKt  ("quite  simi)ly,  as 
chap.  i.  32  ;  ii.  26  ;  comp.  also  chap.  v.  16  ")  as  the 
requirement  of  the  law ;  that  which  the  law  stipu- 
lates. Yet  we  have  seen  above,  that  (ivy-aiMiia  is 
that  which  satisfies  and  fulfils  the  law.  The  right- 
eousness of  life  shall  proceed  from  the  righteousness 
of  faith.  Or,  as  the  former  proceeds  originally  from 
the  latter  as  freedom  iu  Christ,  so  shall  it  al-^^o  pro- 
ceed actually  from  it  in  more  gradual  fulfilment — in 
the  holiness  of  our  life.  The  surpri.sc  of  the  expos- 
itors at  tlie  explanation  of  Chrysostom  and  Thecjdo- 
ret,  6  ay.nnn.:  to?'  voiiov  (see  Tholuck,  p.  396),  is 
therefore  without  ground.  Certaiidy  that  cannot 
mean,  tiiat  the  ]>tir|iose  of  the  law  is  to  justify,  but 
that  it  is  its  limit  and  end  ;  see  Rom.  xiii.  1(J.  Ex- 
planations : 

1.  The  impu'atio  of  Christ's  righteousness.  Cal- 
vin :  The  transferrence  to  us  of  the  destruction  of 
guilt  which  Christ  eH'ected  (Hullinger,  Beza,  Calix- 
tua  [Hodge],  and  others).  Also  the  transfern-nee 
of  Chri'<t's  obedience  to  us  (Brenz,  Aretius  [Haldane, 
apparently]  :  therefore  also  the  abedieu/la  ae/ira). 
Kolhier,  l-'rifzsche,  and  l'liilip|)i  :  The  .^luiiutin  nb' 
soliiloiia  is  meant.  Tholuck  properly  suggests,  that 
the  7i/.)j(>ovv  and  the  iv  are  against  these  interpre- 
tations. 

2.  The  principle  of  the  righteou.sncss  of  life  iin- 
|)arted  to  believers.  This  view  seems  to  indii-ate  a 
glight  fear  of  the  thought  that  Christians  sliall  be 
holy  in  the  form  of  believing  spontatu-ity.  Tholuck 
cites  Meyi-r's  view  :  "  in  order  that  this  fulfilment 
of  the  law  become  ajiparent  in  the  whole  conduct," 
and  adils  (in  accordance  with  Olshausen),  "  then 
('hrislians  woidii  be  regarded  as  though  they  were 
onlv  the  possessors  of  a  principle  fulfilling  th« 
law." 


CHAPTER  VIII.   1-11 


255 


8.  The  real  boliness  of  believers  proceeding  from 
the  principle  of  the  righteousness  of  faith.  [So 
Tholuck,  Olsliausen,  Meyer,  Alford,  John  Brown,  and 
many  othei'S  ;  among  them  some  who  refer  the  pre- 
vious verse  to  the  vicarious  sacrifice  of  Clirist. — R.] 
The  passive  form  (instead  of  nltiQiliatontv)  is  a  safe- 
guard against  a  semi-Pelagian  misconstruction.  De 
Wette  :  in  our  inward  activit;/  of  life.  Reiche  and 
Klee  give  special  prominence  therewith  to  the  real 
inwardness  of  the  fulfilment  of  the  law. 

[Might  be  fulfilled  in  us,  n ).  rj  q  o)  &  ji  Iv 
tjfitv.  The  verb  is  passive.  The  fulfilment  is 
wrought  by  God.  In  us  ;  not  by  us,  not  nn  us  (some 
shade  of  this  meaning  is  involved  in  all  those  inter- 
pretations which  refer  the  verse  to  imputed  right- 
eousness or  holiness),  and  certainly  not  among  ws. 
The  oidy  objection  to  be  considered  is  that  of  Cal- 
vin, and  others :  that,  in  this  sense,  the  fulfilment 
docs  not  take  i)lace.  Granted — not  at  once,  nor  in 
this  lite,  perhaps ;  but  surely  this  must  be  the  end 
(comp.  Eph.  ii.  10  ;  Col.  i.  22),  and  that  it  is  in  the 
Apostle's  mind  here,  is  evident  from  the  latter  part 
of  the  chapter. — R.] 

Who  walk  not  according  to  the  flesh,  &c. 
[toi<;  ^tij  xarct  actQxa  nf^vnarovavv, 
a.X).a  y.axa  nvfv/ncc.  KuTci  maybe  expand- 
ed into :  according  to  the  hiiptihc<  of  (so  Meyer). 
These  phrases  express  the  actual  life  of  those  in  the 
flesh  and  in  the  Spirit. — R.]  This  addition  states 
not  only  the  characteristic,  but  also  the  neisessary 
condition  *  of  belieuers.  Tholuck  [iqlds  tliat  the 
participial  clause  does  not  contain  the  condition,  as 
many  of  the  earlier  expositors  maintain,  but  only  the 
specification  of  the  method.  Meyer  holds,  that 
x«T(x  nvfv/ia  designates  only  the  sanctifying 
Divine  principle  itself,  as  objective,  and  different 
from  the  human  nvtr/<a  I  But  it  must  not  be 
viewed  subjectively  as  the  pneumatic  nature  of  the 
regenerate,  restored  by  the  Holy  Spirit,  as  (in  accord- 
ance with  Chrysostom)  held  by  Bengel,  Riickert,  Phi- 
lippi,  and  others.  We  would  then  have  to  ask  at 
once,  whether  there  is  not  another  expression  for  the 
human  spiritual  life  in  the  fellowship  of  the  Holy 
Spirit  ?  Further,  whence  the  antagonism  of  the 
Holy  Spirit  and  the  human  otc^jS,  since  the  most 
direct  antithesis  would  be  man's  unholy  spiritual 
life  ?  Universally,  wherever  the  question  is  the  an- 
tithesis of  spirit  and  flesh  in  man  himself,  man  is 
nevertheless  considered  as  man,  and  not  merely  as 
flesh.  [To  this  position  of  Dr.  Lange  there  are  de- 
cided objections.  On  the  whole  subject,  the  reader 
is  referred  to  the  Excursus,  p.  235.  It  is  better  to 
hold  (with  Meyer,  Alford,  Hodge,  and  many  others, 
against  Stuart,  Philippi,  Lange,  &c.),  that  nrfviia 
here  refers  to  the  Holy  Sjiirit,  and  not  to  the  spirit- 
ual nature  imparted  by  the  Holy  Spirit,  or  the  sub- 
jective spiritual  life-principle  (Lange).  This  seems 
to^TjiTreqtlif ed Iw^  ver.  2  (""the  law  of  the  Spirit  of 
life")  and  ver.  5  ("the  things  of  the  Spirit "),  wTiere 
^Tj^e  evidently  ffleans  tbe'Holy  Spirit. -^The  E.  V. 
fias  ^CTy~l)l'Operiy  expressed  this  by  the  use  of  the 
capital  letter. — R.] 


*  fThis  eeetns  donbtftil.  It  is  true  that  this  is  n  condi- 
tion of  the  final  fulfilment,  a  condition  which  implies  the 
Divine  Spiritual  power  as  its  cause  ;  but  this  is  not  the  idea 
which  is  prominent  here.  The  method  is  now  introduced, 
60  as  to  point  out,  in  what  follows,  the  difference  between 
the  workings  of  the  law  of  the  Spirit  of  life,  and  the  law 
of  sin  and  death,  which  find  their  corresponding  expressions 
in  the  phrases  :  according  to  the  Spirit,  according  to  the 
flesh.— E.l 


Second  Paeageaph,  vees.  5-8. 

Ver.  5.  For  those  vrho  are  according  to 
the  flesh  [oi  y«(>  xora  a uq  y.a  ovrK;'\. 
The  flvai,  y.ara,  aa()y.a  is  identical  with  the  iivat 
iv  aa(jy.i,  and  the  latter  means,  to  be  in  the  carnal 
principle,  under  the  supposition  that  the  ff«o|  is 
the  absolute  principle  of  life.  This  dvai,,  as  the 
controlling  tendency  of  life,  is  the  source  of  the 
q>Qovfiv,  and  the  (p^ovflv  is  the  causa  efficiens  of  the 
ntiimanlv. — Meyer  says  that  this  expression  is  a 
wider  notion  than  that  conveyed  by  "  who  walk  after 
the  flesh,"  which  is  not  the  case.*  Tholuck  explains 
(ivai,  y.ata  rt :  "  To  bear  in  one's  self  the  qualities 
of  something ;  therefore  =  ot  ffa^^xtzoi."  But  it 
is  these,  first  of  all,  in  their  principle  of  life,  which 
then  certainly  results  in  the  walk  in  the  flesh.  [It 
may  be  admitted  that  the  principle  of  life  is  more 
prominent  than  the  ethical  state  in  this  verse.  Yet 
the  phrases,  "  in  the  flesh  "  and  "  according  to  the 
flesh  "  (especially  the  former)  include  the  character- 
istic  state  as  well.  Hence  the  view  of  Tholuck  ia 
preferable. — R.] 

Do  mind  the  things  of  the  flesh  [  i  a  t  ^  s 
(Tcc^  y.oq  qi^orovffvr.  The  verb  means,  think  of, 
care  for,  strive  after  (Alford).  Meyer  notices  the 
presence  of  the  article,  making  (jdfii  objective,  as 
though  it  were  something  independent.  This  ac- 
cords with  the  view,  that  Spirit  here  is  the  objective 
and  operative  Holy  Spirit. — R.]  The  false  objects 
of  the  desires  of  the  false  independence  of  the  flesh. 
The  antithesis,  those  who  are  according  to  the 
Spirit,  o(  de  y.ara  nvfii/ia,  completes  the 
thought  that  the  two  tendencies  totally  exclude  each 
other. — [It  also  follows  that  ra  rov  nvfvftciroi;, 
the  things  of  the  Spirit,  vhich  belong  to  the  Holy 
Spirit,  and  hence  to  the  spiritual  life,  exclude  the 
things  of  the  flesh.  Dr.  Hodge  well  remarks,  there- 
fore, that  the  latter  phrase  means  "  not  merely  sen- 
sual things,  but  all  things  which  do  not  belong  to 
the  category  of  the  tilings  of  the  Spirit." — R.] 

Ver.  6.  For  the  mind  of  the  flesh  is  death 
[to  yaQ  (f()6vi;fin  rtjq  (Tafiy.oq  i9  « roT  oi,]. 
The  connection  here  formed  by  yap  is  singular. 
Tholuck  :  "  It  could  serve  to  prove  only  the  second 
half  of  ver.  5,  while  the  correspondence  of  the  mem- 
bers of  the  sentence  leads  us  to  expect  a  proof  of 
both  halves  of  ver.  5.  Thus  the  view  gains  proba- 
bility,  that,  according  to  the  Greek  and  Hebrew 
(  ^3  )  use  of  language,  the  proof  in  ver.  6  performs 
for  that  in  ver.  5  the  parallel  service  of  assigning 
reasons  for  the  toTc  fir;,  y..rJ..,  in  ver.  4."  Meyer 
makes  the  yciQ  the  proof  of  the  second  lialf  of  ver. 
5,  01  (U  y.ara  nvivita.  "  Motive  why  they  make 
the  interests  of  the  nvfifia  the  end  oi  their 
eflbrts."  f  _  We  regard,  however,  the  yaf)  as  proof 
that  the  firai.  y.ara  has  a  corresponding  q(jovnv 
and  (fijovr^iia  :|:  as  a  result.  For  the  (to^jJ  has  a 
qoovijfta,  yet  all  its  (fQovfj/ta  is  nocidng  but  death  ; 


*  [It  were  better  to  say  that  it  is  the  same  idea  under  a 
different  aspect.  In  ver.  4,  with  reference  to  the  outward 
life  ;  here,  with  reference  to  the  actual  state. — K,.] 

t  [In  4th  ed.,  Jlcyer  aprrces  with  Tholuck,  taking;  this 
second  yap  as  explicative,  according  to  chissical  usage.  So 
Kuckcrt,  Stuart,  Hodge.  (De  "Wette,  Alford,  follow  the  • 
view  attributed  to  Meyer  above.)  The  contrast,  already 
indicafeil  in  ver.  4,  is  continued  here.— R.l 

t  f*p6»a)fia  (Lange:  G'shimitirj ;  Ben  pel :  sentiment,  in 
the  French)  means  the  disposition,  which  manifests  itself 
in  the  (^poi-eiv  (ver.  5).  The  E.  V.  is  therefore  conect  in 
thought,  though  not  in  form.— R.l 


f 


256 


THE    EPISTLE   OF   PAUL   TO    TUE   ROMAXS. 


not  only  aiming  at  death  against  its  will,  but  also 
proceeding  tVuin  death,  moving  in  the  element  of 
death  ;  tiiat  is,  in  constant-  dissidiitiun  of  tlie  unity 
between  life  and  its  source  of  life,  between  spiritual 
and  physical  life,  and  even  between  the  opposition 
of  the  desires  of  the  individual  members.  The 
'jopula,  to  be  supplied  here,  is  pot,  /iok  as  its  res^l/ts^ 
Dut,  is,  ainoiiH/s  to.  Fhilippi :  "  JJeath  is  here  con- 
ceived as  present  (comp.  1  Tim.  v.  6  ;  Eph.  ii.  1,  5), 
aot  merely  as  a  result,  but  as  a  characteristic  mark, 
an  immanent  dcfniition  of  the  carnal  mind." — U.] 

[But  the  mind  of  the  Spirit,  to  di  q  (>6v  tj - 
u  a  r  o  r  ;r  )' f  ('/' «  T  o  i,-.]  Tiie  ojiposite  is  the 
f^ovrjfici  ToT'  nvfv/iarnc  (for  tlie  tirni,  xarct 
nv.  is  itself  nv^ ;  it  is  life  and  peace.*  It  is 
therefore  from  true  life,  moving  in  life,  directed  to 
life.  Peace  means  the  soul  of  life.  Op|iosition  is 
the  separation  and  dissolution  of  life  ;  i)eace  with 
God  is  cotniection  with  the  source  of  life ;  peace 
with  one's  self,  a  blessed  sense  of  life ;  peace  with 
the  government  of  God  and  His  world,  an  infinitely 
richer  life.  The  third  characteristic  must  be  special- 
ly em])hasized  in  both  clauses.:  directed  to  the  end  : 
life  and  peace. 

Ver.  7.  Because  the  mind  of  the  flesh. 
[/iiOTi.  introduces  a  pnjof,  here  ciinfined  to  the 
former  half  of  ver.  G.  This  proof  hints  at  an  an- 
tithesis to  both  life  and  peace,  the  latter  being  more 
evident,  as  it  is  in  human  consciousness  also. — H.] 
The  reason  why  iniovtjna,  &c.,  =  Oay.,  lies  in  its 
opposition  to  the  s(jurce  of  life,  its  enmity  against 
God  [*/•'>('«  fi<;  />f6i'],  with  which  the  dis- 
pleasure of  God  necessarily  corresponds.!  Since 
the  Ai)ostle  does  not  prove  the  second  half,  it  fol- 
lows that  here  the  ellbrt  of  the  flesh  constitutes  the 
prinei[)al  point  of  view.  Enmity  against  God  is,  in 
the  first  degree,  the  actual  opposition  to  God  in 
almost  unknown  (but  not  unconscious)  form ;  but 
afterwards  the  opposition  established  also  in  the 
consciousness,  Melanchthon  appropriately  says : 
"  Loquitur  Pttulus  principal' fer  de  cogitntionibun  de 
deo,  qiiiilcs  aunt  in-  imnte  non  renala,  in  qua  ximul 
magna  conftisio  cet  dnlAtationum,  deiiide  et  dc  affcc- 
tibus  erga  dcicin.  In  sccuris  est  contciiitus  jndlcii 
dei,  in  perpcre  factin  indignatio  et  fremitus  adversns 
deum." 

For  it  does  not  submit  itself  to  the  law  of 

God      [tw      y«('      VU/ilit      TOl"      (}(0V      01'/      V7Z0- 

rciirrrfTnu.  Ihe  verb  is  middle.  T/ie  law  of 
God  is  in  emphatic  position.  The  clause  proves 
what  precedes,  by  adducing  a  fact.  This  mode  of 
proof  concurs  with  the  statements  already  made  re- 
specting man's  character  and  that  of  the  law. — R.l 
Paul's  positive  declaration  of  the  manifestation  of 
this  enmity.  This  enmity,  which  is  very  deep-seated, 
becomes  manifest  in  disobedience  to,  and  re!)ellion 
against,  (Jod's  law. 

Neither  indeed  can  it  [orfTj  yctQ  rfi'va- 
T«t].  Sul)jection  to  the  law  of  (Jod  is  not  possible 
on  tne  carnal  st.indpoint.  Or  rather,  it  cannot  be 
effected  by  carnal  effort.  A  divided  life,  according 
to  the  blind  couree  of  the  lusts,  is  in  outright  con- 
tradiction to  the  central  procession  of  life  from 
within,  according   to   the   principle   of   the   Spirit. 

•  (Mover,  who,  n»  usual,  limitfl  " death"  to  ctemnl 
donth,  miist  deflnc  "  lifu  "  In  the  some  way.  J,i/f  ih  tlin 
dirert  nntiihcsis  to  ri'itli  ;  l>ut  a  fulycctlvo  chaniotcristic  is 
adiloil,  as  Bf-mtcl  s>iij«p»t.s,  to  propari'  tho  way  for  tho  fol- 
lowing doscription  of  enmity.— H.) 

t  [It  is  cnsy  to  coii(>trui;t  tlilr*  inforoncc:  The  mind  of  tho 
flesh  =  death  ;  liecaune  ihu  mind  of  the  flesh  =  enmity 
against  God;  therefore,  enmity  against  God  —  death.— R.] 


Tholuek  justly  opposes  Zeller,  by  bringing  out  the 
fact,  tluit  the  antithesis  is  not  man's  sensuous  and 
sjiiritual  nature  in  itself,  but  that  (T«oJ  denotep 
human  nature  with  the  accessory  idea  of  its  sinful 
character.  But  to  this  it  may  be  said,  tliat  the  ques- 
tion is  not  the  adi>i  in  itself,  but  a  i/oorrjnct  t^? 
aa(>y.6i;;  that  i.s,  a  (ift^ij  morbidly  excited  and  demon- 
ized  by  a  selfish  spirituality.  [Comp.  the  E.xcursus 
in  chap.  vii.  Tiiat  chapter  is  a  proof  of  this  deelit- 
ration.  The  fact  is  undoubted.  Paul  is  but  declar. 
ing  the  cause  of  the  numifostation  of  enmity  to  (lod 
in  the  forui  of  opposition  to  His  law,  the  inability 
cf  the  carnal  man  to  be  subject  to  it.  The  (piestio'n 
of  al)ility  to  believe  is  not  under  discussion,  yet  Pe- 
lagianism  and  legalism  are  obviously  precluded  by 
this  statement. — J{.] 

Ver.  8.  And  those  -who  are  in  the  flesh 
cannot  please  God  [oi  fik  iv  ano/.i  ovtk; 
f)  f  01  a  (I  i  (T  a  !■  oil  ()  e  r  rt  r  T  a  t .  The  E.  V. 
Strengthens  di  into  so  t/ie?i,  following  Beza,  Calvin, 
and  others,  who  made  it  =  oi'j'.  (So  Hodge.)  It 
is  much  better,  with  De  Wette,  Philippi,  Meyer,  to 
consider  it  nietnbatic.  It  continues  the  thought  of 
the  first  clause  of  ver.  7.  There  seems  to  be  no  ni<- 
cessity  for  assuming  a  suppressed  /lii;  as  AlforCc 
does.  On  this  account  we  render  and  instead  of 
bu'. — R.]  "OvTfi;  iv  acijjxl  =  orrf?  xara  aci^' 
xn,  but  the  expression  here  is  stronger ;  see  above. 
The  incapacity  in  ver.  8,  then,  follows  from  the  in- 
capacity of  ver.  7.  It  is  said,  in  a  mild  way,  that 
they  are  objects  of  the  Divine  displeasure,  children 
of  wrath.  But  the  expression  is  significant,  in  that 
it  destroys  the  notion  of  those  who  are  legalists,  and 
rely  on  the  righteousness  of  their  works,  and  who, 
allliough  ovTn;  tv  ffai>y.l,  fancy  that  they  can  meric 
tlie  pleasure  of  God  by  tlicir  works  and  endeavors. 
For  we  must  by  no  means  lose  sight  of  the  fact,  that 
the  Apostle  does  not  speak  merely  of  the  gross  ser- 
vice  of  sin,  but  also  of  an  observance  of  the  law, 
which  accepts  the  law  as  merely  external,  as  yftcimin 
and  (Tcioi.  [The  connection  renders  obvious  what 
is  distinctly  stated  elsewhere,  that  this  is  no  negative 
position,  involving  only  negative  results.  The  mind 
of  the  flesh  is  death. — R.l 

Third  Pabaobapb,  vers.  9-11. 

Yer.  9.    But   ye  are  not  in  the  flesh,  &c 

[i/itii;  (W,  x.r.A.  y1  f  is  distinctive  (Stuart). — 
If  so  be  that  the  Spirit  of  God  dwell  in  you, 
tinf(j  71  V  tr  II  u  i9  f  o  r  oixfT  f'l'  I'liirl.  The 
antithesis.  Tlie  more  specific  exhortation  does  not 
appear  here,  but  in  ver.  12.  The  n;Tf()  may  be 
thus  distinguished  from  nyt :  it  (=  "  provided 
that")  generally  expresses  slight  doubt,  while  fiyt 
expresses  ratlier  an  assurance  in  the  sense  of  if  iti- 
dnd.  Yet  tlie  HTTtQ  here  must  be  understood  as 
only  purely  conditional,  in  conformity  with  the  an- 
tithesis by  which  the  Apostle  represents  the  stand- 
point of  the  spiritual  life  of  believers  as  purely  fun- 
damental and  ideal.  With  such  a  representation, 
the  applicntif)n  to  individuals  can  only  take  place 
with  an  t'lnni  ;  likewise  without  positive  doubt. 
Chrysoslom  and  Olshausen  take  it  as  t.'Tni)t^rrt(], 
qnnndo  qnidm  ;  Tholuek  and  Meyer  prefer  the  hor- 
tatory construction,  on  account  of  the  antithesis, 
[It  seems  most  natural  to  account  for  the  condi- 
tional form,  by  admitting  "  an  indirect  incitement  to 
self-<'xnmination "  (Meyer).  Ilvfi'im  is  without 
the  article,  yet  it  must  mean  the  Holy  Spirit ;  henc* 


CHAPTER  VIII.   1-17. 


257 


we  claim  this  as  its  usual  meaning  throughout  the 
passage.  The  use  of  nvfv/taTi,  seemingly  in  dis- 
tinctiuu  from  nvfvfta,  is  not  against  this,  since,  in 
tiie  first  clause,  the  Spirit  is  represented  as  the  ele- 
meiit  in  wiiich  they  live ;  in  the  second,  as  the  in- 
liwelling  power  causing  them  to  live  in  this  element. 
— On  olxcT,  conip.  1  Cor.  iii.  16;  vi.  17,  19; 
2  Tim.  i.  14  ;  John  xiv.  23. — In  you  must  not  be 
weakened  to  amonr/  you. — R.] 

Now  if  any  man  hath  not,  &c.  [ft  de  nq 
nvfvfta  A'^KTTor  ov/.  t/ft.  The  antithesis 
is  not  very  strong;  6s  may  well  be  rendered  now 
(E.  Y.).  The  urconditional  negative  belongs  to  the 
verb  (Alford).  See  Tfxhial  Note  ^— R.]  This  an- 
tithetical declaration  certainly  expresses  tlie  possibil- 
ity, tliat  what  has  been  said  has  no  reference  to  par- 
ticular individuals,  and  that  here  no  half  measures 
are  of  any  avail. 

The  Spirit  of  Christ.  The  question  here  is, 
hi^longmg  to  Christ;  hence,  the  Spirit  of  Chi-ist.  It 
is  the  Spirit  of  God  as  the  Spirit  of  Christ,  the  Spirit 
of  His  righteousness  of  life  as  brought  home  to  the 
inward  life  of  believers.  [There  can  be  no  reason- 
able doubt  that  it  is  identical  with  Spirit  of  God, 
above  ;  though  the  connection  with  "  none  of  His  " 
has  occasioned  the  use  of  this  particular  phrase. 
The  genitive  is  possessive,  Spirit  belonging  to,  or 
proceeding  from,  Christ,  Comp.  Phil.  i.  19  ;  Gal. 
iv.  6  ;  1  Peter  i.  11.  Notice  the  terms,  "  Spirit  of 
God,"  "  Spirit  of  Christ,"  "  Chri.st,"  all  applied  to 
the  Divine  spiritual  indwelling.  Hence  Bengel  well 
says :  Testimonium  illustre  de  sancia  Trinitalc  ejusque 
oeconomia  in  corde  fidd  iim.  It  must  be  admitted 
that  such  statements  generally  have  reference  to  the 
economy  of  grace,  but  they  form  the  basis  for  the 
doctrinal  statements  of  the  Chuich.  This  text  is 
tiierefore  a  dictuin  profiaiis  for  the  Western  doctrine 
of  the  procession  of  the  Holy  Ghost  from  the  Father 
and  the  Son  {Jilioque,  Synod  of  Toledo,  A.  D.  689). 
This  was  the  final  contribution  to  the  doctrinal  state- 
ment of  the  Trinity.  On  its  importance,  &c.,  see 
SchaPf,  Hidory  of  the  Christian  Church,  iii.,  pp. 
688  f. ;  comp.  Kahnis,  Lehre  vom  Hcilujen  Geisle, 
Halle,  1847.  Philippi  has  an  excellent  note  in  loco. 
On  the  relation  of  the  Holy  Spirit  to  Christ,  comp. 
John  xiv.  26  ;  xv.  26  ;  xvi."7,  13,  14.— R.] 

[He  is  none  of  his,  ot'Tot;  ova  eatir 
arror.]  The  Apostle  does  not  regard  a  merely 
external  belonging  to  Christ  as  of  any  value.  Where 
the  Christianity  of  the  inward  life  is  extinct,  there 
the  Christianity  of  the  whole  man  is  extinct.  Mey- 
er :  "  Not  those  who  are  not  Christians,  but  nominal 
Christians." 

Ver.  10.  But  if  Christ  is  in  you  [fl  Se 
XQt'fTroi;  iv  v/(Tv'\.  That  is,  as  a  principle  of 
life,  [//e  contrasts  with  the  last  verse.  (Is  is  sub- 
stituted for  be,  to  indicate  the  strong  probability  that 
this  is  the  case.)  Comp.  Jolin  vi.  56  ;  xv.  4  ;  2  Cor. 
xiii.  5;  Gal.  ii.  20;  Eph.  iii.  17;  Col.  i.  27;  also 
John  xiv.  23,  as  justifying  the  remark  of  Bengel : 
Qui  Spiritum  habet,  Chi-istum  habet  ;  qui  Christtim 
habei,  Deum  habet.  The  mystical  union  of  Christ 
and  the  believer  has,  as  its  underlying  basis,  the  yet 
more  mvsterious  unity  of  the  Persons  of  the  God- 
head.—R.] 

The  body  is  dead  [to  ^itev  aMfia,  vi- 
Kf  or].     Explanations  of  vers.  10,  11  :* 

1.  Death  and  life  in  their  strict  sense.    There- 


♦  [For  fuller  discusaions,  see  Tholuck,  Meyer,  and  De 
Wette  in  loco. — K.] 

17 


fore  the  body  lapsed  to  death  (Augustine,  Beza, 
Bengel  [tnortuum  pro  moritunini],  Usieri,  Riickert, 
and  Fritzsche).  [So  Hodge,  Alfdrd,  Wordsworth.] 
According  to  Meyer,  the  rf/^ot;  is  proleptic  •  "  Ye 
have  the  following  blessed  results  to  enjoy  :  although 
the  body  is  a  prey  to  death  because  of  sin,  yet  the 
spirit  is  life  because  of  righteousness.  But  He  who 
raised  Christ  will  also  raise  your  mortal  bodies,  be- 
cause the  Spirit  of  Christ  dwelleth  in  you."  [In 
favor  of  this  view  are :  the  natural  sense  of  dead, 
the  connection  with  ver.  11,  and  the  subsequent 
course  of  thought ;  its  not  attaching  an  ethical 
meaning  to  body.  Against  it :  the  comprehensive 
meaning  of  death  throughout  this  part  of  the  Ejjistle, 
the  necessity  for  a  v.ide  meaning  in  its  antithesis 
LMtj,  as  well  as  in  Lomnou'jufi,  (ver.  11,  not  tj/ft^fi); 
also  the  use  of  ai7)/ia  in  an  implied  ethical  sense  in 
ver.  13.— R.] 

2.  The  body  is  dead,  slain  by  sin  (Chrysostom, 
Theodoret,  Erasmus,  Grotius,  Baumgarten-Crusius 
[Stuart],  and  others.  [These,  lor  the  most  part, 
take  ver.  10  in  a  moral  or  spiritual  sense.  This 
view  is  most  objectionable,  since  it  disturbs  the  har- 
mony of  the  two  verses,  takes  <T(7i/ia  in  a  strict  ethi- 
cal sense,  and  gives  to  rf/.^ov  (which  seems  to  be 
chosen  rather  to  avoid  a  direct  antithesis  to  twif) 
the  widest  possible  meaning. — R.] 

3.  The  misery  of  sin  as  bearing  in  itself  the 
germ  of  death  (De  Wette,  and  others).  [De  Wette 
claims  that  the  physical  and  ethical  senses  must  be 
combined  here,  as  in  John  v.  21  ff.  This  view  is 
sufficiently  correct  if  properly  restricted.  The  phys- 
ical death  of  the  body  is  to  be  viewed  as  a  nioi-al  re- 
sult of  the  indwelling  sin,  but  only  because  the  body 
has  not  yet  shared  in  the  full  results  of  redemption. 
-R.] 

But  all  this  does  not  furnish  us  with  the  defini- 
tion, thfi-J.,  on  account  of  sin — that  is,  because  of  sin- 
fulness— ice  have  to  lead  a  divinely  /  arfial  life  from 
the  principle  of  the  S;  irif,  in  which  the  body  is  de- 
clared to  be  dead  in  an  ideal  and  dynamical  respect 
(see  chap.  vi.  4).  lint  thereby  the  spirit  as  life,  and 
the  principle  of  life,  is  concentrated  still  more  in 
itself.  [The  objection  to  this  view  is,  its  confusion 
of  human  spirit  and  Divine  Spirit,  on  which  the 
whole  interpretation  rests. — R.] 

But  the  spirit  is  life  [to  (Te  nvivfia 
tofj  ].  Meyer  also  holds,  that  here  the  spirit  is  not 
the  Holy  Spirit  (as  Chrysostom,  Calvin,  and  others 
suppose),  but  the  human  spirit.  Although  the  hu- 
man spirit  is  here  regarded  as  filled  by  the  Holy 
Spirit,  we  must  not  include  (with  Philippi,  following 
Theodoret  and  De  Wette)  the  pneumatic  nature  of 
the  regenerate.  For,  says  Meyer,  that  must  remain 
there.  [The  meaning  is  evidently  that  under  III.  B. 
in  the  Excursus  above,  p.  235. — R.]  Zo)/';,  life; 
not  merely  living,  i)ut  life  which  is  thoroughly  act- 
ual, life-giving,  and  life-supporting.  [Whatever  view 
be  taken  of  dead,  the  change  in  the  form  here,  from 
the  adjective  to  the  noun,  warrants  an  extension  of 
meaning ;  as  indeed  the  word  udj/  itself,  and  its 
reference  to  the  human  spirit  permeated  by  the 
Divine  Spirit,  demand. — R.] 

Because  of  sin  [<)i.a  a/iaQtiav,  on  ao- 
count  of  sin,  as  an  indwelling  principle.  Not  the 
special  sins  of  the  body,  nor  that  the  body  is  the 
special  seat  of  sin  ;  but,  having  shared  in  the  results 
of  sin,  it  has  not  yet  shared  in  the  results  of  re- 
demption. How  and  when  it  will,  is  afterwards 
stated. — R.]  As  this  c;in  only  mean,  to  constitute 
J  a  pure  opposition  to  the  sini'ul  propensity  cleaving  to 


■+ 


258 


TDE    EPISTLE    OF   PAUL   TO    THE   ROMANS, 


t'lie  memh-^;:*,  so  can  because  of  righteousness 
\din  i)i,y.aio(T t''vr,v]  only  mean,  to  maintain  and 
aovclo|)  the  riglitfousness  of  taitli  in  tiie  righteous- 
cesa  of  lite.  Aciording  to  Meyer,  the  jusiUia  im- 
piitafa  is  meant,  as  the  foiiiulation  of  the  Liot^. 
(The  most  of  the  elder  expositors,  together  with 
kiiekert,  &c.,  favor  the  same  view.)  Hut  then  the 
liiti  would  have  to  be  construed  with  the  genitive. 
The  reference  to  the  righteousness  of  life  (Erasmus, 
Grotius,  De  Wette,  Pliilippl  [Hodge,  Alford],  and 
others)  is  opposed  i)y  Meyer  in  the  words :  "  Be- 
sause  the  ngiiteousness  of  life  can  never  be  perfect. 
It  can  never  be  the  ground  of  the  !^(tnj.  But  the 
question  is  not  the  ground  of  the  l^ottj,  but  the  great- 
er promotion  of  life,  so  tliat  it  may  prove  itself  to 
be  ])urcr  life.  The  coneer'n  is,  to  preserve  spotless 
the  white  robe  of  bestowed  righteou^neS3,  and,  being 
clad  iu  it,  to  strive  for  the  crown  of  righteousness." 
(Meyer  holds,  according  to  this,  that  the  ana()T. 
does  not  imply  our  own  individual  sin,  and  thus,  too, 
that  the  (V^z.  does  not  imply  our  own  "  righteous- 
ness.") In  harmony  with  the  sense,  many  exposi- 
tors, ])articularly  Calixtus,  connect  the  judiiia  impii- 
tata  with  the  hic/ioata* 

Ver.  11.  But  if  the  Spirit  [d  tie  to  nvfv- 
/««].  Tiie  Apostle  here  i)ieparos  his  transition  from 
his  description  of  adoption,  regarded  aw  a  /artial 
tpiritiuil  life,  to  his  description  of  the  (/hrij  in  which 
hod'i  and  xpiril  xhall  be  m  perfect  hnrmoni/,  when 
the  body  shall  be  glorified  into  the  perfect  organ  of 
the  Spirit.  Meyer  thus  construes  the  connection  : 
"  After  ver.  10,  deatii  still  retains  some  power — that 
over  the  body  ;  Paul  now  removes  this." 

Of  him  that  raised  up  Jesus  from  the  dead, 
&C.  [to  r  i  •/  f  I  (>  «  t'  T  o  i;  ]  tj  (T  o  r  r  t  x  v  f  y.  (j  i'i  v  , 
x.r./.].  The  spiritual  resurrection  must  be  followed 
by  the  physical  ;  it  is  a  prophecy  of  the  pliysieal 
resurrection.  For  the  author  of  the  spiritual  resur- 
rection is  the  Spirit  of  the  wonder-working  God, 
which  has  raised  Christ,  and  elevate<l  Him  to  the 
majesty  of  the  glorified  life.  Wliat  the  Spirit  [now 
dwelling  in  you]  ha.s  done  to  Him,  in  conformity 
■with  the  connection  of  body  and  spirit,  He  will  also 
do  to  His  meml)ers  (set;  Eph.  i.  I'J  ff.).  He  has 
■raised  Jesus  from  the  <l<vd — tliat  is,  as  the  first-fruits 
of  the  rcsurreetiun.     Thrri'fore  He 

Will  quicken  even  your  mortal  bodies, 
&C.  [  s'o)  o  .Totij  Tf  I  x«t  Tft  O-rriTct  (Tioiiarci 
v/ti'iv,  x.T.}..  The  use  of  the  word  f)rrjTn,  ntor- 
tiil,  immediately  after  %'f/.ij6v  (ver.  10)  seems  to  jus- 
tify the  reference  of  the  latter  to  physical  death ;  as, 
indeed,  autnnra  here  opposes  any  ethical  sense  of 
that  word  in  ver.  10.  Since,  however,  the  verb 
ti'io/Toafi'  is  one  of  wide  nii.'aning,  a  large  numl>er 
of  eomnientators  (Calvin,  Stuart,  De  Wette,  Pliilippi, 
and  others)  refer  this  verse  also  to  somrthing  whicli 
takes  place  even  here,  to  be  completed,  indeed,  ut 
the  time  of  actual  resurrection.  Against  this  is  the 
nai,  also,  even,  which  is  unnecessary,  unless  the 
reference  be  to  something  wliich  has  not  yet  tiiken 
place,  and  which  seemed  most  milikely  to  take  place. 
The  (luiekcning  of  the  body,  as  a  tool  of  unriglit- 
eousness,  has  already  begun.  The  olyection  of  Stu- 
art, that  then  this  would  only  mean  to  declare  the 


•  (Acooptlnn  tiK.  as  imi>lnnlod  riifhtcounnpiw,  wo  pnm- 

f'hriiHC  :iB  lollowrs  :  But  if  Christ  he  In  you,  (thoUKh)  your 
x«ly  iiidcod  \*  (it'iid  (Imvini;  in  it  thi'  hcciIh  of  denth,  iind 
Hli'Mit  to  dii')  on  account  of  Hin  (who^io  olfi'Ctsi  are  not  yot 
totnly  romoved),  hut  y^iur  spirit  (pi-i-nn-iitcd  hy  the  Itoly 
■Spirit)  ii(  lifr  (alri'ndy  iind  to  he  yet  more  truly  so)  or  ac- 
rouiit  of  ri(fhtfoimnc».i  (iinplnntcd  m  you  hy  tho  Holy 
8piiit,.iu  virtue  of  yuur  union  to  Chriiit).— R.] 


bodily  resurrection,  a  truth  already  well  known,  be- 
trays a  want  of  api)reciation  of  the  importance 
attached  to  that  truth  by  the  A|)ostle.  Furthermore, 
even  admitting  a  secondary  refei-ence  to  a  present 
moral  quickening  of  the  body,  the  primary  reference 
to  the  actual  physical  resurrection  seems  to  be  de- 
manded by  the  experience  of  Christians,  wiiich  cer- 
tainly shows  them  that  the  last  seat,  b(jth  of  tht? 
strength  and  the  ett'ects  of  sin,  is  in  the  body.  Il 
does  not  revive ;  no  spiritual  power  here  renews  it. 
It  is  mortal,  yet  even  it  shall  share  in  the  life-giving 
influence.  The  verb  means  more  than  raising  from 
the  dead  indeed,  but,  as  used  liere,  the  emphasis 
rests  on  this. — R.] 

[On  account  of  his  Spirit  that  dw^elleth  in 
you,  (iiu  TO  ivoi,y.o7v  fti'Tor  nrfTna  f» 
I'/ilv.  See  7'extiial  Note  "].  We  have  decided 
above  for  the  accusative,  dt.a  to  ivoixovv,  in 
opposition  to  the  genitive.  Wc  do  this  for  impor- 
tant reasons.  The  Spirit  which  dwells  in  believers 
prepares  the  resurrection-body  ;  but  the  resurrection 
is  t]iercl)y  only  provided  for.  The  resurrection  itself 
is  still  to  be  the  final  deed  of  God.  And  this  is  tha 
question  here  (see  ver.  18).  But  it  is  a  miraculous 
deed  of  God,  which  is  not  only  occasioned,  but  also 
brought  to  pass,  by  the  presence  of  the  Spirit  of 
life  In  believers. 

The  change  of  terms  is  remarkable :  Jesua  and  i 
Christ.  [Bengel :  Appellatio  Jesu  spectat  ad  I 
ipxitm  ;  Chkisti,  refertnr  ad  nos ;  true  even  to  its 
cschatological  reference  (Meyer). — R.] 

If,  now,  the  too^rou/fff  t  also  refers  to  the 
resurrection,  the  choice  of  the  expression  yet  indi- 
cate!?, at  the  same  time,  the  holiness  of  the  cor- 
porealness  by  the  operation  of  the  resurrection- 
power  of  the  Spirit,  as  this  holiness  constitutes  the 
tratisition  and  interposition  for  the  final  miracle  of 
the  resurrection  (see  2  Co 
nature  of  the  case,  the  que 
an   ethical    vivification    alone 

alone  ;  but  the  idea  of  vivification  comprises  both 
these  (according  to  Calvin,  De  Wette,  Pliilippi,  and 
others).  Calvin  :  "  Non  de  ultima  nxurreclioiie,* 
(jvw  viometito  fiet,  habetur  sermo,  sed  de  coutiifua 
npirituK  opera' tone,  quce  relinqnias  carnix  paulntim 
mort iticansi  ccelextrm  vitam  in  nobis  iiiftaurat.''''  But 
De  Wette  properly  ol>serves,  against  the  notion  that 
the  si)iritual  power  of  resurrection  alone  can  con- 
sunniiate  tlie  process  of  renewal  (in  conformity  with 
the  reading  ()ta  Toe,  &c.),  that  the  Jewish  opinion 
that  the  Holy  Ghost  quickens  the  dead  (Shamoth 
Rabba,  &c.)  cannot  prove  any  thing  here. 


FOUltTH    rAllAOKAPH,   VERS.    12-17. 

Ver.  12.  Therefore,  brethren  [«(<«  o'v, 
nSff.q'oi.  An  inferential  exhortation.  In  chap, 
vi.  12  a  similar  exhortation  is  found,  but  without 
n<)f/.qni.  The  first  person  naturally  follows. — R.l 
The  lion  draws  an  inference  from  tlie  necessity  of 
leading  the  life  in  the  Spirit  in  opposition  to  the  life 
in  the  flesh,  in  hope  of  the  reanimation  of  the  body. 
Tholui'k  says,  though  not  in  the  sense  of  the  textual 
construction  :  "  The  Apostle  allows  hiniself  to  bo 
led  ott'  from  the  train  of  thought  commencing  with 

•  [Ai  Alford  8ii|ri;obtg  :  tjoji  oo'i(m  <?<•  uUima  rejsiirrre- 
linnf,  would  In'  niort-  correct.  For  n  very  full  diKuwion, 
holh  of  tho  textuiil  vnriutionH  mid  the  exciretical  opinions, 
Hco  Mi'ver  in  hicn.  He  defen<l8  the  exclusive  rufercno*  t« 
the  resurrection  of  tho  body. — K.] 


n  for  the  final  miracle  of 

or.  v.  5).     From  the  very  I 

cstion  here  can  be  neither  1 

one,   nor   a    jihysieal    one  I 


CHAPTER  VIII.    1-17. 


25S 


Ters.  10  and  II,  by  the  necessity  of  an  exhortation, 
and  afterwards  returns  from  another  point  to  the 
eschatological  expression." 

We  are  debtors,  not  to  the  flesh  [6q>(i.Xe- 
rai.  ea/iiv  ot''  ttJ  aa()xi.  The  negative  applies 
to  the  succeeding  clause  as  well.  The  antithesis  is 
ol)vious.  ^«(>|  has  the  article  here,  where  it  is 
personified,  but  not  in  tlie  next  clause,  where  it  cor- 
responds with  the  use  made  of  it  in  vers.  4  and  5. 
— R.]  According  to  Meyer,  the  Apostle  has  sup- 
pressed his  antitliesis  in  consequence  of  the  Tiva^ 
cious  movement  of  his  language.  But  he  was  pre- 
vented by  something  else — namely,  a  desire  to  guard 
against  misunderstanding,  as  if  Christians  had  no 
duties  in  reference  to  their  fle^h  or  their  physical 
life  (comp.  Eph.  v.  29).  [So  Chrysostom  ;  see  Al- 
ford  in  loco. — R.]  Therefore  he  defines  his  propo- 
sition more  specifically :  not  to  live  after  the  flesh 
[toT  x«Ta  (Tci^K a  tfji'];  that  is,  not  to  hve 
according  to  the  principle  of  carnal  desires,  or  of 
external  motives  at  all.  The  genitive  xnv  is  suffi- 
ciently explained  as  designation  of  the  infinitive  of 
result.  (Fritzsche  takes  another  view  ;  see  Meyer.)* 
The  antithesis,  after  the  Spirit.,  follows  indirectly  in 
ver.  13. 

Ver.  18.  Ye  shall  die  [fiiXXiri  cc/io&vtj- 
ffxfirv].  Strictly,  tlien  ye  shall  go  continually  to 
death,  or,  toward  death  {  fi  e /.?.  f  r  f  ).  Meyer  under- 
stands this  to  mean  here  only  eternal  death.  This 
is  contrary  to  Philippi,  who  properly  retains  the  gen- 
eral idea  of  death. •(■  According  to  Riickert,  this 
declaration  would  exclude  the  resurrection.  But 
the  Apostle  takes  cognizance  not  only  of  the  differ- 
ence between  the  first  and  second  resurrection  (1 
Cor.  XV.  23),  but  also  of  a  resurrection  •which  begins 
immediately  after  deatli  (2  Cor.  v.  1);  and  pure  life 
is  in  antithesis  to  a  final  resurrection  to  judgment. 
The  explanation  of  Q]cunienius,  rov  dOdraTov 
.9«r«Toi'  iv  TTj  yfivvrj,  precludes  neither  the  resur- 
rection on  the  one  hand,  nor,  on  the  other,  a  ccm- 
etant  connection  of  physical  and  psychical  corrup- 
tion with  ethical  corruption. 

But  if  ye  through  the  Spirit  [ft  rfe  nvfv- 
narv.  JI vhv fi  ari,  here  is  undoubtedly  not  sub- 
jective, but  the  Holy  Spirit  (comp.  ver.  14).  An 
instrumental  dative. — R.]  By  means  of  the  life  of 
the  Si)irit  (by  virtue  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  says  Meyer). 
Therefore  the  Apostle  says,  tiie  deeds  of  the  body 
should  be  mortified,  not  by  bodily  exercise,  restraint, 
and  penance,  but  by  the  power  of  the  life  of  the 
Spirit. 

The  deeds  [ra?  ;r^aSftc].  The  strata- 
gems. Machinations  (Luke  xxiii.  51  ;  Col.  iii.  9). 
These  consist  in  the  predominance  of  illegnl  im- 
pulses as  irresistible  necessities,  as  proofs  of  liberty, 
as  the  poetry  of  life,  &c.  The  word  occurs  in  the 
later  Greek  writers  in  the  meaning  of  cunning  de- 
signs, especially  in  relation  to  sins  of  lust  (see  Tho- 
luck).:]:     Yet  the  general  treatment  in  the  present 


*  [Sfiinrt  follows  Winer,  p.  306,  in  govpming'  the  greni- 
tive  liy  o<J>ecAeTai  (so  Fritzsche).  This  is  harsli,  and  most 
commentators  take  the  genitive  as  that  of  design  or  result, 
according  to  a  very  common  usage. — R.] 

t  [The  most  comprehensive  idea  of  death  seems  to  be 
demanded  by  the  context.  Graiitii\g  that  the  antithesis  is 
ju)»)  (ver.  10),  the  present  and  spiritual  reference  is  still  re- 
q^uited  Vf'r.  6  forms  the  ln-st  guide  to  the  meaning  of  the 
terms  here  (so  Tholuck).— R.] 

X  i^The  New  Testament  uses  the  word  generally  in.  ma- 
\om  parlnn  ;  and  so  here,  whether  in  a  more  or  less  re- 
Jtrictcd  sense.  It  does  not  refer  to  the  definite  acts  so 
strictly  as  epya,  but  includes  the  general  conduct,  &c.  (Phi- 
tippi)  -K.] 


section  requires  a  general  interpretation  of  the 
word. 

[Of  the  body,  to"'  (To5/(«Tog.  See  Textual 
Note  ".]  The  expression  ato/iaroi;  has  been  verj 
strange  to  many ;  therefore  Codd.  D.  E.  F.  G.,  and 
the  Vulgate,  read  (Td(iy.oi;.  7'6  ffwfioi,  t/ji;  dfiUQ- 
Tt'ac,  chap.  vi.  6,  cannot  be  cited  in  favor  of  the  ex- 
pression,  since  the  question  here  is  a  real  body,  but 
not  there.  Yet  Meyer  correctly  asserts,  contrary  to 
Stirm,  that  Paul  remained  true  to  his  customary  use 
of  langiuige.  The  body  has  its  autonomous  desires, 
which  express  themselves  faithfully  in  the  normal 
life  of  man,  and  willingly  subordinate  themselves  to 
the  dominion  of  the  Spirit.  In  the  sinful  man,  who 
is  not  converted,  these  express  themselves  as  impe- 
rious commands.  In  the  believer,  on  the  contrary, 
from  whom  the  law  in  the  members  is  removed,  they 
can  morbidly  express  themselves  still,  though  in  only 
deceptive  forms,  and  so  far  as  the  body,  which  should 
be  the  organ  of  the  spirit,  is  autonomous  in  un- 
guarded moments.  But  its  7TQdifi<;  are  then  mo- 
tions of  the  (rd(i'S,  which  appear  as  n^dtftq  of  the 
body,  because  the  body  has  its  phj^siological  rights. 
[Thus  we  avoid  giving  an  ethical  sense  to  body.  If 
the  bad  sense  of  deeds  be  emphasized,  then  the  ethi- 
cal force  is  found  there.  We  must  avoid,  on  the 
other  hand,  taking  the  phrase,  "  deeds  of  the  body," 
as  metonyme  for  sinful,  carnal  deeds  (Stuart,  Hodge) ; 
for  there  must  be  a  reason  for  the  choice  of  this 
word.  Alford,  following  De  Wette,  explains  it : 
"  =  r'ji;  (7a(jy.6<:,  but  here  concrete,  to  give  more 
vivid  reality." — R.] 

(ztavaroT'Tf  [comp.  chap.  vii.  4,  and  the 
stronger  expression,  vh-/.(io')aaTf,  Col.  iii.  5  ;  Lange'a 
Comrn.,  pp.  63,  64. — R.]  Mortify  can  only  mean : 
exhaust  and  abnegate  to  the  very  root.  Wicked 
practises,  as  roots  of  sin,  are  included. 

Ye  shall  live  [u  r;  a  f  a  S  i .  Alford  :  "  not 
fiiD.iTi  c/^i' ;  this  /i/"e  being  no  natural  consequence 
of  a  course  of  mortifying  the  deeds  of  the  body, 
but  the  gift  of  God  through  Christ ;  and  coming, 
therefore,  in  the  form  of  an  assurance,  '  ye  shall 
live,''  from  Christ's  Apostle." — R.J  In  the  higher, 
and  even  highest  sense. 

Ver.  14.  For  as  many  as  are  led  by  the 
Spirit  of  God  [ o rr o t  ydq  n'vtv tiutiy  d  tov 
dyovtfxi.  Comp.  Gal.  v.  18.  Lange's  Comw.,  p. 
187.  VuQ  introduces  the  reason  why  they  shall 
live,  implying,  at  the  same  time,  that  such  mortifica- 
tion was  the  result  of  the  Spirit's  it)fluence,  as  is  ex- 
pressed in  ver.  18.  Hence  nrfT/ia,  in  the  former 
case,  must  refer  to  the  Spirit  of  God.  That  this 
leading  means  a  continued  and  special  influence  of 
the  Divine  Spirit,  is  obvious. — R.]  The  Spirit  of 
God  is  not  identical  with  the  Spirit  in  ver.  13  (Mey- 
er) ;  but  it  is  Christian  spiritual  life,  to  be  led  by  the 
Spirit  of  God.  The  passive  form  expresses  its  com- 
plete  dominion,  without  at  the  same  time  denying 
the  voluntary  being  led  on  the  part  of  the  human 
will. 

They  are  sons  of  God  [oTrot  viol  fl(Ti,v 
&fov.  See  Textnal  Note  '*.  The  reading  adopted 
here  places  the  emphasis  on  oi'rot,  these,  and 
none  other,  but  gives  a  secondary  emphasis  to  ii'ot; 
comp.  Gal.  iii.  7.  Philippi  finds  no  essential  differ- 
ence between  viol  and  tir.va  dtov,  except  that,  in 
the  former,  the  idea  of  maturity  is  more  prominent. 
Hence  Christ  is  called  \<i6<:,  never  rtxvor  OtoT:  (So 
Alford.)  On  the  significance  of  the  phrase,  see 
Doctr.  Note  '",  and  the  JEueg.  Notes  on  vers.  15,  16. 
— R.]    Sons,  in  the  real  sense,  in  contrast  with  the 


260 


THE   EPISTLE    OF   PAUL   TO    THE   ROMANS. 


symbolical  cliildren  of  God  of  the  old  theocracy. 
It  is  those,  and  those  alone,  who  bear  in  themselves 
the  iniiik  that  the  Spirit  of  God  leads  them.  On 
the  other  hand,  the  merely  symbolical  adoption  by 
God  under  the  law  is  strictly  a  bondage,  accordng  to 
ver.  15.     Comp.  Gal.  v.  18. 

\'ir.  1.").  For  ye  did  not  receive  the  spirit 
of  bondage  [or  ;■«('  y/.d^-itTt  TrrtTnu  ()oi'- 
j.tia^.  An  appeal  to  Christian  consciousness,  to 
confirm  (y«(')  his  statement.  The  verb  is  aoiist, 
referring  to  a  definite  time  (when  they  became  Chris- 
tians).— U.]  Meyer  translates  :  "  A  spirit  of  bond- 
age, adoption."  We  hold  that  the  delinitions  are 
sutKciently  united  by  the  exclusive  antithesis.  What 
must  we  understand  by  the  expression,  xpirit  of 
iondji/e  ?  Tholuck :  "  The  negative  form  of  this 
clause  caused  the  earlier  expositors  great  difficulty, 
since  the  question  is  not  a  coiinnunication  of  the 
spirit  in  the  Old  Testament,  and  since  tlie  spirit 
there  imparted,  so  far  as  it  was  a  spirit  of  bondage, 
could  not  Ije  derived  from  God  ;  and  finally,  as  the 
nvfT/ia,  which,  in  consequence  of  the  antithesis  of, 
TiviT'fiu  vioOnTiai;,  must  be  viewed  as  the  Holy 
Spirit,  could  produce  the  spirit  of  bondage."  Ex- 
planations : 

1.  Augustine  incidentally:  The  devil  is  the  au- 
thor of  the  slavish  spirit  (Ileb.  ii.  14,  15).  Luther: 
The  spirit  of  Cain  in  opposition  to  Abel's  spirit  of 
grace  (Fritzsche  :  mains  ilcewon,  &c.). 

2.  Chrysostom,  Theodoret,  and  (Ecumenius  :  The 
gift  of  the  law  itself,  as  m'H'iiartxt'i,  according  to 
chap.  vii.  14.  Likewise  Augustine,  clsewiiere :  The 
spirit  of  the  external  gift  of  the  law  :  iilem  spiritus 
in  labulis  lapideis  in  tiinore,  in  (abulis  cordis  in 
dilectione. 

3.  Most  of  the  later  expositors  :  The  same  Holy 
Spirit  is  described  in  His  twofold  operation ;  here, 
as  far  as  He  exercises  His  penal  office  (John  xvL  8). 
In  that  case,  the  operation  of  the  mere  attritio  not 
designed  by  the  Spirit  is  niade  prominent. 

4.  Grotius,  Philippi,  and  otiiers :  nv.  is  in  both 
cases  a  subjective  spiritual  disposition.  [Piiilippi 
defends  this  view  very  aldy.  Stuart :  a  servile 
spirit;  a  filial  spirit,  Alford  admits  also  the  sulyec- 
tive  sense.  De  Wette  remarks,  that  the  objective 
source  is  indicated  in  the  verb  "  received." — K.] 

5.  Fritzsche,  Meyer,  ami  Tholuck :  nv.  i)n\).. 
denotes  what  tlie  received  filial  spirit  is  not.  Like- 
wise Monachus,  in  the  seventh  century.  Therefore 
the  spiiit  of  l)ondage  is  regarded  as  a  hypothetical 
antithesis.  This  is  undoubtedly  correct,  in  a  meas- 
ure, so  far  as  the  Spirit  which  they  have  received 
can  be  regarded  only  as  a  Spirit  of  adoption  ;  but  a 
spirit  of  bondage  would  be  really  a  jierverse  spirit. 
[It  should  be  remarked,  that  all  vii'ws  which  give 
Tivtviia,  a  subjective  meaning,  must  either  take  it  in 
the  first  ciise  as  =  disposition,  and,  in  the  second, 
=  the  human  spirit  as  inlluenced  l»y  t!ic  Holy  Spirit, 
thus  having  no  exact  correspondence;  or,  assume  a 
hypothetical  antithesis  in  the  first  ca,se.  It  may  be 
added,  that  it  is  difficult  to  account  for  the  use  of 
the  word  "receive"  (espef?ially  the  definite  aorist), 
if  these  views  be  accepted,  since  the  servile  spirit 
was  the  natural  spirit.  We  are  thus  driven  to  the 
inter[>retation,  tliat  nvtv/ia  means  the  same  spirit 
in  both  cases,  defined  first  negatively,  then  positive- 
ly. The  prol)ability  of  a  reference  to  the  Holy  Spirit 
13  very  great  in  that  case. — R.] 

Hut  yet  the  Apostle  intimates  that  Judaism  has 
made  of  the  Old'  Testament  a  spirit  (a  spirit-like, 
complete  system)  of  bondage,  and  that  it  might  at- 


tempt to  make  such  a  perverse  spirit  of  tlie  New 
Testament.  This  intimation  is  brought  out  promi- 
nently by  the  TTci/.t^v  fit;  qofjov,  wliich  denotes 
a  tact.  At  Sinai  the  Jews  made  of  the  law  a  law 
*i',-  (/6,^i)v  in  the  bad  sense  (Exod.  xx.  lit,  &c.).  Oi: 
the  other  hand,  the  repetition  of  the  i'/.a[lcrh  favora 
the  view  given  above :  ye  have  not  received  a 
spirit  of  bondage,  because  that  would  be  a  contra, 
diction. 

Agsiin  to  fear.  This  denotes  the  bound  :  wick- 
ed  fear  of  slavish  legalism.  [De  Wette,  Meyer,  Phi. 
lippi,  join  Tid/.i-v  with  tli;  (pvfioviis=inorJer 
Of/din  to  ftur.  The  ndhv  may  imply  that  the  con- 
dition under  Judaism  was  one  of  fear,  but  it  does 
not  follow  that  the  Roman  Christians  were  mainly 
Jewish  (Pliilip|)i),  for  tliis  fear  is  a  result  of  idl  un- 
christian religiousness.  The  nd'/.tv  points  to  thei^ 
previous  condition  in  all  cases. — R.] 

But  ye  received  the  Spirit  of  adop< 
tion  [  «  /  /. «  i  ).  d  fj'  tr  f  n  vfT  /i  a  rio  >')  f  a  i  a^, 
Meyer  finils  in  the  repetition  of  ildptrt  nvto- 
/(«  something  solemn.  The  force  of  the  genitive 
must  be  determined  largely  by  the  meaning  of 
nvfv/ia.  Meyer:  A  spirit  which  is  the  ruling  prin- 
ciple in  the  condition  of  adoption.  Phili|>pi,  argu- 
ing, from  Gal.  iv.  5,  C,  that  adojitiou  i)recedes  the 
impartation  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  finds  another  rea- 
son for  the  subjective  sense  of  spirit ;  but  the 
adoption  may  be  taken,  not  as  the  act,  but  the 
state,  which  is  more  accordant  with  the  context, 
since  iv  i>>,  wherein,  refers  to  a  state  or  element  of 
life.  Out  of  this  comes  the  subjective  feeling,  the 
cry,  Abba,  Father.  The  genitive  then  points  to  au 
effect  as  in  bomltge,  which  also  has  a  descriptive 
clause  appended. — H.] 

De  Wette:  "■  lioOtala,  strictly,  adoption  instead 
of  a  child  ;  "  which  meaning  can  l)e  so  urged,  that 
they  who  were  by  nature  the  children  of  wrath  (Eph. 
ii.  3),  have  been  adopted,  or  appointed  (Eph.  i.  15), 
the  chihlren  of  God  (Fritz.sche,  Meyer,  and  Olshau- 
sen).  The  same  connnentator  says  :  "  Rut  it  is  a 
(luestion  whether — as  even  in  the  Old  Testament 
(Deut.  xxxii.  C),  and  in  the  New  Testament  (John  i. 
12  ;  1  John  iii.  9  ;  2  Peter  i.  4),  and  also  in  Paul, 
agreeal)ly  to  the  new  creation  (Gal.  vi.  15),  the  idea 
of  transformation  into  children  of  God  occurs— 
there  is  not,  consequently,  in  liofy.  rather  the  idea 
of  sonship,  of  the  real  relation  of  children  to  the 
father  (Luther,  Usteri,  kc),  than  of  adoption 
(Fritzsche,  Meyer,  and  Tholuck).  The  expression, 
nrtTfict  liofy.,  and  the  use  made  of  the  word  in  ver. 
23,  harmonizes  better  with  this  view."  Tholuck, 
on  the  contrary,  appeals  to  Eph.  v.  1  ;  Rom.  ix.  4  ; 
to  the  desigmition  of  the  adopted  child  by  iio? 
f)tT6<;  (I'/'oi;  tif!7T()irju^)\  and  to  the  adop'.io  filio' 
mm  of  the  Vulgate.  Rut  Chry.sostom,  Theodoret, 
and  other  Greek  expositors,  on  the  other  hand,  have 
taken  tiie  word  also  in  the  sense  of  iiotij^.  It  is 
easy  to  see  that  the  Apostle  chose  the  expression  in 
order  to  distinguish  the  children  of  faith,  as  adopted 
through  grace,  from  the  l•(6^•  J'diot,-.  Rut  he  had  the 
further  reason  of  not  wishing  to  press  the  idea :  for 
then  he  could  Jiot  have  said,  with  reference  to  the 
Hebrew  law  of  inheritance,  "  And  if  children,  then 
heirs."  Likewise,  the  new  liirth  by  Christ  and  His 
Spirit  denotes  real  lioi.  [The  actual  sonship  has 
already  l)een  mentioned  in  ver.  14.  It  seems  more 
natural,  then,  to  take  this  expression  in  the  confirma- 
tory verse  in  its  literal  sense,  adoption,  as  implying 
the  method  of  their  becoming  sons ;  the  more  so,  ad 
au  appeal  ia  made  to  the  experience  of  the  readers, 


CHAPTER  VIII.    1-17. 


261 


ffhich  experience  would  revert  to  the  time  when 
they  passed  out  of  one  state  iuto  the  other. — R.] 

Wherein  we  cry  (1  Cor.  ii.  3)  [er  m  y.ijd- 
tofifv.  The  E.  Y.,  whervbi/,  is  not  exact.  Ilodge: 
"  which  enables  us  to  address  God  as  our  Father." 
Such  an  instrumental  sense  of  the  preposition  is 
very  doubtful.  The  first  person  is  here  used,  proba- 
bly I'roni  the  deep  feeling  of  fellowship  which  the 
thought  awakens. — R.]  Tiie  tv  here  designates 
the  Spirit  as  ikrn  principle  [element]  of  life,  which 
has  the  full  na^^t^aia  as  its  result  (Heb.  x.  19-23). 
Kijd^uv,  loud  praying  ;  the  voluntary,  chil  .like  ex- 
elaniatiou.  "  Chrysostom  raises  the  doubt,  that, 
even  in  the  Old  Testament,  God  is  called  the  Father 
of  Israel ;  and  he  replies  to  it,  by  saying  that  the 
Jews  did  not  use  this  term  in  their  prayers ;  or,  if 
they  did,  it  was  only  ti  ol/.tiat;  diavoiat;,  and  not 
ano  Ttviffian/.tii;  ivfijytlaq  xn'or/if rot.  Yet  God 
certainly  has  the  name  of  Father  iu  the  Old  Testa- 
ment, only  in  the  same  incomplete  sense  as  the  peo- 
ple tlie  name  of  son — namely,  as  founder  and  pro- 
tector of  the  people  (Jer.  iii.  4,  19,  and  elsewhere), 
and  always  in  reference  to  the  community,  and  not 
to  the  relation  of  the  individual ; "  Tholuck.  Iu 
the  Apotrypha,  He  is  first  addressed  thus  by  indi- 
viduals (Book  of  Wisdom  xiv.  3  ;  Sirach  xxiii.  1  ; 
li.  14).  But  we  must  not  overlook  the  fact  that, 
even  in  the  Old  Testament,  the  centre  of  the  filial 
relation  is  the  Messiah  (2  Sam.  vii. ;  Ps.  ii.  ;  Isa. 
ix.) ;  and  that,  consequently,  from  the  perfect  New 
Testament  centre  of  the  relation  of  the  Father  to 
Christ,  all  linOfaia  extends. 

Abba,  Father.  "yJfifiS.  [  X3X  ],  the  Syriac 
name  for  father  (Gal.  iv.  6  ;  Mark  xiv.  36).  Why  is 
the  nuriiQ  added?     Explanations: 

1.  The  usual  view  (Riickert,  Keiche,  Kiillner, 
he  )  is,  the  nmtjo  helps  to  explain  the  Syriac  Abba. 
'So  Hoilge :  "  Paul  chose  to  call  God  his  Father,  in 
lis  own  familiar  tongue.  Having  used  the  one  word, 
'low'cver,  the  Greek,  of  course,  became  necessary  for 
ihose  to  whom  he  was  writing."  But  Paul  does  not 
..Iways  deem  it  necessary  thus  to  translate  (comp. 
I  Cor.  xvi.  22) ;  and  in  the  three  cases  where  this 
jjhrase   occurs,   the   usual    mark   of    interpretation 

TovT    t'lTTt)  is  wanting. — R.] 

2.  The  repetition  of  the  name  is  an  expression 
"if  childlike  fondness  (Chrysostom,  Theodore  of 
'"i;opsvestia,  and  Grotius  [AUbrd]  ). 

3.  An  expression  of  God's  fatherhood  for  Jews 
srid  Gentiles  (Augustine,  Anselm,  Calvin,  Estius,  and 
ethers). 

4.  The  name  "  Abba "  has  passed  from  Jewish 
i,Uo  Chri.stian  prayer,  and  has  received,  through 
Christ  himself,  the  consecration  of  a  special  sanctity. 
Therefore  the  Greek-speaking  Christians  retained  the 
word  as  a  proper  noun,  and  added  thereto  the 
nartjo  as  an  appellative,  so  that  the  Abba,  Father, 
remained  in  force  ;  Meyer.  [So  De  Wette,  Philippi, 
lightfoot ;  comp.  Lange's  Comm.  Galalians,  p.  98. 
• — R.]  This  would  be,  in  realit)-,  a  duplication  arising 
from  a  misconception.  Tholuck  unites  with  Luther, 
In  favor  of  Chrysostom's  view.  Luther :  "  It  is  the 
callincf  to,  just  as  a  young  child  lisps  to  its  father  in 
simple,  childlike  confidence."  If  it  be  necessary  to 
refer  to  the  passage  in  Mark,  the  nariji)  there  un- 
doubtedly serves  as  an  explanation.  It  is  without 
any  admixture  of  misconception  that  a  liturgical  use 
(.IS  Hallelujah,  Hosanna,  Amen)  has  been  made  of 
this  passage,  because,  in  the  most  significant  manner, 
there  is  iu  one  salutation  an  invocation  of  the  Father 


of  Christ  and  the  Father  of  Christians,  the  Fathei 
of  the  believers  of  the  Old  Testament  and  the  Kew, 
the  Father  of  Jews  and  Gentiles,  and  thus  of  the 
Father  of  all  believers  in  all  nations. 

Yer.  16.  The  Spirit  itself  [avro  r'o  nvfii 
fia.  The  parallel  pas.-age,  Gal.  iv.  6,  is  conel  isiv« 
in  favor  of  a  reference  to  the  Holy  Spirit,  even  if  tin 
context  did  not  demand  it. — R.]  .-/iVtl.  Not  tin, 
same  (Erasmus,  Luther),  but  the  Spirit  itself  (Yul- 
gate  :  ij:>ye  spirUus  ;  Beza  :  ipse  ille  spirilvs).  We 
cry  in  the  spirit,  and  the  Spirit  itself  beareth  us  wit- 
ness. 

Beareth  witness  with  [or  to]  our  spirit 
\^(Jrfi/Lia(j'rv(jft  r  m  nvivt^uri  ^/((7)j'].  It 
may  be  asked  whether  ot/</(  a(<Tt'(j*i  is  to  be 
taken  in  the  sense  of  the  strengthened,  uncom- 
pounded  word  :  He  bears  witness  to  our  spirit,  as 
the  Yulgate,  Luther,  Grotius,  Koppe,  De  Wette 
[Alford],  and  many  other  expositors  hold ;  or, 
whether  it  should  read :  He  bears  witness  witii  our 
self-consciousness :  I  am  God's  child.  Meyer  holds 
this  opinion,  insisting  upon  the  crrr  here,  as  every- 
where (chap.  ii.  15  ;  ix.  1).  But  the  latter  view 
would  give  rise  to  the  question,  To  whom  do  both 
bear  witness  ?  And  thus  there  would  follow  the 
conclusion  :  even  self-consciousness  bears  witness  to 
self-consciousness.*  This  view  is  hardly  tenable, 
Chrysostom  distinguishes  as  the  two  witnesses,  the 
Holy  Spirit  and  the  grace  given  to  us  ;  and  Hervteus, 
Calvin,  Tholuck,  and  others,  take  the  same  position. 
Parcus  even  applies  the  legal  maxim,  "  out  of  the 
mouth  of  two  witnesses."  "  According  to  this  old 
Protestant  interpretation,  the  witness  of  our  own 
spirit  consists  in  the  communication  of  the  declara- 
tion of  Divine  pardon  to  the  believing  subject ;  but 
the  witness  of  the  Holy  Spirit  is  regarded  as  a  two- 
fold one.  On  the  one  hand,  it  consists  in  the  gen- 
eral  witness  by  the  Scriptures  and  the  sacraments, 
and  then  in  the  applicati"  and  obsignatio  produced 
by  the  Holy  Spirit,  while  the  declarations  of  the 
obsignatio  fidehmn  are  applied  here." 

Yet  it  seems  clear  from  the  antitheses,  the  Holy 
Spirit  and  our  spirif,  that  the  Holy  Spirit  should  be 
regarded  as  the  testifying  part,  but  that  our  spirit, 
on  the  other  hand,  should  be  regarded  as  the  part 
which  is  testified  to.  For  the  witness  of  our  spirit 
has,  as  a  special  witness,  no  value  beside  that  of  the 
Holy  Spirit  (see  Tholuck,  p.  416,  417).  And  yet  the 
question  ever  arises.  To  whom  is  the  witness  made? 
We  hold  that  the  expression  aivavni.upi [Jdn-rai, 
(ver.  26)  is  an  illustrative  parallel,  and  must  give 
importance  to  the  consideration  that  there  the  ex- 
planatory word  vTrf^frriy/dvn,  is  added.  But  we 
thereby  approach  nearer  the  explanation,  that  the 
(Ti'v  in  both  cases  has  the  meaning  of  a  strengthened 
simple  word.  But  it  yet  remains  for  us  to  conclude 
concerning  a  twofold  function  of  the  same  Holy 
Spirit  in  the  life  of  the  soul.  He  operates  in  the 
filial  life  of  the  soul  of  believers  as  an  impulse  to 

*  [Dr.  Lange  does  not  Roc-m  to  determine  definitely  in 
favor  of  either  view.  But  his  olijectiou  here  is  based  on  the 
asfumption  that  our  spirit  is  =  self-consciou;-nee.<.  Is 
there  not  in  Christians,  during  this  time  ot  witiic.«s-V)cailnfr, 
such  a  division  stiil  remai  ing,  as  to  justify  the  intei  preta- 
tion  which  accepts  a  twofold  witnres  ?  The  witness  is  to 
the  man  as  self-conscious,  needing;  such  testimony  and 
borne  both  by  the  Holy  Spirit,  and  the  renewed  uattire, 
over  against  the  remaining  sinful  nature.  With  our  view 
(if  ver.  15,  it  is  necessary  that  a  new  witness  of  this  kind  be 
introduced  here.  Philippi  accepts  the  twofold  witnessing 
here,  claiming,  however,  that  the  other  sense  is  possible 
onlv  in  case  the  reference  in  ver.  15  be  to  a  filial  spirifc 
-li.] 


202 


THE  EPISTLE  OF  PAUL  TO  THE  ROMA^:S. 


praver,  but  He  also  operates  as  the  sealing  witness 
of  adoption.  And  thus  He  hastens  in  advance  of 
cur  consciousness  oi"  faith  with  groaniiigs  which  can- 
not be  uttered  (ver.  20).  The  aiv,  though  it  be  not 
a  mere  simple  prefix,  does  not  always  signitS-  the 
equality  of  two  dillerent  parts  in  one  function. 
Sometimes  it  denotes  the  etlect  (aivctyM,  (Tiva- 
Ouoi^o)),  and  sometimes  the  conjoint  conclusion  of 
the  act  specified  in  the  verb  with  a  kimired  fact 
Ot'viijUt).     This  is  the  case  here. 

It  is  important  that  the  earlier  theolopans  re- 
garded this  passage  as  a  proof  of  the  certitudo  gra- 
ti(e,  in  opposition  to  the  Catholic  doctrine.  Meyer 
▼ery  properly  refers  to  the  fact,  that  it  is  a  witness 
against  all  pantheistic  confusion  of  the  Divine  Spirit 
with  that  of  man.  It  testifies  to  the  living  unity  of 
both.*  Melanchthon  correctly  observes  against  fa- 
natics, that  "  the  efficacy  of  the  Spirit  enters  into 
the  believer  prielucujite  voce  evamjelii.'''' 

[That  -vie  are  children  of  God,  ort  itTfiiv 
rixva  i>for.  The  purport  of  the  testimony. 
Alford  :  "  not  ii'o/,  because  the  testimony  respects 
the  very  ground  and  central  point  of  sonship,  like- 
ncsi.s  to  luid  desire  for  God.'''' — R.]  The  word  rixva 
empiiasizea  the  heartiness  of  the  filial  feeling. 

Ver.  17.  And  if  children,  also  heirs  [fl  <)i 
rixva,  xai  z >.//<< o  vo"  oi. ].  We  must  sup))ly 
l(Tniv  both  times.  The  beluc/  /leirs  arises  from  the 
very  idea  and  right  of  a  child  ((Jal.  iv.  7).f 

Heirs  of  God  \_x /. t] (>ov6/i oi.  iiif  O-tor^. 
The  inheritance  is  the  kingdom  of  glory.  God,  as 
tlie  eternally  living  One,  is  like  the  earthly  testator, 
in  that  He  gives  His  children  every  thing  for  an  in- 
lieritance  ;  but  He  gives  them  himself  <as  the  treas- 
ure of  all  treiLsure-s.  He  will  be  their  inheritance, 
as  they  are  to  be  His  inheritance — a  relation  prefig- 
ured already  in  the  Old  Testament  (E.xod.  xix.  5  : 
Israel  the  peculiar  treasure  of  God.  Num.  xviii.  20  : 
Jehovah  is  the  inheritance  of  the  Levites,  as  they 
are  His  inheritance,  clerus).  As  He  him.self  will  be 
all  in  all,  so  shall  His  children  receive  with  Him,  in 
His  Son,  every  thing  for  an  inheritance  (1  Cor.  iii. 
21  ff.).  In  Luke  xv.  12  the  inheritance,  in  another 
sense,  is  spoken  of.  [Including  in  this  the  highest 
idea  of  eternal  life,  the  deelaiation  of  the  Apustle 
(ver.  115):  _>/e  xliaH  live^  is  aljundantly  proven. — R.] 

And  joint-heirs  vrith  Christ  [(TKvxAr/^iO- 
vo/ioi.  <)t  A'()  tfTTor].  Conformaljly  to  the  c'to- 
&KTiu,  tiie  I'loi  are  in  the  most  intimate  felhtwship 
with  the  i'«rii,-,  to  which  the  common  inlieritance  cor- 
responds ;  Gal.  iv.  7.  The  second  designation  char- 
acterizes the  Divine  inheritance  of  believers  in  its 
majesty,  its  infinite  extent,  and  its  nature,  as  the 
kingdom  of  perfect  love.in  the  glorifieil  world.  The 
view  tnged  .by  Fritzsche,  Meyer,  and  Tholuck,  that 
here  Paul  does  not  have  in  mind  the  Hebrew,  but 
the  Roman  right  of  inheritance  (with  reference  to 
adopted  children),  Philippi  correctly  terms  "  an  nn- 
theocratic  reference  to  the  Roman  right  of  inherit- 
ance." \ 

•  [On  the  witness  of  the  Spirit,  see  Dorlr.  N"lf.  ",  and 
the  workrt  refurrod  to  in  the  lint  of  Ilomilctical  Literature 
on  thii«  section. — U] 

t  [fn  tJalutians,  polemic  necessity  occasions  a  fuller  nnd 
romuwli.it  modifli-il  stutcmcnt  of  tlii-s  idea ;  see  Langu's 
Comm.  in  /'«■<..— U.) 

J  [  riio  Jewish  law  (rave  o  double  portion  to  the  olde^'t 
son;  the  Roman  law  made  all  rhildren  (.idnpted  ones  also) 
equal.  (So  the  Attic  law.)  J'ho  pfiint  of  this  controversy 
alMiut  the  referenro  to  Jewish  or  Itoman  law  of  inheritance, 
is,  that  the  former  presents  believers  as  lieritors,  shariiiK 
through  the  i^race  of  Christ,  the  chief  Heir,  the  latter,  in 
Vi  virtue  of  their  souship.    Pliilippi  culla  the  latter  "pro- 


If  so  be  that  we  suffer  with  him  [tin^ 
a  v  V  Tt  urs  yo  ft  t  V .  On  tlie  particle,  see  ver.  9, 
Here,  as  there,  it  implies  a  slight  adiuonition,  since 
it  introduces  a  con<iition  sine  qua  nou.  The  order, 
not  the  reason,  of  obtaining  full  salvation,  is  set 
forth  (Calvin). — R.]  Suffer  with  Ciirist — for  Him, 
His  gospel.  His  witness  (1  Peter  iv.  IS  ;  2  Cor.  v. 
5;  Phil.  iii.  lu  ;  Col.  i.  24  ;  *  2Tim.  ii.  11).  Suf. 
fering  with  Christ  has  the  promise  of  being  glorified 
with  Him.  Meyer  says,  strangely,  that  "  Olshausen 
(comp.  also  Philippi)  intermixes  something  totally 
wrong :  '  Share  in  the  conflict  with  sin  in  ourselves 
and  in  the  world.'  "  Just  this  is  the  very  nerve  of 
the  suffering  with  Christ. 

[That  vie  may  be  also  glorified  with  him, 
'ivct  xai  rrrr  t)o  i  ctrr  i9  i7)i(  f  r .]  As  Jleyer  proj). 
erly  says,  against  Tholuck,  the  i»a  is  not  dependent 
on  "joint-heirs,"  but  on  "  suffer  with  Him."  [This 
view  is  now  given  up  by  Tholuck,  who  correctly 
adds,  however :  "  That  does  not  describe  the  sub- 
jective, but  the  objective,  divine  design.  (So  Al- 
ford).— R.]  On  the  relations  of  the  right  of  inlierit- 
ance in  Rome,  and  other  nations,  see  Tholuck,  p.  419 
[and  the  note  on  "joint-heirs"].  We  must  here 
hold  to  this  much,  at  least,  of  the  idea  of  adoption : 
that  tiie  joint-heirs  with  Christ  become  heirs  of  God 
through  Christ,  in  and  with  Him  as  the  truly  Uui- 
versal  Heir. 


DOCTEINAIi  AND    ETHICAL. 

1.  The  correct  understanding  of  this  eighth  chap- 
ter of  the  Epistle  to  the  Romans  depends  essentially 
on  the  following  conditions:  (1.)  It  must  be  regard- 
ed in  connection  with  the  whole  section  beginning 
with  chap.  v.  12  ;  (2.)  The  antithesis  in  this  chapter 
must  be  perceived.  The  fundamental  thought  is  in- 
ilicaled  in  the  superscriptions :  Sin  and  the  life  of 
Christ,  as  opposite  principles  of  life  in  the  world. 
The  foundation  is  given  in  chap.  v.  12-21.  The 
abrogation  of  the  old  principle  in  its  two  fundamen- 
tal  forms  :  Service  of  sin,  service  of  the  law  ;  chap, 
vi.  1  to  vii.  G.  The  transition  from  the  old  to  the 
new  nature;  the  inwardness  of  the  law;  chaj).  vii. 
7-2").  With  chap.  viii.  there  appears  the  new  life 
of  believers  in  Christ,  and  of  Christ  in  believers. 
Tiiis  new  life  itself -constitutes  again  an  antithesis. 
It  is  :  a.  An  exclusively  spiritual  stand[ioint,  in  op- 
position to  the  Hesh,  and  contemplates  the  extirpa- 
tion of  the  old,  sinful  motions;  b.  A  standpoint  of 
renewal — whose  ol)ject  is  the  resurrection  and  the 
glorification  of  the  world  —  proceeding  from  the 
Spirit,  and  embracing  the  flesii  and  the  whole  cre- 
ated world. 

2.  The  Spirit  of  Christ's  life  being  conimimieatcd 
to  believers,  it  becomes  to  them  a  law  of  the  Si)irit 
for  the  new  life.  The  law  of  the  Sjiirit  is  a  |)otency 
which  exteiwls  further  than  the  spirit  of  tlu'  law  ; 
much  less  Is  it  a  nova  lex  in  the  sense  of  the  Catho- 


fnnc,  far-fetched,  inconfrruous."  Mever  and  Tholuck  think 
it  appropriate  in  an  Kpistlo  to  the  Itom-ins,  and  say  tliat 
the  only  le^al  basis  for  the  illustration  is  ihe  Koman  Inw. 
On  the  iitlier  hand,  the  genitive  \pi.(TTou,  whore  the  daiive 
mii;ht  properly  bo  used,  may  bo  ur,{eil  in  favor  of  the  other 
view.  In  any  c.iso,  the  riifht  of  the  atloiit<Hl  children  i* 
Ihrouk'h  the  mediation  of  Christ.  Tbe  context  points  to 
fellowship  with  him,  so  that  heir.ship  in  hlni  is  an  appro- 
piiate  thoiiKlit.  Helimollcr  (GihUiann,  p.  98)  deems  tb( 
whole  controversy  podantie. — K.j 

•  [In  Col.  i.  2i,  suili  suderltiKS  are  termed  "the  afflic- 
tions of  Christ  ;  "  so  Intimate  is  the  fcUowslnp  of  Ciu-ial  au6 
hiii  body,  the  Church.    See  also  lleb.  ii.  lU.— R.] 


CHAPTER  YIIL   l-ll. 


263 


lie  dogmatics.  Life  in  the  entire  spiritual  view  and 
experience  of  Christ's  life  constitutes  a  universal 
principle  of  life,  which  becomes  the  rule  for  every 
more  general  relation  of  life,  and  an  ivto/./]  of  tlie 
living  Divine  will  for  every  individual  situation. 

3.  On  ver.  3,  see  the  Exeg.  Aotes.  It  is  totally 
foreign  to  the  context  to  give  this  passage  a  special 
application  to  the  propitiation  for  the  guilt  of  sin 
(for  the  discussions  on  the  subject,  see  Tholuek). 

,  [Those  who  thus  do,  are  careful  to  defend  their  po- 
sition against  antinomianism  ;  but,  practically,  the 
danger  from  a  too  exclusive  application  of  all  possi- 
ble passages  to  justification,  lies  in  another  direction, 
viz.,  that  of  legal  eflTorts  after  holiness.  The  con- 
nection between  pardon  and  holiness  is  tiius  ob- 
scured ;  the  believer  fails  to  see  Christ  as  his  life- 
giving  Saviour ;  the  law  is  again  sought ;  "  the  spirit 
of  bondage  "  returns,  and  the  conflict  of  chap.  vii. 
14-25  is  all  too  common.  Whatever  may  be  tlie 
logical  and  theological  antithesis,  the  Christian  pas- 
tor finds  this  to  be  the  practical  effect. — R.] — It  is 
likewise  a  disregard  of  the  definite  expression  to 
overlook  the  real  meaning  of  the  bfioio>fta.  Be- 
cause Christ  appeared  in  the  truth  and  ria,il>/  of  the 
adiji,  He  also  appeared,  according  to  the  universal 
human  view,  in  the  likeness  of  sinful  flesh.  The 
Apostle  expresses  exactly  the  same  thought  in  the 
words,  tv  oiioiiofiaTv  avQ()i!)niov  j'fi'o/if  roc ;  Phil. 
ii.  7.  The  reality  of  His  human  nature  resulted  in 
the  likeness  of  His  appearance  and  suffering  life  to 
the  picture  presented  by  the  lite  of  men.  Buur's 
spiritualisticaliy  gross  misconception  of  this  declara- 
tion (Phil,  ii.)  makes  a  sort  of  Gnosticism  out  of  it ; 
the  realistic  obscuration  of  the  term,  on  the  other 
hand,  allows  Christ  himself  to  have  assumed  sinful 
flesh.  The  simple  thought  is  too  grand  for  both 
these  stunting  and  mutilating  tendencies.  God  luis 
unmasked  and  judged  sin  in  the  flesh,  and  con- 
demned it  to  be  cast  out  as  a  foreign  element,  a  ruin- 
ous pseudo-plasma  in  the  flesh,  by  Christ's  assuming 
a  pure  and  consecrated  ffct^i,  and  by  His  keeping 
His  white  robe  spotless  on  the  whole  filthy  road  of 
His  pilgrimage,  and  maintaining  its  holiness  until  it 
was  illuminated  in  glorified  splendor.  Thus  the 
question,  whether  Christ  assumed  human  nature  in 
its  paradisiacal  state  before  the  fall,  or  the  fallen  na- 
ture of  Adam,  is  a  thoroughly  incorrect  one,  for  it 
rests  on  a  misconception  of  biblical  facts.  Christ 
assumed  neither  the  unfallen  nor  the  fallen  human 
nati.ie,  but  the  nature  raised  from  the  fall  and  made 
holy.     See  the  Bible-  Work  on  Joim  i.  14. 

4.  On  the  connection  of  the  doctrine  of  the  obe- 
dientia  activa  to  ver.  3,  see  Tholuck,  p.  395. 

5.  On  ver.  4.  The  righteousness'of  Christ  should 
be  realized  also  in  believers,  from  the  principle  of 
the  righteousness  of  faith  to  the  righteousness  of 
life.     See  the  Exe'-f.  Notes. 

6.  Tiie  antithesis,  walking  in  the  flesh  and  walk- 
ing in  the  Spirit,  separates  into  these  elements : 
a.  Being  or  living  in  the  flesh  ;  being  or  living  in 
ihe  Spirit ;  b.  Tlie  seeking  of  the  flesh  as  enmity 
against  God  ;  the  seeking  of  the  Spirit  as  enlivened 
and  impelled  by  the  Spirit  of  God  ;  c.  The  end — 
on  one  side,  death ;  on  the  other,  life  and  peace. 

1.  Those  who  live  in  the  flesh  cannot  please  God. 
Those  imagine  that  they  please  God  who,  following 
the  letter  of  the  law,  lead  an  analytically  divided, 
,%nt,  and  fragmentary  life,  or  a  false  life  in  outward 
observances  But  God  is  one ;  His  Spirit  is  one ; 
His  law,  as  the  principle  of  life,  is  one ;  and  salva- 
tion lies  in  the  dynamical  synthesis  of  life   from 


a   shedding  abroad  of  the  Spirit.      See  Mark  xii. 
32  ff. 

8.  The  real,  fundamental  thought  of  this  section 
appears  in  vei'.  10.  See  the  Exeg.  Notes.  The  bodj 
is  dead  by  tlie  necessarily  positive  standpoint  of 
Christian  life  in  the  Spirit,  and  it  is  dead  in  its  pic 
pensity  to  sin  and  death,  in  order  that  it  may  bt 
raised  from  its  state  to  a  new  life,  and  iuiicrit  tha 
resurrection  (1  Cor.  ix.  27  ;  2  Cor.  iv.  14  ;  Eph.  ii. 
5;  Col.  ii.  12;  Pliil.  iii.  11).  Also  John  vi.,  and 
the  doctrine  of  the  Lord's  Supper,  belong  here. 
The  effecting  of  the  future  resurrection  by  the  re- 
newal of  tlie  inner  life,  is  questioned  by  Meyer, 
against  De  Wette  and  Philippi,  for  he  does  not  place 
a  correct  estimate  on  the  real  relations  of  the  king- 
dom of  God  (p.  246).  On  pneumatic  corporeity,  see 
Tholuck,  pp.  485,  486. 

9.  On  ver.  13.  By  the  Spirit,  and  not  by  the 
scourge  \i)iit  dem  Geist^  nicht  mit  der  GeisseC^y 
should  the  deeds  of  the  body  be  mortified.  See 
the  Excii.  Notes. 

10.  On  the  difference  between  the  symbolical  and 
real  children  of  God,  see  the  Exec/.  Notes  on  ver  14. 
On  viol  Stot;  see  Tholuck,  p.  409. — That  the  i('o. 
OKJta,  in  the  Apostle's  sense,  can  be  adoption  only 
in  form  and  mode,  and  not  in  its  essence  and  sub- 
stance, arises  i'rom  the  fact  that  believers,  as  the 
children  of  God,  have  the  Spirit  of  God  and  of 
Christ ;  that  they  pray  in  filial  confidence  ;  and  that 
tliey  are  destined  to  be  heirs  of  God  and  joint-heirs 
with  Christ.  [In  interpreting  the  phrase,  "  sons  of 
God,"  two  errors  must  be  guarded  against :  (a.)  lim- 
iiing  it  to  something  like  this  :  the  objei  ts  of  God's 
favor;  (b.)  extending  it  so  as  to  obliteiate  any 
real  distinction  between  the  Son  and  the  adopted 
children.  The  latter  may  occur,  either  through  a 
denial  of  the  specific  and  eternal  Sonship  of  Christ, 
or  through  some  too  spiritualistic  view  of  the  work 
of  Redemption,  which  makes  the  children  of  God 
i?i  essence  and  siibstance  children.  Pantheistic  fan- 
cies follow  the  same  tendency.  Between  these  two 
lies  the  true  definition.  A  Christian,  as  a  bon  of 
God,  is  new-born  of  the  Spirit  of  God  ;  hence,  has 
a  likeness  to  God  in  character,  is  the  object  of  God's 
special  love,  and  entitled  to  special  priviKge  and 
dignity.  Ytt  even  this  is  not  all.  The  term  is  not 
merely  figurative,  as  this  passage  shows,  save  as  all 
language  about  our  relations  to  God  is  figurative. 
The  relation  is  real — grounded  on,  yet  differing 
from,  the  relation  of  the  Eternal  Son.  Only  those 
in  Him  are  "  sons."  They  are  "  sons  "  in  such  a 
sense  as  to  become  partakers  of  the  Divine  nature 
(1  Peter  i.  23).  A  further  definition  is  now  impos- 
sible. "  Now  are  we  sons  of  God  ;  but  it  doth  not 
yet  appear  what  we  shall  be  "  (1  John  iii.  3).  Tlie 
fact  remains  established ;  the  manifestation  of  its 
full  significance  is  to  come  ;  ver.  19. — R.] 

11.  The  dogmatic  spirit  of  the  Middle  Ages  made 
of  Christianity  a  religion  ndhv  fit;  qofJov.  Rome 
in  particular  did  this,  in  spite  of  these  words  to  the 
Romans,  in  ver.  15.  Even  the  Old  Testament  and 
its  law  aimed  at  a  higher  fear  of  God,  as  the  begin- 
ning of  wisdom.  See  Ps.  i.  and  Ps.  xix.  on  com- 
munion with  the  law  of  God. 

12.  On  the  vloOtaia,  and  its  origin  in  the  Old 
Testament,  see  the  Excg.  Notes. 

13.  In  relation  to  adoption,  the  Spirit  is  our  icit- 
ness  ;  in  relation  to  future  glory,  it  is  our  'pledge. 
[Ou  the  witness  of  the  Sjjrit.  This  consists  in  the 
gracious  fruits  and  effects  wrought  in  us  by  the  Hoh 
Spirit.     "  His   whole  inward   and  outward   efficacy 


2G4 


THE   EPISTLE   OF   PAUL   TO   THE   ROMANS. 


mu^t  be  fciken  together ;  for  iiiftance,  His  comfort, 
His  iiiciiement  to  prayer,  His  censure  of  sin.  His 
.iiipulse  to  works  of  love,  to  witness  before  the 
world,"  &e.  (OlsliaU'Cn).  Yet  filial  feelings  of  those 
happy  moments  when  we  are  conscious  that  we  live 
by  the  Spirit,  love  GoJ  aniJ  goodness,  desire  and  de- 
ligiit  in  phasing  God,  must  not  l)e  excluded  ;  since, 
wlii-ther  the  witness  be  to  or  with  our  spiriLs,  such 
nsults  may  be  expected.  Because  enthusiasm  has 
pushed  tiiis  matter  to  an  extreme  at  times,  the  assur- 
ance of  salvation  is  not  to  be  deemed  unattainable, 
uoi  filial  eniotions  toward  God  checked  by  the  sneer 
about  i'aiiatifisni.  "  That  the  world  deny  any  such 
testimony  in  the  hearts  of  believers,  and  that  they 
look  on  it  with  scorn  and  treat  it  with  derision, 
proves  only  that  they  are  unacquainted  with  it ;  not 
that  It  is  an  illusion.  It  was  a  sensible  and  true  re- 
mark of  the  French  philosopher  Ilemsterhuys,  in  re- 
gard to  ctTlaiu  sensations  which  he  was  discussing : 
'  Tliose  who  are  so  unliai)py  as  never  to  have  had 
sueli  sensations,  either  througli  weakness  of  tlie  nat- 
ural t)rgan,  or  because  tliey  have  never  cultivated 
them,  will  not  compreiiend  me'"  (Stuart). —  K.] 
The  conclusion,  "and  if  children,  then  heirs,"  con- 
nects this  section  with  the  following. 


HOMILETICAL  A2^D  PEACTICAIi. 

Why  do  we,  as  those  who  are  in  Christ  Jesus, 
have  no  more  fear  of  condemnation  ?  1.  Because 
the  law  of  the  Spirit  of  Christ  has  made  us  free 
from  the  law  (that  is,  tiie  power)  of  sin  and  death  ; 
2.  This  has  been  eflected  by  the  act  of  God  in  con- 
demning sin  in  tlie  flesh. — Contrast  between  the  law 
of  the  S[)iiit  of  Cin'ist  and  the  law  of  sin  :  1.  The 
former  brings  lile  ;  2.  The  latter,  death  (vcr.  2). — 
The  appearance  of  the  Son  of  God  in  the  form  (like- 
ness) of  sinful  flesh:  1.  In  its  meaning  ;  2.  In  its 
effects  (vers.  3,  4). — The  sending  of  God's  Son  an 
ait  of  God  (vcr.  3). — He  who  becomes  united  with 
Christ  ever  more  fully  performs  the  righteousness 
required  t)y  tlie  law  (vcr.  4). — Why  is  carnal-minded- 
ncss  death  V  Because  :  1.  It  is  enmity  against  God  ; 
and,  2.  As  sudi,  it  is  disoljedience  to  (iod's  law 
(vers.  5-7). — All  who  have  Christ's  Spirit  are  not 
carnal,  but  spiritual.  This  is  shown  thus  :  1.  Christ's 
Spirit  reigns  in  their  spirit ;  and  therefore,  2.  Their 
spirit  reigns  in  their  liody  (vers.  9-11). — "If  any 
man  liavo  not  the  S[)irit  of  Christ,  lu;  is  none  of 
His."  This  declaration  is  :  1.  Perfectly  true  ;  but, 
2.  Fearful  in  its  truth  (ver.  9). — A  (piestion  of  con- 
Bcience  in  two  forms:  1.  Have  we  Cin-ist's  Spirit? 
2.  Are  we  His?  (ver.  9.)  —  Tlie  Spirit  of  (rod  as 
pledge  of  our  resurrection  from  the  dead  (vcr.  11.) 
— The  preparation  of  our  bodies  for  the  day  of  resiir- 
'eetion  by  the  Sjiirit  of  God  (ver.  11). — The  glorifl- 
jation  of  pliysical  life  by  God's  Spirit  (vcr.  11). — 
riie  oppo'iuon  between  carnal  and  spiritual-minded- 
ni'ss  oi.e  of  (liMth  and  life  :  1.  Demonstration  (vers. 
6-H) ;  2.  Keferenee  to  the  members  of  the  Christian 
communion  (vers.  9-11);  3.  Inference  for  their 
ni(jral  life  (vers.  11-13).— If  we  allow  ourselves  to 
be  led  l)y  the  Spirit  of  (Joil,  we  are  God's  children, 
beiisof  (rod  and  joint-heirs  with  Christ.  Ueasf)ns : 
1.  Heeause  this  spirit  is  not  slavish,  but  filial ;  2. 
Ikcause  He  bears  witness  with  us  that  we  are  chil- 
dren of  (iod  ;  3.  Because  we  are  assured  by  Him  of 
eternal  glory  (vers.  14-17). — The  leading  power  of 
the  Spiiit  of  (Jod  (ver.  14). — The  ditfcrcnce  between 
Uirinu  adoption  in  the  Old  Testament  aud  the  Haw 


(ver.  15). — The  Spirit  of  God  a  spirit  of  prayer  (ver 
15). — The  Abba-Fatner  cry  of  believing  Christian 
souls:  1.  So  filially  humble;  2.  So  filially  joyous 
(vcr.  15). — The  inward  witness  of  the  Spirit:  1. 
Who  bears  this  witness?  2.  To  whom  is  it  borne? 
3.  What  is  its  import?  (ver.  16.) — How  rich  the 
children  of  God  are  !  They  are  :  1.  Heirs  of  God  ; 
2.  Joint-heirs  with  Christ  (ver.  17). — Let  us  gutter 
with  Christ,  in  order  that  we  may  be  raised  to  glory 
with  Him. 

LiiTHEK  :  Although  sin  still  rages  in  the  flesh,  we 
are  not  condemned,  if  the  spirit  is  righteous,  and 
fights  against  it.  But  where  there  is  not  this  spirit, 
the  law  is  weakened  and  overpowered  by  the  flesh  ; 
so  that  it  is  impossible  for  the  law  to  help  man,  ex- 
cept to  sin  and  death.  Therefore  God  sent  His  own 
Son,  and  jilaced  upon  Him  our  sins,  and  thus  helped 
us  to  fulfil  the  law  by  His  Spirit  (vers.  1-4). 

Stakke  :  Sin  and  death  are  connected  together; 
who  will  separate  tlu.-ni  ?  Therefore,  if  you  would 
escape  death,  you  must  flee  from  sin  ;  James  i.  15  ; 
Siraeh  xxi.  2,  3  (ver.  2). — Is  sin  sweet  to  thee,  0 
man  ?  Then  remember  that  its  fruit  will  be  bitter 
(ver.  2). — IIkdinokk:  It  is  a  false  trust,  to  wish  to 
be  righteous  in  Christ,  and,  at  the  same  time,  to  de- 
sire to  walk  afier  the  flesh.  Where  sin  reigns,  there 
is  condemnation,  though  Christ  had  died  a  thousand 
times.  The  fiesh  must  die  on  the  cross  with  Him, 
and  His  Spirit  must  live  in  the  sinner  ;  otherwise  the 
salvation  purchased  by  Christ  will  be  of  no  use ; 
1  Peter  ii.  24  (ver.  1). — Starkk  :  Adam  (merely) 
out  of  us  does  not  injure  us ;  and  Christ  (merely) 
out  of  us  does  not  help  us  (ver.  10). — People  of  the 
world  seek  immortality  in  wrong  ways.  Seek  the 
right  way,  which  is,  to  let  God's  Spirit  dwell  in  you ; 
Isa.  Iv.  2  (vcr.  11). — It  is  better  that  we  kill  sin, 
than  that  sin  kill  us  (ver.  13). — Xihil  vUi"s,  (juam  a 
came  vhici,  nihil  f/loriosius,  quam  carueni  vincere  ; 
Jerome. —  Qui  scquunlur  caruein,  flagcU  ■utur  in 
came:  in  ipsa  est  censura  supplicii,  in  qua/tiit  causa 
peccati ;  13Eit.\ARD  (ver.  12). — Starkk:  One  may 
speak  of  God  without  the  Holy  Spirit ;  but  he  can- 
not speak  to  Him  in  a  way  that  the  prayer  will  be 
granted  (ver.  15). — If  little  children  can  move  their 
parents'  hearts  by  "  papa  "  and  "  manmia,"  so  c.in 
believers  move  God  by  the  word  "  Al»ba  "  (ver.  15). 
— IIkiii.ngek:  To  suffer,  and  to  inherit,  stand  to- 
gether. Very  well !  Heaven  is  worth  a  toilsome 
pathway.  Si  vis  regnare  tnecum,  porta  crucan  nteam 
tecum  ;  Gehso.v. 

Speseii:  God  sent  His  Son  to  assume  fli'.<h  ;  for 
the  Word  became  flesh,  not  merely  ontwanily,  ijut 
truly  and  in  very  deed.  But  such  liesh  in  Him  was 
not  sinful  ;  but  it  was  only  hi  the  form  of,  or  uni- 
formity with,  sinful  flesh,  so  that  he  who  saw  it  only 
outwardly  might  regard  it  just  as  sinful  flesh  a3 
ours  (vers.  3,  4.) — Christianity  enjoins  not  only  that 
we  do  good,  and  thus  perform  spiritual  works,  but 
that  we  should  also  be  s)iiritually,  and  not  carnally, 
niitidid  (vcr.  5). — The  witness  of  the  Holy  S|)irit  is 
as  glorious  as  it  is  necessary.  .  .  .  This  witness  is 
the  foundation  of  the  highest  consolation  of  the 
child  of  (Jod.  Yet  but  little  can  be  told  of  it,  for 
no  man  can  niidcrstand  it  except  him  irho  feeln  it. 
It  is  "  a  new  name,"  which  noliody  knows  except 
him  who  receives  it;  Rev.  ii.  17  (ver.  If'i).  It  is  a 
great  dignity,  indeed,  to  be  heirs  of  God,  and  to 
stand  with  Christ  as  though  in  the  jiossc.ssion  of 
equal  rights.  For  it  is  the  inheritunce  of  the  Al- 
mighty (lod,  and  therefore  consists  of  eternal  pos- 
sessions.    Yet  such  an  inheritunce  has  the  cerUin 


CHAPTER  VIII.    1-17. 


265 


condition  of  having  previously  suffered  with  Christ 
(ver.  17). 

Roos :  Being  in  Christ  Jesus  presupposes  long- 
ing for  Christ  Jesus  ;  fleeing  to  Him  ;  submission  to 
Him ;  being  planted  in  Him  as  tlie  Vine ;  union 
with  Him  ;  and,  consequently,  faith  in  Him  ;  just  as 
even  the  continued  being,  or  remaining,  in  Clirist 
Jesus,  rests  upon  a  continuous  faith  in  Him  (vers. 
1-4). — The  man  who  is  in  Christ  Jesus  does  not 
walk  any  more  after  the  flesh ;  and  thus  the  right- 
eousness, or  righteous  requirement,  of  the  law, 
which  is  spiritual,  is  fulfilled  in  him  ;  it  is  so  far  ful- 
filled as  his  spiritual  lite  and  walk  in  the  Spirit  ex- 
tend (ver.  4). — In  short,  just  as  the  Spirit  com- 
prises spirit ual-mindedness,  and  walking  after  the 
Spirit  comprises  every  thing  which  is  good,  praise- 
worthy, holy,  and  well-pleasing  to  God ;  so  do  the 
words  flesh,  cariial-mindedness,  and  walking  after 
the  flesh,  comprise  every  thing  wicked  and  sinful 
(vers.  6-8).  —  Suffering  does  not  precede  glory  by 
mere  accident ;  it  does  so  by  God's  design,  and 
makes  fit  for  great  glory.  It  is  only  a  nature  crushed 
by  suftering  that  can  be  glorified.  But  the  suffering 
must  be  :  1.  A  suffering  with  Christ ;  2.  In  fellow- 
ship with  Cln-ist ;  3.  In  the  likeness  of  the  suftering 
and  mind  of  Christ.  Then  will  we  be  also  raised  to 
glory  with  Christ,  in  whom  we  are  by  faith  (ver.  17). 
— Bengkl  :  The  carnal  mind  cannot,  and  maij  not. 
Hence  comes  the  pretext  of  impossibility  with  which 
those  seek  to  excuse  themselves  who  are  even  here 
convicted  as  carnal  (ver.  7). 

Geklach  :  What  seems  remote  and  difficult  to 
man  under  the  law,  is  made  easy  by  grace  ;  indeed, 
is  even  accomphshed  by  grace  (vers.  2,  3). — Both 
flesh  and  spirit  are  mighty  and  active  forces  in  man 
(vei'.  5). — "  The  Spirit  should  be  as  much  the  Lord 
of  our  life,  as  the  helmsman  is  guide  of  the  ship,  and 
the  driver  is  guide  of  his  team  ;  "  Ciaysostom  (ver. 
14). — The  Spirit  of  adoption  is  the  Spirit  of  the  Son 
of  God.  In  Him  we  cry,  Abba,  dear  Father !  He 
encourages  us  to  call,  with  childlike  joy  and  confi- 
dence, upon  God,  whom  Christ  thus  called  on  (Mark 
xiv.  26) ;  and  whom  Christ,  after  the  atonement  was 
completed  (John  xx.  17),  calls  His  God  and  ours, 
His  Father  and  ours  (ver.  15). — The  witness  of  the 
Spirit  of  God  consists  in  the  consciousness  of  peace 
with  God,  and  of  access  to  Him  in  childlike,  believ- 
ing prayer ;  which  witness  we  have  received  through 
faith  in  Christ  (ver.  16). — The  believer  enters  upon 
the  inheritance  of  God  as  "joint-heir  with  Christ ;  " 
but  it  is  not  a  dividing  joint-heirship,  by  which  one 
receives  what  another  is  deprived  of  It  is  a  posses- 
sion like  that  of  the  sunlight,  which  every  one  en- 
joys to  the  full,  without  any  robbery  of  another 
(ver.  17). — The  life  of  the  Christian  is  really  a  life 
of  suffering,  both  inwardly  and  outwardly,  except 
that  the  consciousness  of  Divine  adoption  rises  high 
above  suffering  and  oppression  (ver.  17). 

Lisco  :  The  certainty  of  the  attainment  of  per- 
fect salvation  by  believers,  rests  upon  their  fellow- 
ship with  Christ,  and  upon  their  being  and  living  in 
Him  ;■  and  it  is  from  this  true  fountain  that  their 
ever-progressive  sanctification  flows  (ver.  1). — What 
prosjjects,  what  hopes  !  Yet  the  ordtr  is,  that  we, 
like  Christ,  shall  attain  future  glory  through  suffer- 
ing.— Luther:  "  He  who  would  be  Christ's  brother 
and  joint-heir,  must  bear  in  mind  to  be  also  a  joint- 
martyr  and  joint-sufferer  ;  not  feeling  Christ's  sufter- 
ings  and  shame  after  Him,  but  with  Him,  as  vers. 
10,  32,  33,  declare"  (ver.  17). 

Hecb.ner  :   The  Kuiltlessness  of  true  Christians 


(ver.  2). — We  must  preach  duties  so  conformably  tc 
the  gospel,  that  they  will  be  a  pleasure  (ver.  3).— 
Faith  in  Christ  gives  no  aid  to  indolence.  The  de 
sign  of  the  atonement  is  our  sanctification  (ver.  4), 
— The  carnal  mind  and  religion  do  not  agree  to 
gether  (ver.  7). — Christ's  Spirit  is  the  true  Spirit ; 
men  out  of  Him  are  sjiiritlcss,  however  full  of  th( 
Spirit  such  unchristian  people  may  fancy  themselves 
(ver.  9). — Life  after  the  flesh  destroys  all  Christian 
prosperity,  spiritual  enjoyment,  vital  force,  and  eter- 
nal salvation  (ver.  13). — The  Spirit  can  overpower 
the  flesh  ;  therefore  no  Christian  can  say,  that  the 
power  of  the  flesh  is  too  great,  too  insurmountable 
(ver.  13). — The  guidance  of  the  Spirit  of  God  ic : 
1.  Not  irregular,  but  regular,  and  its  traces  are  to  be 
found  rather  within  than  without ;  2.  Nor  a  sudden 
impulse,  an  emotion  ;  but  a  continuous  guidance, 
extending  through  the  whole  life,  and  operating  in 
all  acts  ;  3.  And  finally,  this  guidance  is  effected  by 
means  of  the  Word  ;  it  is  free,  and  without  cimipul- 
sion  (ver.  14). — The  Abba-cry  is  an  uninterrupted 
thinking  upon  God,  and  longing  after  Him. — No 
cross,  no  crown. — Bksseu  :  The  impulsive  power  of 
the  Holy  Spirit  is  twofold  :  He  leads  us  to  receive  in 
faith,  and  give  in  love. — The  glorification  of  Chris- 
tians begins  with  Christ  under  the  cross. 

I'he  Pericope  (vers.  12-17)  for  the  Sf/i  Sunday 
after  7Vi>iiti/. — Hecbner  :  The  adoption  of  Chris- 
tians with  God  :  1.  It  is  holy  ;  2.  It  is  saving. — The 
diff'erence  between  the  children  of  the  world  and  the 
children  of  God. — Genzler  :  Those  whom  the  Spirit 
of  God  leads,  are  God's  children.  The  Apostle 
praises :  1.  The  filial  mind ;  2.  The  filial  joyful- 
ness ;  and,  3.  The  filial  hoj)e  of  those  who  allow 
themselves  to  be  led  by  the  Spirit  of  God. — Petri  : 
The  children  of  God :  1.  Their  nature ;  2.  condi- 
tion ;  3.  and  inheritance. — Harless  :  The  poverty 
and  wealth  of  the  legacy  of  Jesus  Christ. — Tho- 
LucK :  The  witness  of  Divine  adoption  is  the  .surest 
pledge  of  eternal  life.  1.  In  what  is  the  witness  of 
Divine  adoption  manifested  ?  2.  Why  is  it  a  pledge 
of  eternal  life? — Kapff  :  The  healing  of  sinful  cor- 
ruption by  Jesus  and  His  Spirit.  Through  Him  we 
become :  1.  Children  of  God  ;  2.  Praying  men  of 
the  Spirit ;    and,  3.  Joint-heirs  with  Christ. 

[BauKiTT  (condensed) :  All  men  show  the  true 
temper  of  their  minds,  and  the  complexion  and  dis- 
position of  their  souls,  by  willingly,  cheerfully,  and 
constantly  minding  either  the  things  of  the  Spirit  or 
the  things  of  the  flesh. — Three  things  are  implied  in 
our  being  glorified  with  Christ :  1.  Conformity — we 
shall  be  like  Him  in  glory ;  2.  Concomitancy — we 
shall  accompany  Him,  and  be  present  with  Him  in 
glory  ;  3.  Conveyance  or  derivation — His  glory  shall 
be  reflected  upon  us,  and  we  shall  .shine  in  His 
beams. — Henry  :  It  was  great  condescension,  that 
He  who  was  God  should  be  made  in  the  likeness  of 
'Jiesh ;  but  much  greater,  that  He  who  was  holy 
should  be  njade  in  the  likeness  of  xinful  flesh. — The 
Spirit  witnesses  the  privileges  of  children  to  none 
who  have  not  the  nature  and  privileges  of  children. 
— Doddridge  :  The  Spirit  of  God  will  not  dwell  with 
those  whom  He  does  not  effectually  govern. — Mac- 
knight:  The  minding  of  the  things  of  the  flesh,  to 
the  neglecting  of  the  things  of  the  Spirit,  di.<quali- 
fyiug  men  for  heaven,  stands  in  direct  opposition  to 
God's  friendly  intentions ;  consequently,  is  enmity 
against  God,  and  is  deservedly  punished  with  death. 
— Wesley  (sermons  on  the  Witness  of  the  Spirit) : 
The  witness  of  the  Spirit  is  a  consciousness  of  oui 
having  received,  in  and  by  the  Spirit  of  adoptioa 


266 


THE   EPISTLE   OF  PAUL   TO   THE   ROMANS. 


the  tempers  mentioned  in  the  Word  of  God  as  be- 
.onging  to  Ilia  adopted  children — a  loving  heart 
towaid  God,  and  toward  all  mankind  ;  hanging  with 
childlike  confidence  on  God  our  father ;  desiring 
nothing  but  llini  ;  casting  all  our  care  upon  Him  ; 
and  embracing  every  child  of  man  with  earnest,  ten- 
der att'ection,  so  as  to  be  ready  to  lay  down  our  life 
for  our  brother,  as  Christ  laid  down  His  life  for  us. 
It  is  a  consciousness  that  we  are  inwardly  conformed, 
by  the  Spirit  of  God,  to  the  image  of  His  Son,  and 
that  we  walk  before  Him  in  justice,  mercy,  and  truth, 
doing  the  things  which  are  pleasing  in  Ilis  sight. — 
Clarke  :  Ver.  15.  The  witness  of  the  Spirit  is  the 
grand  and  most  observable  case  in  which  intercourse 
is  kept  up  between  heaven  and  earth ;  and  the  genu- 
ine believer  in  Christ  Jesus  is  not  left  to  the  quib- 
bles or  casuistry  of  polemic  divines  or  critics,  but 
receives  the  thbif/  and  the  testimony  of  it  from  God 
himBelf.  Remove  the  testimony  of  adoption  from 
Christianity,  tmd  it  is  a  dead  letter. — Hudgk  :  There 
can  be  no  rational  or  scriptural  hope  without  holi- 
ness ;  and  every  tendency  to  separate  the  evidence 
of  the  Divine  favor  from  the  evidence  of  true 
piety,  is  antichristian  and  destructive. — Barnes  :  If 
«  man  is  not  influenced  by  the  meek,  pure,  and 


holy  spirit  of  the  L'ord  Jesus ;  if  he  is  not  con- 
formed to  His  image  ;  if  his  life  does  not  resemble 
that  of  the  Saviour,  he  is  a  .stranger  to  religion.  No 
test  could  be  more  easily  applied,  and  none  is  more 
decisive. 

[HOMILETICAL    LiTKRATLRE  ON  THE    8tII  ChaPTEB 

OF  Romans;  Bishop  Coavper,  Heaven  Opened,  &c., 
5th  ed.,  Lend.,  1619;  E.  Philips,  Xinetcen  Hermonti 
E.  Elton,  The  Triumph  of  a  True  Christian  De- 
scribed, or,  An  Exjilanaiion  of  the  8th  Chapter  of 
Romans,  1623  ;  H.  Binning,  2'he  Sin)ier''s  Sanctu- 
ary;  being  48  Scrmona  on  the  8th  Chapter  of  Ro- 
7nans  ;  T.  Jacomb,  Several  Senno7ts  on  the  whole  8th 
Oiapter  of  Romans,  London,  1672  ;  T.  Horton, 
Forty-six  Senuous  on  the  whole  8th  Chapter  of  Ro- 
mans, London,  1674  ;  T.  Manton,  Forty -seven  ser- 
mons in  Works  (vol.  2);  Mestrkzat,  Seimoiui  sur 
la  8e  chap,  de  V£pitre  aux  Romains,  Amsterdam, 
1702  ;  T.  Bryson,  Comprehensive  View  of  the  Real 
Christianas  Character,  &c.,  London,  1794  ;  Bishop 
Short,  21ie  Witness  of  the  Spirit  with  our  Spirit^ 
Illustrated  from  the  8th  Chapter  of  Romans  (Bamp- 
ton  Lectures),  Oxford,  1846 ;  Winslow,  J\'o  Con- 
demnation  in  Christ  Jesus,  as  Unfolded  in  t/ie  &th 
Chapter  of  Romatm,  London,  1857. — J.  F.  H.] 


n.     Life  in  the  Spirit  in  connection  with  nature  as  the  Resurrection-life,  and  the  Spirit  as  security 

of  glory. 


Chapter  VIIL   18-39. 

A.    The  present  and  subjective  certainty  of  future  glory,  or  the  glorification  of  the  body  and  of  nature  by  the  Spirit 

(vers.  18-27). 

18  For  I  reckon  that  the  sufferings  of  this  present  time  are  not  wortliy  to  be 
compared  [insignifit-ant  in  comjydriso')!^  Avith  the  glory  which  shall  be  revealed 

19  in  us  [fiV  V/'"^"]-'  ^^^^'  t^^^  earnest  [patient]  expectation  of  the  creatm-e  [crea- 
tion] '  waiteth  [is  waiting]  for  the  manifestation  [revelation]  of  tlie  sons  of  God. 

20  For  the  creature  [creation]  was  made  subject '  to  vanity,  not  willingly,  but  by 
reason  of  him  who  hath  subjected  the  same  [who  subjected  ^V,]  *  in  liope  ;  [,]  * 

21  Because  [That]  the  creature  [creation]  itself  also  shall  be  delivered  from  the 
bondage  of  corruption  into  the  glorious  liberty  [freedom  of  the  glory]  of  the 

22  children  of  God.      For  we  know  that  the  wliole  creation  groancth  [together] 

23  and  travaileth  in  pain  togetlier  until  now.  And  not  only  they  [^o],'  but  [but 
even  we]  ourselves  also  ["»"'  also],  MJiich  [though  we]  have  the  firslfruits  of  the 
Spirit,  even  we  ourselves'  groan  within  ourselves,  waiting  for  the  ado}>tion,* 

24  to  wit.,  \mnit  to  Wit,]  (he  redemption  of  our  ])ody.  For  we  are  [were]  saved  by 
[in]*  hope:  but  mow]  hope  that  is  seen  is  not  hope:  for  what  a  man  seeth, 
why  doth  he  yet  I  still]  "°  hope  fc 


25 
26 


27 


for  ?      But  if  we  hope  for  that  we  see  not,  then 


Like 


the 


do  we  with  patience  wait  for  it  [with  patience  we  wait  for  it] 
Spirit  also  helpeth  our  infirmities  [weakness]  :  "  for  we  know  not  wliat  we 
should  ])ray  for  "  as  we  ought :  but  the  Spirit  itself  maketh  intercession  [inter- 
cedeth  I  for  us  \omu  for  us]  "  with  groanings  which  cannot  be  uttered.  And 
[But]  lie  that  [who]  searcheth  the  hearts  kiioweth  what  is  the  mind  of  the 
Si)irit,  because  he  maketh  inte 


tcill  of  God. 


itercession  [pleadethj  for  the  saints  according  to  the 


B.     The  future  and  objective  cortninty  of  glory  (vers.  88-37). 


28  And  we  know  that  all  things  '*  work  together  for  good  to  them  that  [those 
who]  love  God,  to  them  [those]  who  are  the  calh-d  aecordiiig  to  his  purpose. 

29  For  whom  he  did  foreknow  [foreknew],  he  also  did  predestinate  [predesthiated] 


CHAPTER  Vm.    18-39.  267 


to  he  conformed  to  the  image  of  his  Son,  that  he  might  be  the  firstborn  among 

80  many  brethren.     Moreover,  whom  he  did  predestinate  [predestinated],  them  he 

also  called  :  and  Avhom  he  called,  them  he  also  justified  :  and  whom  he  justified, 

31  them  he  also  glorified.      "What  shall  we  then  [What  then  shall  we]  say  to  these 

32  things  ?  If  God  he  [is\  for  us,  who  can  he  [is]  against  us  ?  He  that  [Who] 
spared  not  his  own  Son,  but  delivered  him  up  lor  us  all,  how  shall  he  not  with 

33  him  also  freely  give  us  all  things  ?     Who  shall  lay  any  thing  to  the  charge  of 

34  God's  elect?  It  is  God  that  justifieth.  [!] '^  Who  is  he  that  condemneth? 
Jt  is  Christ  [or,  Christ  is  Jesus]  '*  that  died,  yea  rather,^'  that  is  risen  again, 
who  is  even  at  the  right  hand  of  God,  who  also  maketh  intercession  for  us. 

35  Who  shall  separate  us  from  the  love  of  Christ  ?    shall  tribulation,  or  distress, 

36  or  persecution,  or  famine,  or  nakedness,  or  peril,  or  sword  ?      As  it  is  written, 

For  thy  sake  we  are  killed  all  the  day  long ; 

We  are  [were]  accounted  as  sheep  for  the  slaughter. 

37  Nay,  in  all  these  things  we  are  more  than  conquerors  through  him  that  [who] 
loved  '*  us. 

C.  The  unity  of  the  subjective  and  objective  certainty  of  future  glorv  in  the  already  attained  glorious  life  of  love,  the 

Spirit  of  glory  (vers.  38,  39). 

38  For  I  am  persuaded,  that  neither  death,  nor  life,  nor  angels,  nor  principalities, 
nor  powers,  [omit  nor  powers,]  "  nor  things  present,  nor  things  to  come,  [insert  nor 

39  powers,]  Nor  height,  nor  depth,  nor  any  other  creature  [created  thing], ^°  shall 
be  able  to  separate  us  from  the  love  of  God,  which  is  in  Christ  Jesus  our  Lord. 

TEXTUAL. 

1  Ver.  18. — [It  is  difficult  to  render  e  t  s  17  m  a  s  literally.  In  us  (E.  V.)  implies  that  we  are  the  subjects  of  the  revela- 
tion, and  this  is  the  main  thought.     Alford  renders  :  willi  regard  to  us ;  Lange  :  an/  und  an  uns. 

"  Ver.  19. — [KriVts  occurs  foui  times  in  vers.  19-22,  with  the  s.ime  meaning.  In  ver.  22  it  is  best  to  render  it 
creatinn,  and  in  the  other  casts  it  should  conform.  Lange  :  die  Kreaturliche  Welt,  Kreatur-Welt.  On  the  various  limita- 
tions of  meaning,  ste  Exig.  Xo'es. 

2  Ver,  20. — [iange  renders  iiTroTayij,  unterwarf  sick,  adopting  the  middle  sense;  but  as  this  sense  is  doubtful, 
the  English  text  has  not  been  altered. 

*  Ver.  20. — [Tu  hope  is  not  to  be  joined  with  what  immediately  precedes,  hence  a  comma  must  be  inserted.  Gries- 
bach  and  Knapp  make  ovk  .  .  .  vnoTafavTa  parenthetical,  hut  without  sufficient  reason.  Ainer.  Bible  Union  also 
makes  a  parenthetical  clause  :  but  by  reason  of  him  who  made  it  subject ;  yet  this  only  seems  to  add  confusion.  See 
the  next  note. 

6  Ver.  20. — [Lange  puts  a  full  atop  after  hnpe.  Meyer,  and  many  others,  a  comma,  connecting  the  next  verse :  that 
the  creation,  &c.  (the  purport  of  the  hope).    Eorbes  gives  the  parallelism  thus  : 

19.  a.   'H  yap  anoxapaSoKia  tj)?  KTiVeioj 

b.    Tr)v  dTTOKaAvi/zii/  Twi"  viCiv  ToO  SeoO  airfKiex^Tai, 

20.  Trj  yap  fiaraiOTrjTi,  rj  KTicrts  vnoTayTji 
OVK  €Kovaa  aAAa  6id  rbv  i/TroTci^ai/Ta, 

21.  a,  etr'  eAiri'Si  ort  Ka\  avrr)  r}  KTicris  eAevSepui^^crcTai  otto  t^s  SouAei'ai  T^s  <^6opas 
*             b.   eis  Ti)i'  e\ev0epiav  t^s  S6(rii  tu>v  TeKyiov  tov  0eov. 

19.  a.  Por  the  earnest  expectation  of  the  creation 

b.  Is  waiting  for  the  revelation  of  the  sois  of  God. 

20.  For  the  creation  was  made  subject  to  vanity, 

Kit  willingly,  but  by  reason  of  Him  who  subjected  it, 

21.  a.  In  hope,  that  the  creature  itself  shall  also  be  delivered  from  the  bondage  of  corruption, 
b.  Into  the  liberty  of  the  glory  of  the  children  of  God, 

This  makes  the  whole  of  ver.  20,  except  in  hope,  parenthetical,  and  connects  ver.  21  with  that  phrase,  as  giving  the  pur- 
port of  the  hope.  Oa  this  last  view,  Forbes  dues  not  insist,  however.  In  hnpe  is  thus  made  to  refer  to  both  lines  of  the 
parenthesis,  yet  with  a  main  roference  to  ajrexSexeTai,  is  waiting.  The  two  lines  of  ver.  19  find  thtir  parallels  in  ver. 
21,  while  a.  a.  refer  to  the  exp.^clotion  or  hope  that  animates  creation  ;  b.  h.  to  the  final  consummation  to  which  it  points. 
At  the  bepinning  of  ver.  21,  Lange  reads  deim,  Alford,  becnise,  but  Tholuck,  Philippi,  Meyer,  Amer.  Bible  Union, 
I»oyes,five  Anglican  ciergymfn,  &e.,  favor  l/iai,  introducing  the  purport  of  the  hope, 

•  Ver.  23.— [5o,  or  "lis  should  be  supplied ;  the  meaning  is :  Aol  only  is  this  so.  The  E.  V.  is  therefore  inexact. 
Ths  latest  revision-  adopt  so. 

'  Ver.  23.— [There  is  considerable  variation  in  the  test  here,  not  affecting  the  sense,  however.  B.  reads  (coi 
ovTo'i  TTji'  anapxv"  Toi;  TrvevftaTos  ix'"''''^^  *"'  avToi;  adopted  by  Tischendorf,  Meyer,  Lange,  Tregelles. 
The  Bee.  inserts  rinfli  o/lir  the  second   KaC;   N.  A.  C,  Lachmann,  Alford  be.fnrc  it,  so  Tregelles,  in  brackets;  while 

D.  F.  G.,  Fritzscbe  insert  the  same  after  the  .^cs^  Kai.  The  original  reading  was  probably  that  of  B. ;  li/Ltei?  being  in- 
jserted  as  an  explanatory  glofS,  hence  the  variation  in  position  (Meyer).  As  (cat  avToi  is  repeated,  it  is  better  to  ren- 
ter fven  we  ours'-lvi-.-:  in  both  cases. 

*  Ver.  23.— [D.  F.  G.  omit  vioOea-iav.  which  is  stronely  attested,  however.  The  omission  may  have  arisen  from 
the  thought  that  the  word  meant  sometliing  already  possessed,  and  hence  was  inappropriate  here. 

•  Ve"r.  24.— [The  dative,  t^  ekiriSi,,  is  not  instrumental.  Kow  is  the  better  rendering  of  the  logical  8e,  which 
follows. 

'f  Ver.  24.— [N.  A.  C,  K,  L.,  read  rt  xai  (7?ec.,  Meyer,  Wordsworth,  Lange);  B.  D,  F,  omit  Kai  (Lachmann, 
Mfor'',  Tregelles),  The  latter  reading  gives  the  sense  :  Why  doth  he  hope  (at  all)  f  the  former,  which  is  preferable  ; 
W'ly  doth  he  still  hope. for  ?  Kai  =  etiani. 

"  Ver,  26.— [Instead  of  rais  daSei'eiais  (.liec,  K.  L.),  which  was  probably  a  marginal  gloss,  N.  A,  P.  C.  D., 
jiost  cui-sives,  veisioii.-j,  and  lathers,  read   t;/   aadtveia;  adopted  by  most  editors. 


208 


THE   EPISTLE    OF   PAUL   TO   THE    ROMANS. 


"  Ver.  26.— [X.  A.  B.  C,  Lachmann,  Alford,  "Wordswcrth,  Trepelles,  read  irpo<rtv(iJiie9a  (aonst);  D.  K.  L. 
Qriesbach,  Tisclandoi  f,  irpoa-evfdfxcda.  Uuih  arc  grammatical,  citber  may  liavc  bi'eu  urigiual ;  but  the  funiicr  is  sligliU 
.y  better  aitestcU. 

"  ViT.  2G.—['Ynip  riixiav  (Rcc.  N".  C.  K.  L.)  is  omitted  by  Lachmann,  Tischendorf,  Meyer,  ^Vlford,  'Wordsworlb, 
Lauge,  Tregollfs,  on  tin;  authority  of  N'.  A.  B.  D.  !•".  (i.     Probably  added  for  closer  (Iclinition. 

"  Ver.  28.— [N.  A.  It.  insert  o  9«6?  (as  .-ubjcct)  after  trvvepyei .  It  i8  omitted  in  C.  1).  V.  K.  L.,  nnd  ri'jocted  by 
most  editors.  The  seeming  necessity  ol  some  such  subject  led  to  its  inserlion,  which  was  reiideied  easier  by  the  \)vvs' 
ence  of  fltdf  liinmediitely  before).     Liichniunn,  who  retains  it,  inserts  to  belbre  ayaBov,  on  iu-iiUic  cnt  authority. 

"  \'er.  3  >.— [In  vers.  3:i-3S,  l.ange  adopts  the  punctuation  followci  in  the  K.  v.,  eNce|)t  in  this  trifling  iiavlicul;ir. 
Vary  miuy,  iiowever,  pace  an  intcrroyration  point  after  each  clause.  (See  Alford,  wlio  incorrectly  <iuot<'s  Meyer  na 
fiivoring  th  s  view.)  Tischendorf  and  Meyer  place  a  ci'lou  after  iiKaiiiv,  and  also  alter  iiirip  ii iioyv  (ver.  'M). 
Xregellcs  a  comma  after  the  fonner,  a  colon  after  the  latter.  The  relation  of  the  clau>es,  which  involves  the  punctua- 
tion, is  discussed  in  the  Exeg.  A'dns. 

"  Ver.  3-1.— [After  X  pier  to?,  N.  A.  C.  F.  L.  m=ert  'I»)o-ous  (adopted  by  Lange).  It  ii  omitted  in  B.  D.  K.,  by 
TwehenJjrf,  Meyer,  Alford,  Tregelles,  and  most  editors.  Hence  the  renderiig  of  Lange  (br;ic;ietted  in  the  text)  u 
doubly  doubtful  :  first,  on  account  of  the  dubious  reading  ;  second,  a<  a  somewhat  forced  exegesis.     See  Ex-g.  A'<'<'.>-. 

'"  Ver.  M. — [MdAAo><  &e  Kai  (ii'C.)  is  supported  by  D.  F.  K.  L.  ;  Kai  is  omitted  in  SC.  A.  B.  C.  (by  Lachmann, 
Trege'les,  luacketted  by  Alford),  but,  !is  Meyer  su^sests,  was  easily  overlooked  between  6E  and  Ey. 

'■*  Ver.  ,57. — [Instead  of  the  well-supported  toO  ayaiD/aai'Tos,  I).  E.  F.  O.,  and  many  Latin  £ithers,  read  :  t6» 
dyairijffo^Ta  ;  objectionable  on  both  critical  and  exegetieal  grounds. 

'"  \'er.  38.— [The  order  in  N.  A.  B.  C.  IJ.  F.  is  outs  evtariaTa,  oiire  /i^AAovTa.  outc  Sv  i/dfiKt;  ;  adopted 
by  Liriesbich,  Lachmann,  Tischendorf,  Mever,  Alford,  Tregidles,  and  ciitic-al  editors  generally.  The  Ji-opla  puts 
OUT*  &vvantii  first  (K.  L.,  some  versions).  This  may  readily  be  accounted  for;  Svvaixn  is  associated  with  ayyt\oi 
or  apxri  in  Kph.  i.  '.'1 ;  I  Cor.  xv.  H  :  1  Peter  iii.  22,  hence  the  sc  "miiig  necessity  for  a  closer  connection  here.  In  Col.  ii. 
15,  ivvdiieii  is  omitted,  but  in  all  the  passages  cited,  e(ov<Tia  is  found ;  hence  we  find  it  aa  a  variation  here,  but  very 
•lightly  attested. 

""  Ver.  39— [Tis  »cTt'<7i«  cannot,  of  course,  mean  crea<to«  here.— R.] 


EXEGETICAL  AXD   CRITICAL. 

Surmnari/. — The  witness  of  Divine  adoption,  im- 
partcil  by  tiie  lluly  Spirit  to  believers,  comprises  at 
the  same  time,  according  to  ver.  17,  the  security 
that  they  will  be  heirs  of  future  glory.  Then,  too, 
the  physical  body — which,  in  their  spiritual  life  in 
this  world,  they  mistrust,  bccau.-e  of  its  enervation 
through  sill,  which  they  must  strictly  control  by 
walking  in  the  .Spirit,  but  in  which,  even  here,  ac- 
cording to  ver.  II,  a  germ  of  its  glorilication  into 
the  psychico-physical  existence  is  formed — shall  be 
transformed  into  the  glory  of  the  Siiiiit ;  and  all 
nature,  at  present  made  partaker  of  corruption,  yet 
groaning  and  travailing  to  be  si)iritualized,  shall 
share  in  the  glory  also,  as  the  transformed,  illumi- 
nated, and  ajipropriated  organ  of  the  kingdom  of 
Sfiirits.  Ver.  17  serves  as  a  foundation  for  the  sec- 
tion which  now  follows,  as  it  terminates  the  previous 
section  lus  a  final  inference. 

A.  The  pre.iciU  and  subjective  certainty  of  future 
glorii. 

Believers,  from  their  present  and  subjective  sense 
of  life,  are  certain  of  future  glory ;  accordingly,  all 
the  sufferings  of  the  present  time  are  to  them  as 
birtii-paiigs  for  future  glory.  This  holds  good,  first, 
in  resj)ect  to  the  ])ressure  toward  development,  and 
the  longing  and  patient  waiting  of  nature  in  its  pres- 
ent state ;  and  this  pressure  toward  development 
corresponds  with  that  of  God's  kingilntn.  It  liolds 
good,  secondly,  in  regard  to  the  birth-pangs  of  (iod's 
kingdom,  its  maiiifesteil,  first,  in  the  groaiiiiigs,  long- 
ing'<,  and  iiopes  of  believers,  and  in  the  unntteral)le 
gleanings  of  the  S[)irit,  who  intercedes  for  them. 
Althiiiigli  believers  have  the  Spirit  of  adoption,  it  is 
because  tiiey  have  it  that  they  still  groan  for  its  con- 
summation (2  Cor.  V.  1).  Their  principial  .salvation 
is  not  their  finished  salvation  ;  but  the  latter  is  testi- 
fied liv  their  liojie  and  coiilirmeii  l)y  their  |>alience. 
Hut  tiie  Spirit  proves  himself  in  tht'ir  hearts  by  un- 
utterable groanings,  as  a  vital  pressure,  which  har- 
monizes in  this  life  with  the  sense  of  the  future  ex- 
ercise of  (jod's  authority,  and  points  to  the  futui-e 
objective  certainty  of  glory  a.s  founded  in  the  will 
Df  Cfod;  vers.  IS  (17)-27. 

H.      Tki:  f  linrr.  and  nhjtc/ire  cTfalnfi/  of  fihrif. 

The  love  for  (Jod  by  believers  is  the  experience 
of  Qod's  lr)ve  for  them.  Hut  therein  lies  the  secur- 
ity of  an  omnipotent  power  for  its  completion — a 


power  which  nothing  can  oi)pose,  but  to  which  every 
thing  must  serve.  The  certainty  of  the  decisive 
y./.7j(ni;  is  the  centre  and  climax  of  tlie  lite,  from 
which  the  groundwork,  as  well  as  the  future  of  life, 
is  glorified.  It  points  backward  to  God's  jjurpose, 
and  forward  to  its  consummation.  The  periods  be- 
tween the  pre-temporal,  eternal  jiurpose  of  (Jod,  and 
its  future,  eternal  consummation,  are  the  periods  of 
the  order  of  salvation  (ver.  29).  That  this  way  of 
salvation  leads  through  stiH'ering  to  glory,  accord- 
ing to  the  image  of  Christ's  life,  is  secured  by  the 
omnipotent  decision  with  which  "  God  is  for  "  (ver. 
31)  His  children — a  decision  which  is  secured  by 
the  gift  of  Christ  for  them,  by  their  justilictition, 
their  reconciliation,  redemption,  and  exaltation  in 
Christ ;  in  a  word,  iiy  the  love  of  Christ.  This  love 
leads  them  in  triumph  through  all  the  tempfcitions 
of  the  world,  because  it  is  the  exjjression  of  Christ's 
own  coiupiest  of  the  world  (vers.  28-37). 

C.  The  nnitii  of  the  subjective  and  objective  cer- 
taint)/  of  future  glory  in  the  glorious  life  of  lorn 
already  attained. 

Life  in  the  love  of  Christ  is  exalted  above  all  the 
powers  of  the  world  (vers.  38,  3lt). — Kindred  sec- 
tions: John  xvii.  ;   1  Cor.  xv.,  and  others. 

Tholuck :  "This  inheritance  will  far  outweigh  all 
suffering,  and  must  be  awaited  with  steadfast  iiope 
(vers.  18-27).  But  as  far  as  we  are  concerned,  we 
can  suffer  no  more  bijury ;  the  consciousness  of 
(rod's  love  in  Chri.st  rests  upon  so  impregnable  a 
foundation,  that  nothing  in  the  whole  universe  can 
sei)arate  'him'  from  it"  (vets.  28-3'.)). — .Meyer  find.s, 
in  vers.  18-31,  "  grounds  of  encouragement  for  tlio 
(Tf/iTTcifT/nv,  ira  X.  irrrdoi.  To  wit :  1.  The  future 
glory  will  far  outweigh  the  present  suffering  (vers. 
18-25).  2.  The  Holy  Spirit  sniiports  us  (vers.  2<>, 
27).  3.  Every  thing  must  work  together  for  good 
to  them  that  love  (Jod  "  (vers.  28-31).  Undoubted- 
ly these  things  are  grounds  of  encouragement;  yet 
the  Apostle  evidently  designs  to  encourage  by  a 
copious  and  conclusive  didactic  exposition  of  tiio 
certainty  of  the  Christian's  hope  of  future,  glory,  in 
face  of  the  great  ap|)arent  cmitiitdictions  of  this 
hope — an  ex])osition  which,  in  itself,  has  great  value. 

[Alford  (vers.  lS-30) :  "The  Apostle  treats  of 
the  coin]»lete  and  glorious  trium|)h  of  (lod's  elect, 
throiigh  sull'erings  and  l>y  hope,  and  the  blessed 
renovation  of  all  things  in  and  by  their  glorifica- 
tion,"    (Vers.  31-3'.t):  "The  Christiim  has  no  re» 


CHAPTER  VIII.    18-39. 


2C9 


•on  to  fear,  but  all  reason  to  hope  ;  for  nothing  can 
separate  liini  from  God's  love  in  Christ." — Hodge, 
making  the  theme  of  the  chapter  "  the  security  of 
the  believer,"  finds,  in  vers.  18-28,  a  proof  of  this 
"  from  the  I'act  tliat  they  are  sustained  by  hope,  and 
aided  by  the  Spirit,  under  all  tlieir  trials ;  so  that 
every  thing  eventually  works  together  for  their 
good."  In  vers.  29,  3U,  another  proof  "  founded  on 
the  decree  or  purpose  of  God."  In  vers.  31-39,  yet 
another,  foumled  "  on  His  infinite  and  unchanging 
love."— R.] 


First  Pahagkaph,  vers.  18-27. 

Ver.  18.  For  I  reckon,  &c.  [Aoyt to/tat 
yaQ,  z.T.A.  I'ccQ  connects  this  verse  with  ver. 
17,  introducing  a  reason  why  the  present  sufferings 
should  not  discourage  (De  Wette,  Philippi).  Cal- 
vin :  Nique  vcro  mok-stum  jiohis  debet,  si  ad  coeleslem 
gloriam  per  varian  offitctioiief;  proceden  tan  est,  quan- 
doqnidein,  kc.  Stuart  prefers  to  join  it  to  "glorified 
witli  Him  ;  "  "  we  shall  be  glorified  with  Christ,  for 
all  tlie  sufferings  and  sorrows  of  the  present  state 
are  only  temporary."  The  connection  seems  to  be 
with  the  whole  thought  which  precedes.  The  verb 
is  thus  expanded  by  Alford  :  "  I  myself  am  one  who 
have  embraced  this  course,  being  convinced  tliat." 
It  is  used  as  in  chap.  ni.  28  ;  see  p.  136. — R,] 
Now  by  his  view  of  the  magnitude  of  future  glory, 
as  well  as  by  his  conviction  of  its  certainty,  he  esti- 
mates the  proportionate  insignificance  of  the  suffer- 
ings (certainly  great  when  considered  in  themselves 
alone)  of  the  present  time,  since  tliey,  as  birth-throes, 
are  the  preliminary  conditions  of  future  glory. 

Insignificant,  o  ('  /.  a  1 1  a  ,  not  of  weight ;  a 
stronger  expression  for  ctraSm.  They  are  not 
synonymous.*  The  vvv  y.aoQoi;  is  the  final,  decisive 
time  of  development,  with  which  the  aiwv  ovtoi; 
will  terminate. 

In  comparison  with  the  glory  ■which  shall 
be  revealed  [tt^jcx;  rtjv  fiij.'/.ovaav  dotav 
ano xa?.i'(fi  &tjvau.  On  7i()6c;  after  ovx  aiia, 
in  the  sense  of  iti  relation  to,  in  comparison  with, 
see  Tholuck,  Philippi  in  loco. — R.]  Tijv  /i  eXXov- 
aav  is  antecedent,  with  emphasis.  [To  this  Alford 
objects].  That  glory  is  ever  approaching,  and  there- 
fore ever  near  at  hand,  though  Paul  does  not  regard 
its  presence  near  in  the  sense  of  Meyer,  and  others. 
— In  us  [see  Textual  Note  ^].  The  lii;  Tjndt; 
does  not  mean,  as  the  Vulgate  and  Beza  have  it,  in 
nobis  [so  E.  V.];  it  is  connected  with  the  ano- 
y.a).v(f  Q-Tivat,.  If  it  is  imparted  through  the  in- 
ward life  of  believers  and  through  nature,  it  never- 
theless comes  from  the  future  and  from  above,  as 
much  as  from  within  outwardly,  and  it  is  a  Divine 
secret  from  eternity  in  time — therefore  u7Toy.c<.).vri'i.Q. 

Ver.  19.  For  the  patient  expectation  [?/ 
yuQ  anoxccQa  d'oxia.  On  ana/. a^ at) ox. la, 
comp.  Phil.  i.  20.  The  verb  xciQaffoxiTv  means,  lit- 
erally, to  expect  with  uplifted  head  ;  then,  to  expect. 
The  noun,  strengthened  by  ano,  refers  to  an  expec- 
tation, which  is  constant  and  persistent  until  the  time 
arrives.  The  idea  of  anxiety  (Luther)  is  not  promi- 
nent.    (So   Tholuck,  Pliihppi,  De  Wette,   Meyer.) 


*  On  the  controversy  between  the  Protestant  and  Catholic 
theologians  in  regard  to  the  mcrilum  condigni,  as  connected 
with  this  passage,  see  Tholuck,  p.  421.  [Comp.  Philippi  on 
both  merilum  cotidigni  and  merilum  cnngrui.  Also  Calvin. 
A?  Dr.  Hodge  remarks,  the  idea  of  merit  "is  altogether  for- 
pg:n  to  the  context."— B,.] 


See  below  also.  Tholuck  remarks,  that  the  strength 
ening  of  the  attributive  notion  into  a  substantive 
makes  a  double  prosopopoeia,  "  not  only  the  ci'ea' 
tiire,  but  the  (Xiicctation  of  the  creature  waits." — R.] 
The  ydt^  introduces  the  first  proof  of  his  state- 
ment from  the  course  of  the  whole  xTtctq.  It 
may  be  asked.  Shall  the  future  glory  be  shown  in  its 
grandeur  (Chrysostom  [Hodge,  Alford],  and  most 
expositors),  its  certuiutij  (I'ritzsche,  Meyer),  its  near- 
uess  (Reiche),  or  its  futurity  (Philippi)  ?  Tholuck, 
in  its  grand(ur  and  certniniy*  If  both  must  com 
bine  in  one  idea,  then  it  is  the  truth  or  the  reality 
of  the  glory,  as  such.  The  elements  of  its  grandeur, 
as  of  its  certainty,  are  united  in  the  fact  that  the  de- 
veloping pain  of  the  external  xriaic,  as  of  the  in 
ward  life  of  believers — indeed,  the  groaning  of  the 
Divine  spiritual  life  itself — labors  for  it  and  points 
toward  it ;  that  it  will  consist  in  the  removal  of  all 
vanity  and  corruption  in  the  whole  natural  sphere  of 
mankind. 

Of  the  creation,  t^?  xri(rfo)i;.  The  great 
question  is.  What  is  the  xt iff  1,1;?  Lexically,  the 
word  may  mean  the  act  of  creation,  as  well  as  what 
is  created,  the  creation  ;  f  but  actually,  tlie  question 
here  can  only  be  the  creation  in  the  broader  or  more 
limited  sense.  Tlioluck :  "  xrian;  in  the  passive 
sense  can  mean  the  same  as  xrifffia,  the  single  crea- 
ture ;  ver.  39  ;  Heb.  iv.  13.  'H  xTiffn;,  Book  of 
Wisdom  ii.  6  ;  xvi.  24 ;  Heb.  ix.  11 ;  or  even  iJX.rj 
Tj  xtiavc,  Book  of  Wisdom  xix.  6  ;  naffa  ?)  xriffit;, 
Judith  xvi.  17,  the  created  world.  But  in  that  case, 
as  also  with  o/oc;  6  xoa^ioi;  (John  xii.  19),  it  is  me- 
tonymically  confined  to  the  human  world  (Col.  i.  23 ; 
Mark  xvi.  15  ;  and  also  with  the  Rabbis,  nN'>~i2  hb , 
&c.),  or  to  irrational  nature,  exempting  man." 

The  explanations  are  divided  into  different  groups: 

1.  The  natural  and  spiritual  world.  The  uni- 
verse. Origen :  Man  as  subject  to  corruption  ;  souls 
of  the  stars.  Theodoret :  also  the  angels.  Theo- 
dore of  Mopsvestia,  Olshausen :  The  whole  of  the 
universe.  Kollner,  Koppe,  Rosenmiiller  {tola  re- 
rum  uii  iversitas). 

2.  Inanimate  creation.  (Chrysostom,  Theophy- 
lact,  Calvin,  Beza,  Fritzsche  :  nmndi  inachina.) 

3.  Animate  creation,  a.  Humanity  (Augustine, 
Turretine,:]:  &c. ;  Baumgarten-Crusius :  still  unbeliev- 
ing men) ;  b.  unconverted  heathen  (Locke,  Light- 
foot,  and  others).  Rabbinical  usage  of  language : 
the  heathen :  HN^'ia ;  c,  the  Jewish  people,  be- 
cause the  Jews  were  called  God's  creation  (Cramer, 
and  others) ;  d.  the  Gentile  Christians,  because  the 
proselytes  were  called  new  creatures  (Clericus,  Nos- 
selt) ;  e.  Jewish  Christians  (Gockel ;  for  the  same 
reason  as  under  c.) ;  f.  Christians  in  general  (xaovrj 
/tTtffK,-,  Socinians  and  Arminians). — Evidently  there 


*  [The  primary  reference  seems  to  be  to  its  greatness f 
but  a  secondary  reference  to  its  certainty  and  futurity 
would  necessarily  be  implied  in  "the  patient  expectation." 
-R.] 

t  [The  English  word  creation  has  precisely  the  earn* 
twofold  sense  ;  but  it  always  has  a  general  reference  when 
used  in  the  passive  sense.  KtiVis  luidoubtc-dly  has  a  more 
special  reference  in  many  cases,  but  it  would  seem  that  the 
more  general  signification  preceded  the  more  special  one, 
and  hence  that  the  limitation  of  meaning  m'-st  always  ba 
derived  from  the  context. — R.] 

X  [This  is  tlie  view  adopted  and  defended  at  some  leugth 
by  Professor  Stuart  in  an  Excuxsus  on  this  verse.  Not- 
withstanding his  able  argument,  the  interpretation  is  en- 
tirely too  restricted  to  meet  with  general  acceptance.  An 
instinct  of  immortality  is  assumed,  and  presided  as  the  maig 
thought.    Comp.  Hodge,  in  opposition  to  Stuart's  view 


270 


THE   EPISTLE   OF  PAUL  TO   THE   ROMANS. 


is  no  reference,  on  one  hand,  to  the  mathematical  or 
astronomiciil  cliaractcr  of  the  heavenly  bodies,  nor, 
on  the  other,  to  the  real  rational  or  spiritual  world, 
but  to  a  creature-life,  which  can  groan  and  earnestly 
expect. 

4.  Inanimate  and  animate  nature,  in  contradis- 
tinction from  humanity*  (Irenjeus,  Grotius,  Calovius, 
Neamlcr.  Meyer,  De'  Wette)  [Hodge,  Alford]. — 
[Sciiubert:  "Even  in  the  things  of  the  bodily  world 
about  us  there  is  a  iife-element  which,  like  that 
Ptiitue  of  Memnon,  unconsciously  sounds  in  accord 
when  touched  by  the  ray  from  on  high." — V.  S.] 
But  the  distinction  from  mankind  must  be  confined 
to  the  distinction  from  the  spiritual  life  of  renewed 
mankind ;  for  sinful  mankind  is  utterly  dependent 
upon  nature,  and  even  believers  have  tlieir  natural 
Bide  (2  Cor.  v.  1  ff.).  Nor  can  the  universe,  in  its 
merely  natural  side,  be  altogether  meant,  since  the 
Holy  Scriptures  distinguish  a  region  of  glory  from 
the  region  of  humanity  in  this  lite. 

5.  Tlioluck  :  "  T/ie  material  world  mirronnding 
man."  The  Scriptures  very  plainly  distinguish  be- 
tween an  earthly  natural  world  related  to  mankind, 
and  a  region  of  glory.  (See  the  ascension  ;  1  Cor. 
XV. ;  Heb.  ix,  11,  &c.)  The  former  alone  is  subject 
to  vanity,  and  hence  it  alone  can  be  intended.  But 
there  is  no  ground  for  making  divisions  in  reference 
to  this  human  natural  world.  The  Apostle  asstmies, 
rather,  that  this  creature-sphere  is  in  a  state  of  col- 
lective, painful  striving  for  development,  which  ex- 
presses itself  as  sensation  only  proportiouiitely  to  the 
sensational  power  of  life,  and  hence  is  more  defi- 
nitely expressed,  appears  more  frequently,  and  reach- 
es its  climax  in  living  creatures  and  in  the  natural 
longing  which  mankind  feels  (2  Cor.  v.  1).  The  real 
personification  of  nature  in  man  is  the  final  ground 
for  the  poetical  personification  of  nature. 

[t).  The  whole  creation,  rational  as  well  ax  irra- 
tional, not  yet  redeemed,  bid  needing  and  capable  of 
redemption,  here  opposed  to  the  new  creation  in 
Christ  and  in  the  regenerate.  The  children  of  God 
appear,  on  the  one  side,  as  the  first-fruits  of  the  new 
creaiion,  and  the  remaining  creatures,  on  the  other, 
as  consciously  or  unconsciously  longing  after  the 
same  redcmi)tion  and  renewal.  This  explanation 
seems  to  be  the  most  correct  one.  It  most  satis- 
factorily accounts  for  the  expressions :  expectation, 
Kaiting,  groaning,  not  wil'ingli/  (ver.  20),  and  the 
whole  creation  (ver.  22).  The  whole  creation,  then, 
looks  forward  to  redemption  ;  all  natural  birth,  to 
the  new  birth.  As  all  that  is  created  proceeded 
from  (lod,  so  it  all,  consciously  or  uneonseiously, 
strives  after  Him  as  its  final  end.  What  shows  itself 
in  nature  as  a  dim  imj)u!se,  in  the  natural  man, 
among  tlie  heathen,  and  yet  more  among  the  Jews, 
under  the  influence  of  the  law,  conies  to  distinct 
consciousness  and  manifests  itself  in  that  loud  cry 
after  deliverance  (chap.  vii.  24),  which  Christ  alone 
can  satisfy;  and  then  voices  itself  in  ha[)py  gratitiule 
for  the  actual  redemyition.  Olshausen  aptly  says  : 
"  Paul  contrasts  Christ,  and  the  mw  creation  called 
forth  by  Him,  to  all  the  old  creation,  together  with 
the  tmrcgenerate  men,  as  the  flower  of  this  creation. 


•  (The  ronsons  for  exchulinp:  man  are  :  I.  Dcllcvern  are 
distin^'uitilied  hero  from  the  «[Ti<ri«  (ver.  :3).  J.  Siich  nn 
ex|)L'rtiilion  dncs  not  cx'st  In  maiikincl  iis  a  whole.  3.  Vor. 
20  r.'p-csonts  the  suhjoction  to  viinity  as  unwillinjr,  which  Is 
not  true  i)f  man.  ■!.  Ver.  2i  iTi|)lies  that  deliverance  shall 
take  place,  ami  we  have  no  cvidcme  tlmt  thii  i»  true  of  hu- 
maaily  m  n  wliole.  If  ver.  it  (jivc-i  the  purport  of  the 
"hope  "  (ver.  'JO),  then  IhU  reason  id  of  little  weight. —R.] 


The  whole  of  this  old  creation  has  one  life  in  itself, 
and  this  is  yearning  for  redem])tion  from  the  bonds 
whicli  hold  it,  and  hinder  its  glorification  ;  this  ona 
yearning  has  forms  diflereut  only  according  to  the 
dift'erent  degrees  of  life,  and  is  naturally  purer  and 
stronger  in  unregenerate  men  than  in  plants  and  ani- 
mals ;  in  them,  the  creation  ha.s,  as  it  were,  it? 
mouth,  by  which  it  can  give  vent  to  its  coUectivg 
feeling.  Yet  the  most  of  these  men  hiow  not  what 
the  yearning  and  seeking  in  them  properly  mean ; 
they  tmderstand  not  the  language  of  tlie  Spirit  in 
them ;  nay,  tliey  suppress  it  often,  though  it  is, 
meanwhile,  audiijle  in  their  heart ;  and  what  they 
do  not  understand  themselves,  God  understands,  \^ho 
listens  even  to  prayers  not  understood.  But  how- 
ever decided  the  contrast  between  the  old  and  new 
creation,  yet  they  may  not  be  considered  iis  sepa^ 
rated  thoroughly.  Rather,  as  the  new  man,  in  all 
distinctness  from  the  old,  still  is  in  the  old,  so  is  the 
new  creation  (Christ,  and  the  new  life  proceeding 
from  Him)  in  the  old  world.  The  old  creation, 
therefore,  is  like  an  impregnate  mother  (comp.  ver. 
23),  that  bears  a  new  world  in  her  womb — a  life 
which  is  not  herself,  neither  springs  from  her,  but 
which,  by  the  overmastering  power  that  dwells  in 
it,  draws  her  life,  with  which  it  is  connected,  on 
and  on  into  itself,  and  changes  it  into  its  nature,  so 
that  the  birth  (the  completion  of  the  new  world) 
is  the  mother's  death  (the  sinking  of  the  old)."— 
P.S.] 

[This  last  view  seems  to  be  that  of  Dr.  Lange 
himself.  It  is  ably  defended  by  Forbes,  pp.  310-330. 
The  limitalion  to  creation,  as  capable  of  redemption, 
implies  thnt  only  so  much  of  creation  as  is  linked 
with  the  fall  of  man,  and  subject  to  the  curse,  should 
be  included.  Thus  it  difiers  from  1.  Col.  i.  20, 
however,  gives  a  hint  as  to  the  extent  of  this  con- 
nection with  man.  The  context  renders  such  a  limi- 
tation necessary.  On  the  other  hand,  it  diflers  from 
4,  in  including  man  in  his  fallen  condition.  The 
reasons  for  excluding  humanity  have  been  given 
above.  It  will  appear  that,  against  this  view,  they 
are  of  comparatively  little  weight.  Certainly  the 
burden  of  proof  rests  with  those  wlio  adopt  4  ;  for 
man  is  the  head  of  the  creation,  to  which  they  apply 
xtiVtk  ;  not  merely  as  the  final  and  crowning  work 
of  the  repeated  creative  agency  which  brought  it 
into  being,  but  as  the  occasion  of  its  present  groiin- 
ing  condition.  Besides,  man,  viewed  on  one  side  of 
his  nature,  is  a  part  of  this  material  and  animal  crea- 
tion. It  seems  arbitrary  to  sunder  him  from  it  in 
this  case.  At  all  events,  we  may  admit  that  his  ma- 
terial body  involuntarily  shares  in  this  expectation, 
to  which  his  unregenerate  soul  responds  with  an  in- 
definite  longing.  In  this  view  the  degradation  of 
sin  is  fearfully  manilest.  Nature  waits,  but  the 
natural  man  is  indifferent  or  hostile.  The  very  t)ody 
which,  in  his  blindness,  he  deems  the  source  of  sin, 
waits  for  glorificntion,  while  his  sotd  uses  its  power 
over  it  to  stifle  the  inartienlati;  desire.  On  the  whole 
subject,  see  Usteri,  Stud,  utid  Krit.,  1832,  pp.  835  ff., 
Thohick,  Meyer  in  loro,  Delitzscli,  fiil,l.  J\i/cli.,  ))p. 
.')7  If.  and  pp.  476  ff.  (a  most  profoimd  and  eloquent 
sermon  on  vers.  18-23).  Comp.  J>octr.  Note-,  and 
Dr.  Lange,  Dan  I^nd  drr  Hrrrliehkcit. — R.] 

For  thf  rnrnrxt  i-rpertntion  of  the  creature.  As 
the  xr<(<f«fVoxfri'  meatis,  strictly,  to  exfyect  with  rained 
hrad,  it  is  very  proper  to  regard  the  y.n(j(u)i)xla 
(intense  expectation),  and  tlic  tc.TOKOt^iftfVoxi'rt  (I'liil. 
i.  2'))  (intense  longing,  waiting  for  satisfaction),  as 
an  allusion  to  the  conduct  of  irratiomU  creatures  in 


CHAPTER  VIII.   18-39. 


271 


reference  to  the  future  transformation  of  the  sphere 
of  nature. 

Is  waiting  [a;Tf>;(ye/f rai.  Here,  also,  the 
preposition  implies  the  condnuance  of  the  waiting 
until  tlje  time  arrives. — R.]  Even  the  poor  crea- 
tures, whose  heads  are  bowed  toward  the  ground, 
now  seized  by  a  iiigher  impulse,  by  a  supernatural 
anticipation  and  longing,  seem  to  stretch  out  their 
heads  and  look  forth  spiritually  for  a  spiritual  object 
of  their  existence,  which  is  now  burdened  by  the 
law  of  corruption.*  Certainly  this  representation 
has  the  form  of  a  poetical  personification ;  but  it 
cannot,  on  tliis  account,  be  made  equivalent,  as  Meyer 
holds  (p.  255),  to  the  usual  prosopopoeias  in  the  Old 
Testament,  although  tliese  declare,  in  a  measure,  the 
sympathy  between  the  natural  and  human  world. 
Meyer  would  exclude  from  the  idea  not  only  the  an- 
gelic and  demoniac  kingdom,  but  also  Christian  and 
unchristian  mankind.  But  how,  then,  would  Paul 
have  unilerstood  the  groaning  of  the  creature,  with- 
out human  sympathy  ? 

The  revelation  of  the  sons  (children)  of 
God  [  T  r  r  a  71  o  y.  d  /.  V  X}'  L  J'  r  !iiv  v'liov  x  ov 
^f  or].  The  children  of  God  in  tiie  pregnant  sense 
of  His  sons.  The  creature  waits  for  its  manifesta- 
tion ;  that  is,  for  the  coming  of  its  ()oSa  to  full  ap- 
pearance (1  John  iii.  2)  with  tiie  coming  of  Christ 
(Matt.  XXV,  31),  wiiich  will  be  the  appearing  of  the 
Sola  of  the  great  God  (Titus  ii.  i:-!);  therefore  the 
absolute  aTroza/i'Vn;  itself,f  the  fuilihnent  of  all  tiie 
typical  prophecies  of  nature — and  nut  onh/  as  com- 
plete rexforation,  bid  aho  as  perffct  developmcni. 

Ver.  20.  For  the  creation  was  made  sub- 
ject [fi  jtTtffti;  vnfTO.Y'ri.  Dr.  Lange  takes 
the  verb  as  middle.  It  is  the  historical  aorist,  at 
the  fall  of  man.  See  below.  Comp.  Gen.  iii.  17, 
H  18. — R.].  God  was  the  one  who  subjected  (so  say 
most  expositors) — [This  is  evident  from  the  curse, 
if  the  reference  be  to  the  time  of  the  fall. — R.]  ; — 
not  Adam  (Knachtb.,  Capellus);  nor  man  (Chi-ysos- 
tom,  Schneckenburger) ;  nor  the  devil  (Hammond). 

To  vanity.  3/«T«K)Ti/c.  The  Septuagint, 
instead  of  brp.  Nl'i*,  p''"!.  The  word  does  not 
occur  in  the  profane  Greek ;  it  means  the  super- 
ficial, intangible,  and  therefore  deceptive  appear- 
ance ;  the  perishable  and  doomed  to  destruction  liav- 
ing  the  show  of  reality.  Earlier  expositors  (Tertul- 
lian,  Bucer,  and  others)  have  referred  tlie  word  to 
the  /(ccTaict  =  idols,  understanding  it  as  the  deifica- 
tion of  the  creature.  Yet  the  question  here  is  a 
condition  of  the  creature  to  which  God  has  subject- 
ed it.  Further  on  it  is  designated  as  <)ov).f  ia  riji; 
qiBopai;.  Therefore  Fritzsche's  definition,  perversi- 
tas  (Adam's  sin),  is  totally  untenable.  But  what  do 
we  understand  by  "subject  to  fiarcci^oz  rjt; "  ?  E.x- 
planations : 

1  An  original  disposition  of  creation ;  the  ar- 
rangement of  the  corruption  of  the  creature.  (Gro- 
tius,  Krehl,  De  Wette.  Theodoret  holds  that  the 
original  arrangement  was  made  with  a  view  to  the 
fall.) 


•  [Comp.  the  analogous  Old  Testament  expressions : 
Deut.  xxxii.  1 ;  Job  xii.^7,  9;  Ps.  xix.  2  ;  Ixviii.  17  ;  xcviii. 
B;  Isa.  i.  2  ;  xiv.  8;  Iv.  12;  Ixv.  17  ;  Ezek.  xxxi.  15  ;  Hab. 
ii.  11.     Also  Rev.  xxi  ;  2  Peter  iii.  13  ;  Acts  iii.  21.— R.] 

f  [The  reference  to  this  event  is  undoubted.  It  is  a 
new  expre.=Pion  of  the  deep-seated  consciousness  of  fellow- 
ship with  Cliri.*t,  which  lends  the  Apostle  to  call  thi.»  "the 
revelation  of  the  sons  of  God,"  not  of  the  Son  of  Gnrl.  It 
should  he  remarked,  that  our  Lord  calls  it  the  cominf;  of 
the  Snn  of  Mint.  The  eveut  is  throughout  regarded  in  a 
strictly  soteriological  aspect. — R.] 


2.  A  result  of  the  fall  of  man.  (The  Hebrew 
theology,  Bcrechith  Rabba,  many  Christian  theolo- 
gians .  (Ecumenius,  Calvin,  Meyer,  and  others).  No, 
1  is  opposed  by  the  vntrdy^j,  &c.  [by  or/  i/.oriTn, 
d).?.(i,  which  presupposes  a  different  previous  con- 
dition, and  by  the  historical  fact  (Gen.  i.  31) ;  Meyer. 
— R.]  ;  and  No.  2  by  the  originality  of  the  arrange- 
ment  between  a  first  created  and  a  second  spiritual 
stage  of  the  cosmos  (1  Cor.  xv.  47,  48). 

3."  We  must  therefore  hold,  that  Paul  refers  to 
the  obscurity  and  disturbance  of  the  first  natural 
stage  in  the  development  of  our  cosm6s  produced  bj 
the  fall.*  As,  in  redemption,  the  restoration  oc- 
curred simultaneously  with  the  furtherance  of  the 
normal  development,  so  death  entered,  at  the  fall,  na 
a  deterioration  of  the  original  metamorphoses,  into 
the  corruption  of  transitoriness.  Tholuck  approach- 
es this  explanation  by  this  remark  :  "  As  the  Rab- 
binical theology  expresses  the  thought  that  man, 
born  sinless,  would  have  passed  into  a  better  condi- 
tion '  by  a  kiss  of  the  Highest,'  so,  in  all  probability^ 
has  Paul  regarded  tliat  (x)./.ay7jrca  of  which  he 
speaks  in  1  Cor.  xv.  52  as  the  destination  of  the 
first  man."  Yet  Tholuck  seems,  in  reality,  to  ad- 
here to  De  Wette's  view. 

Not  willingly.  The  ov^  exovaa  cannot 
mean  merely  the  natural  necessity  peculiar  to  the 
creature-world  ;  it  applies  rather  to  an  opposition  of 
ideal  nature,  in  its  ideal  pressure  toward  develofj. 
ment,  to  the  decrees  of  death  and  of  the  cur.se  of 
their  real  developing  progress  (Gen.  iii. ;  2  Cor.  v.  1 
ff.).  Bucer:  Contra  qnam  fert  inffitiimn  eorn?n,  a 
natttra  etihn  omnes  res  a  corruptiove  abhorrent. 

[But  by  reason  of  him  who  hath  subjected 
it,  «/./.«  dta  t6i'  I'TTordiavTcc.  Dr.  Lange 
renders:  the  creature-world  subjected  itself  to  van. 
ity,  not  willingly,  but  on  account  of  Him  who  sub- 
jected it,  in  hope.  The  force  of  <)i.d  with  the  accu- 
sative is  on  account  of ;  but  the  E.  V.  is  correct,  in- 
dicating a  moving  cause — i.  e.,  the  will  of  God. — R.] 
This  unwillingness  is  expressed,  according  to  what 
follows,  in  the  groaning  of  the  whole  creation.  The 
translation  :  "  it  was  nmde  subject  [vntrdytj,  pas- 
sive), by  reason  of  Him  who  hath  subjected  the 
same,"  is  opposed  to  the  logical  conception.  [The 
simplest  grammatical  as  well  as  logical  inteipretation 
accepts  tlie  verb  as  passive,  with  a  reference  to  God 
as  "  Him  who  sulyected  the  same."  (So  Meyer, 
Tholuck,  Hodge,  De  Wette,  Alford,  and  n)ost  com- 
mentators.)— R.]  Moreover,  the  reference  of  the 
()ta  Toi'  vTTorcilnvra  to  man,  to  Adam,f  does  not 
remove  this  logical  difficulty,  since,  in  that  case,  the 
vntTuyri  would  have  to  relate  to  another  subject 
than  the  vnordiarra.  We  therefore  find  ourselves- 
driven,  with  Fritzsche,  to  the  middle  construction 


*  [The  difference  between  2  and  3  is  slight.  Both  point 
to  an  actual  curtse  at  the  fall ;  the  latter  only  ndds  the 
thought,  th:it  the  previous  condition  was  not,  p  ft  or  all,  the 
final  one,  thus  preparing:  the  way  for  an  ixplanntiun  ot 
"notwiUinclv."  Uothshould,  it  seems,  include  tlie  thought 
that  the  clorification  to  ensue  will  transcend  both  the  origi- 
nal state  and  that  which  could  be  attained  by  a  normal  de- 
velopment.— R.l 

t  [The  objection  to  this  reference  is  well  slated  by  Al- 
ford :  (i.)  The  verl>  implies  a  conscious  act  of  inlonticnal 
subjugation.  (2.)  The  accusative  (indicating  the  moving, 
rather  than  the  efiHeient  cause)  is  iu  kecpinc  with  the  Apos- 
tle's reverence  ;  thus  removing  the  supreme  will  of  God  to 
a  wider  distance  from  con-uption  and  vanity.  Mtyer  sug- 
gests that  the  absence  of  any  explanatory  cause  presupposes 
a  well-kiiov\Ti  suhjeet;  God  had  subjected  it.  Jowett  make* 
Cliiist  the  subject  :  "  on  account  ot  whoso  special  work  tli« 
creature  was  made  subject  to  vanity."  This  is  novel,  80 
much  60,  that  it  seeirw  far-fetched. — K.] 


272 


THE   EPISTLE   OF   PAUL   TO    THE    ROMANS. 


of  vTttTciy^].  Thereby  we  guin  the  idea,  that  even 
the  disharinony  wiiith  nature  had  suHered  has  be- 
coni'.',  in  turn,  a  kind  of  order,  since  nature  has  been 
found  in  tlie  service  of  corruption  l»y  virtue  of  its 
ela.-*ticity,  relative  dependence,  plasticity,  and  |»lia- 
bility,  and  its  absolute  dependence  upon  God  ;  and 
pious  nature  is  all  the  dearer  to  God  because  it  is 
subjected  in  hope.  [So  Hodge,  aecq)tiiig  the  mid- 
dle «ense :  tlie  creature  submitted  to  the  yoke  of 
bondage  iu  hope  of  ultimate  deliverance. — R.] 

[In  hope,  t  n'  t/.TTtdi,.  Not  precisely  in  a 
ttatc  ot\  wliich  would  bi;  expressed  by  tr,  Init  resting 
on  ho/)c  {Di;  Wette  :  auf  Huff niuiff  kin). — K.J  This 
means  not  merely,  "  hope  was  left  to  it  "  (ThoUick), 
but  it  is  also  a  motive  of  positive  hope  in  suffering 
nature.  Just  as  the  fallen  human  world  shall  be  led 
iu  its  anoy.aTfxiTTafTii;  beyond  its  primitive  paradisa- 
ical glory,  so  shall  nature  come  thf'ougli  this  humilia- 
tion to  a  riciicr  elevation,  namely,  as  the  trans- 
formed organism  of  the  glorified  Christ  and  Uis 
joint-heirs.  The  In  i).nii)i.  must  ))e  joined  with 
{inftuytj,  not  with  Ata  t.  I'/tot.  (Vulgate,  Lutlier, 
and  others).  [The  question  of  connection  is  a  diffi- 
cult one.  Of  the  two  views  here  mentioned.  Dr. 
Lange  rightly  prefers  the  former,  since  the  latter 
would  attriljute  the  hope  to  the  one  suljjeeting,  not 
the  one  subjected  (Alford).  p]wald,  making  all  that 
precedes  in  this  verse  parenthetical,  joins  in  fiopc 
with  ver.  19,  and  thus  finds  a  reason  for  the  em- 
phatic repetition  of  jtr/rxK,-  in  ver.  "21.  See  2Vxtual 
Note  ',  where  the  view  of  Forbes  is  given.  It  seems 
to  give  greater  clearness  to  the  passage  as  a  whole. 
_R.l 

Ver.  21.  That  the  creation  itself  also  [ort 
r.(i.l  ccuri]  //  xTicru;.  See  IVxt mil  Note ''.  The 
current  of  exegesis  sets  strongly  in  favor  of  the 
view  which  connects  ort  with  in  e).nii)v,  in  the 
sense  of  tlial.  Alford,  who,  in  his  connnentary,  de- 
fends because,  is  one  of  the  authors  of  a  revision 
which  adopts  that.  Sleyer  suggests  that  the  purport 
of  the  hope  must  Ije  given,  in  order  to  prove  the 
expectation  of  the  y.Tian;  a/<  dlrcci'd  prccisili/  toward 
the  majii/cstiition  of  the  nons  of  God.  Alford  in- 
deed objects,  that  this  sulijeetive  significati(jn  of  the 
clause  would  attribute  "  to  the  yearnings  of  crea- 
tion, hiteliiffence  and  ratifmaUty — consciousness  of 
itself  and  of  God;"  but  the  same  objection  might 
be  urged  against  the  refi-rence  of  xTi'fftc  to  inani- 
mate creation,  in  vers.  19,  20,  22,  as  well  as  here. 
If  the  figurative  idea  of  longing  be  admitted  at  all, 
it  may  be  carried  out  to  this  extent  with  equal  pro- 
priety. The  repetition  may  be  readily  accounted 
for,  either  by  considering  ver.  20  parenthetical,  or 
by  regarding  avr'ii  i;  jtr/Vt?  as  emphatic. — li.]  This 
explains  the  hoi)e  of  tlie  creature-world  introduced 
in  the  preceding  verse.  With  Chrysostom,  Theo- 
phylact,  and  others,  we  regard  the  xai  rirrii  as  a 
higher  degree,  itsel/  a/so,  and  not  merely  as  an  ex- 
pression of  equality,  a'so  if.  Meyer  says,  that  tlie 
context  says  nothing  of  gradation.  iJut  the  grada- 
tion lies  es.Hcntially  in  the  fact  that  the  creature- 
world  constitutes  a  humiliation  in  opi)Osition  to 
spiritual  life,  especially  for  contemplating  the  old 
^forlil. 

Shall  be  delivered  from  the  bondage  of 
corruption  [i  ).f  r  O^t  q  (o  & /';  a  f  r  ni  nnh  t^s 
rf o  e  A  m'  « i;  T  ^  I,-  If  fyno  (i  (,•  1.  We  do  not  hold  (with 
Ttioluck,  Sfeycr,  and  others)  that  t^i;  q  fyoQcii;  is 
the  genitive  of  apposition.  J'or  the  question  ia,  in 
the  first  jilaee,  concerning  a  bondage  vitder  vanity  ; 
•0  that  the  creature,  even  in  its  delivej-ance,  will 


remain  in  a  state  of  the  Sovhia  in  relation  to  tht 
children  of  G'kI  himseif.  The  ipOooa  is  not  alto- 
gether the  Same  as  /laraior /;;,•,  but  its  manifestation 
iu  the  process  of  finite  life  in  sickness,  death,  the 
pangs  of  death,  and  corru])tion ;  while  the  fiuraiO' 
T//i,-,  as  such,  is  veiled  in  the  semblance  of  a  bloom- 
ing, incorruptible  life.  [There  seems  to  be  no  good 
reason  for  objecting  to  the  view  of  Tholuck,  Meyer, 
Philippi,  aijd  others,  that  the  bondage,  which  resulti 
fi'om  the  vanity,  and  is  borne  not  wdlinr/!y  (ver.  20), 
co)isi.sls  in  corrupthin.  This  preserves  the  propt.r 
distinctions.  The  corruption  is  the  conse(|uenec  of 
the  vanity;  the  unwilling  subjection  to  a  condition 
which  is  -under  vanity,  and  results  in  corriip/ii>>i,  is 
well  termed  bondaye. — R.]  The  alteration  of  tho 
expression  <if)o(ja  into  an  adjective,  "corruptible 
bondage  "  (Kollner),  is  as  unwarranted  as  the  trans- 
lation of  the  i/.f I  Dffilu  rT^q  ()d;/,^'  by  ylorhmx  lib- 
erty (Luther  [E.  V.]  ). 

[Into  the  freedom  of  the  glory  of  the  chil- 
dren of  God,  ftc;  rijv  t/.fff)f(>lav  r  rj  <;  i)(')ifjq 
T(T)v  Ti/.viov  ToT  OfoTi.  The  construction  is 
pregnant.  (So  Meyer :  Aecht  Gricchische  Prag- 
nam.  See  Winer,  p.  57*7.)  We  may  supply :  xai 
y.a.ru(Tra(y t'lntTcu,  or  fii;a/ Oi'j (jfTai,  shall  be  brought 
or  introduced  into,  &c.  The  freedom  is  to  consist 
in,  or  at  least  to  result  from  a  share  in,  the  glory 
of  the  children  of  God.  Hence  the  hcndiadys  of 
the  E.  V.  (glorious  liberty)  is  totally  incorrect.  It 
makes  the  most  prominent  idea  of  the  whole  clause 
a  mere  attributive.  Besides,  were  the  meaning  that 
expressed  by  the  E.  V.,  we  should  find  this  form  : 
tit;  rijv  lio^civ  r>j<;  i).nifyf^>lai;  ri7)v  rix.  r.  >}tor. — R.] 
The  ffi;  rijv  t/.nfOf(iinv  can  mean  only  the 
sharing  in  tlie  liberty  of  God's  children  by  the  or- 
ganic approi)riation  on  tlu'ir  part,  and  by  the  ecpial- 
ity  with  the  children  of  God  produced  by  means  of 
the  transformation  ;  but  it  cannot  mean  an  indepen-  ♦ 
dent  state  of  liberty  beside  them.  Their  freedom 
will  consist  in  its  helping  to  constitute  the  glory,  the 
spiritualized  splendor  of  the  manifestation  of  (5od's 
children.  As  Christ  is  the  nianil'estiition  of  God's 
glory  because  He  is  illuminated  throughout  by  God, 
and  the  sons  of  God  are  the  glory  of  Christ  as  lighta 
from  His  light,  so  will  nature  be  the  glory  of  (rod's 
sons  as  humanized  and  deified  nature.  Yet  we 
would  not  therefore  take  the  t^v  (Vdi//^-  as  the  geni. 
tive  of  apposition,  since  the  glory  proceeds  outward- 
ly from  within,  and  since  it  is  here  promised  to  na- 
ture as  recompense,  so  to  speak,  in  opposition  to  the 
C(n'rui)tion.  It  shall  therefore  share,  in  its  way,  in 
the  glory  belonging  to  God's  children.  Hut  why  ia 
not  the  aiiOci(i<Tia,  incorruption,  mentioned  (1  Cor. 
XV.  45),  in  opposition  to  the  iiOoiia,  corruption? 
Becau.sc  the  idea  of  corruplinn  has  been  preoe<led 
by  that  of  vanity.  The  real  glory  of  the  manifesta- 
tion in  which  its  inward  incorruption  shall  hereaf'ter 
lie  externally  revealed,  is  contrasted  with  the  decep- 
tive, transitory  glory  of  the  manifestation  in  which 
the  creature-world  in  this  life  appears  subject  to 
vanity.  The  elevation  of  the  children  of  God  them- 
selves from  the  condition  of  corruption  to  the  con- 
dition of  gloiification,  constitutes  the  centre  of  tho 
deliverance  into  this  state  of  glory  ;  but  the  creature 
is  drawn  upward  in  this  elevation,  in  conformity  with 
its  dynamical  dependence  on  the  centre,  and  ita 
organic  connection  with  it.* 

•  [Tills  vorio,  which,  tnkon  in  it«  puhjoctivo  sonso,  m 
tho  j>iir|iort  (if  fhi.'  hope,  sccni.s  to  favor  tin?  rcfcronoe  Oi 
KTiaif  til  hiimMiijty,  riTiit  the  lomrlntr  to  ilio  iiisiiiicto  of  in>- 
niorlulity  (so  Stuart  throughout),  loacB  Ita  foroo  if  lliU8  ua> 


CHAPTER  Vin.    18-39. 


273 


Ver.  22.  For  we  know  that  the  whole 
creation  [oitSafnv  ya^  otl  naaci  ?j  xrt- 
fftc,-].  The  Apostle  furnishes,  in  ver.  22,  fo7-  we 
know,  the  proof  of  the  declaration  in  ver.  21.  Since 
he  has  proved  the  proposition  of  ver.  19  by  ver.  20, 
and  of  ver.  20  by  ver.  21,  Meyer,  without  ground, 
goee  back  with  this  for  to  ver.  20  :  iri'  tXnidi, ;  De 
Wette  [Philippi],  to  ver.  19.  [If  ver.  21  be  taken 
as  stating  the  purport  of  the  hope,  then  Meyer's 
view  is  the  most  tenable  one.  Philippi  finds  here  a 
more  general  affirmation  of  the  existence  of  the 
"  patient  expectation,"  as  an  admitted  truth. — R.] 

Tholuck  asks,  Wlience  does  the  Apostle  have 
tliis  we  know  ?  and  he  opposes  the  view  that  it  is  an 
assumption  of  the  universal  human  consciousness 
(according  to  most  expositors),  or  rather,  that  tlie 
Apostle  seems  (according  to  Bucer,  Brenz)  to  speak 
from  the  Jewisli-Christian  hope  which  rested  on  the 
prophet.s,  as,  even  in  chap.  ii.  2  ;  iii.  19  ;  vii.  14  ; 
viii.  28,  the  ot()'«/(f r  is  understood  best  as  the  Chris- 
tian consciousness.*  We  must  not  subject  the  Apo.s- 
tle  to  the  modern  sense  of  nature.  But  we  can  still 
less  reduce  the  Apostle's  knowledge  to  that  of  the 
prophets.  The  modem  sense  of  nature,  in  its  sound 
elements,  is  a  fruit  of  apostolical  Christianity ;  and 
as  the  harmony  betweeii  spirit  and  nature  has  been 
essentially  consummated  in  Christ,  so,  too,  has  the 
knowledge  of  the  language  (that  is,  the  spiritual 
meaning)  of  nature  been  consummated  in  Him — a 
knowledge  which  was  reproduced  in  the  apostles  as 
a  fountain,  and  ready  for  enlargement.  This  knowl- 
edge is,  indeed,  universally  human  chiefly  in  elect 
souls  alone,  under  the  condition  of  Divine  illumina- 
tion. 

Groaneth  together  and  travaileth  in  pain 
together  \_a  vv  a  r  f  v  dtn'  xal  a  vvoi  d  iv  f  i.^. 
The  anv  in  avvrrrfvai^ii,  and  ffvv(/>divfi>  has 
be«n  referred,  by  (Ecumenius,  Calvin,  and  others,  to 
the  children  of  God ;  KoUner,  and  others,  have 
viewed  it  as  a  mere  strengthening  of  the  simple 
word.  Tholuck  and  Meyer  explain  it,  in  harmony 
with  Theodore  of  Mopsvestia,  as  a  collective  dispo- 
sition of  the  creature.  Tlie  latter :  poTO.nai,  i)e 
I'lTtiTv,  or  I,  aiHKpMvoc  entdfi/.virccu  roTno  7ia<sa  jj 
uTtaa;.  Estius  :  ycnitus  et  dolor  communis  inter  se 
parlium  creaturce.  On  the  linguistic  tenableness  of 
this  explanation,  by  accepting  the  presumed  organi- 
zation of  nature  in  single  parts,  see  Meyer,  against 
Fritzsche.  It  is,  indeed,  against  the  reference  of 
the   aw  to   the   groaning   of  Christians   that    this 

derstood.  The  striking:  phrase  :  "the  freedom  of  the  glory 
of  the  children  of  God,"  becomes  very  vague,  unless  we 
adopt  the  view  thai  nature  is  here  personified  as  in  es- 
peclation.  And  it  is  easier  to  believe  that  the  verse  is  true 
of  all  nature,  than  of  all  men.  "Whatever  may  be  our 
wi.-'hes,  the  sharing  of  nature  in  the  future  glory  is  more 
probable,  judging  from  the  facts  of  the  material  world,  thiin 
the  p-ai-ticipati'in  of  all  men  in  the  same,  iudgiiig  from  the 
facts  of  the  moral  world.  The  sighs  after  immnrtality 
among  the  heathen  are  audible  enough;  but  had  Paul  re- 
f'Tred  to  these,  he  would  undoubtedly  have  spoken  more 
distinctly  of  the  future  conversion  of  the  heathen.  He  is 
too  fond  of  references  to  his  personal  Saviour  and  His 
work,  to  omit  every  allusion  to  these,  where  his  thought 
n-ally  cimcerns  the  salvation  of  persons.  It  seems,  there- 
fore, in  the  highest  degree  improbable  that  mankind  (as 
distinguished  from  the  natural  world)  is  referred  to  at  all. 
-R.] 

*  [Professor  Stuart  urges  that  the  longing  of  the  naturnl 
world  was' not  so  familiar  to  all,  that  the  Apostle  could  thus 
appeal  to  consciousness.  But  this  objection  is  of  weight 
only  in  c;ise  the  meaning  of  oiio/nei'  be  extended  to  human 
eonsciousness  in  general.  That  Paul  uses  it  in  appeals  to 
Christian  consciousness,  is  evident  from  Rom.  ii.  2  ;  id.  19; 
vii.  14 ;  viii.  26,  28  ;  2  Cor.  v.  1 ;  1  Tim.  i.  8 ;  comp.  the  fru- 
fuent  use  of  oiSare  in  1  Cor.  vi. — R.] 

18 


groaning  is  introduced  further  on  as  something 
special. 

Reiche  holds  that  avvb)Sivii,  refers  to  tlie  escha- 
tological  expectation  of  the  Jews,  the  n"'il'lir]~"^2n  , 
dolorts  mexsice ;  against  which  Meyer  properly  ob- 
serves, that  those  dolores  7ncsiiice  are  special  sufl'er- 
ings  which  were  to  precede  the  appearance  of  the 
Messiah  ;  but  the  travailing  of  nature  had  taken 
place  from  the  beginning,  since  Gen.  iii,  1*7.  Yet 
Tholuck  remarks,  with  propriety,  that  tlie  Apostle 
must  have  been  acquainted  with  that  term  of  Rab- 
binical theology.  Likewise  the  developing  suffering 
of  nature  will  ascend  toward  the  end  to  a  decisive 
crisis  (see  the  eschatologic;.!  words  of  Jesus).  But 
the  "  dolores.  menaice''^  conipri.sc  also  ethical  conflicts. 
Therefore  this  continuous  travailing  of  the  world's 
development  is  related  to  the  dolores  messla,  as  the 
preparation  is  to  the  fulfilment,  or  as  the  judgment 
of  the  world,  immanent  in  the  history  of  the  world, 
is  related  to  the  final  catastrophe.  The  uiiiivnv  de- 
notes the  birth-pangs  of  a  woman  in  labor.  The 
figure  is  happily  chosen,  not  only  because  it  an- 
nounces a  new  birth  and  new  form  of  the  earth,  but 
because  it  reflects  in  travailing  Eve  the  fate  of 
the  travailing  earth,  and  vice  versa.  Tholuck  :  "  By 
pain,  it  will  wrest  the  new  out  of  the  old  ;  perhaps 
ffTird^Hv  has  reference  to  bringing  forth  (comp. 
Jer.  iv.  31),  but  better,  as  Luther  explains  the  an- 
vayf<oi,  ver.  26,  the  (jroaning,  earnest  expectation, 
which  is  intensified  by  the  being  in  travail  which  fol- 
lows." Yet  the  groaning  also  indicates  the  painful 
announcement  of  positive  sufferings,  which  subse- 
quently arise  from  the  groaning  of  Christians  for  re- 
demption (crTfr«kO/'fi'  [ja(JOt'/(fvoi',  2  Cor.  v.  4). 

[Until  now,  cc/(j(,  to?  vt'v.  Any  reference 
to  the  future  is  forbidden  by  the  use  of  oida/ifv, 
which  refers  to  experience  (Alford).  While  it  is  not 
necessary  to  insist  upon  an  important  distinction  be- 
tween ftt/Qi,  and  a/Qi,  (see  p.  181),  it  would  seem 
best  to  consider  that  the  idea  of  duration*  is  the 
prominent  one  here.  If  any  point  of  time  is  em- 
phasized, it  must  be  that  of  the  beginning  of  the 
groaning,  when  the  curse  of  wearying  labor  and 
travail  came  upon  man,  and  through  -him  the  curse 
upon  nature. — R.] 

Ver.  23.  And  not  only  so,  but  even  w^e  our- 
selves [oi''  /tdi'or  di,  dX^.a  y.al  avrol.  See 
Textual  Notes  *  and  ',  The  reading  of  the  Vaticanus 
is  followed  here.]  Meyer's  mode  of  stating  the  con- 
nection with  the  preceding  verse  is  utterly  incorrect : 
"  Climax  of  the  previous  proof  that  the  xTtcrtc  in 
ver.  21  is  correct  in  the  in'  tkniiii,,  on.  Even  we 
Christians  would,  indeed,  do  nothing  less  than  unite 
in  that  groaning."  The  principal  thought  is,  not  the 
deliverance  of  the  xTtVn;,  vers.  20,  21,  but  the  future 
glory  of  the  children  of  God,  ver.  18.  The  first 
proof  therefor  is  the  groaning  of  nature ;  the  sec- 
ond, which  now  follows,  is  the  groaning  of  spiritual 
life.  Therefore  Christians  do  not  unite  in  anywise 
in  the  groaning  of  creation,  but  vice  versd :  the 
groaning  of  creation  joins  in  the  groaning  of  Chris- 
tians. Consequently,  we  must  not  translate  :  "  But 
also  we  (Christians)  on  our  p'irt,"  &c.,  but :  even  we 
Christians  ourselves — namely,  we  who  are  most  in- 
timately concerned.     The  expression  xai  avroi  h 


*  [Calvin:  " Particula  Haclenus,  velad  hunc  usque  diem, 
ad  levandum  diuturni  lavguosis  Imdium  pertinet.  Nam  st 
tot  sifculis  durarunl  in  sun  gemilur  creixlwx,  quam  incx- 
cusahilis  erit  nostra  mollifies  vfl  ignavia,  si  in  bir.vi  um* 
braiilis  vilx  curricula  dificimust^' — Ii.1 


274 


THE   EPISTLE    OF   PAUL   TO    THE   ROMANS. 


iaiToTi;  brings  out  prominently  the  truth  that  these 
same  Christians,  who  liave  the  first-fruitR  of  tlie 
S[iirit,  are  also  saved  by  hope,  ttiough  at  heart  tliey 
must  still  groan  and  earnestly  expect.  Thus  airoi; 
iyoi,  in  chap.  vii.  25,  means :  I,  one  and  the  same 
man,  can  be  so  dift'erent ;  with  the  mind  I  can  serve 
tiie  law  of  God,  but  with  tiie  Hesh  the  law  of  sin. 
Tholuek :  "  The  difference  between  tiie  readings 
eeenis  to  have  arisen  rattier  from  .purposes  of  jier- 
tpicuii;/  or  xfi/le."  Augustine,  Ciirysostom,  and  oth- 
ers, hold  that  the  connection — in  which  the  subject 
is  Christians  in  general — is  decidedly  against  the  odd 
limitation  of  the  civToi  to  the  apostles  (Origen,  Am- 
brose, Melanehtlion,  and  Grotius.  Reiche,  and  oth- 
ers :  the  Apostle  Paul  ah)ne.  Others :  Paul,  with 
the  otlier  apostles).  The  former  expositors  maintain 
that  the  second  xat  yj/ittt;  nvrol  consists,  in  a  more 
intense  degree,  of  the  apostles.*  But  the  addition 
is  rather  occasioned  by  the  contrast  presented : 
saved,  and  yet  groaning  ("  the  inward  life  of  Chris- 
tians shines  "). 

Though  we  have  the  first-firuits  of  the 
Spirit  \_T  t]  V  u  7T  a  (J  X  tj  V  t  o  P  n  v  i  v  u  ar  o  i; 
t/oi'Tfi,-.  The  participle  maybe  taken  as  simply 
defining  the  suljject :  we  ourselves,  those  who  liave 
(Luther,  Calvin,  Beza,  Ilodge) ;  or  be  rendered : 
though  we  have,  despite  this  privilege.  The  latter 
is  more  forcible ;  the  former  sense  would  require 
the  article  oi  (Tlioluck,  Philipin,  Meyer,  Alford). 
yi7ta(j-/tj  in  itself  occasions  no  dilficulty  ;  it  means 
first-fndls,  with  the  implied  idea  of  a  future  har- 
Test.  Comp.,  however,  chap.  xi.  IC. — R.]  The 
aTruQ/t]  ToT'  nvfvu.  is  differently  interpreted. 

1.  The  genitive  is  partitive,  having  this  sense : 
the  apostles  (they  alone,  according  to  Origen,  Q^eu- 
menius,  Melanehtlion,  and  Grotius),  and  the  Chiis- 
tians  of  the  apostolic  period,  have  the  first  foretaste 
of  a  s[)iritual  endowment,  which,  when  complete, 
will  extend  to  all  future  Christians  (De  Wctte,  Kiill- 
ner,  Olshausen,  Meyer).  But  by  this  division  the 
Apostle  would  not  only  have  adjudge<l  to  later  Chris- 
tians the  full  harvest  of  the  Spirit,  which  is  contrary 
to  the  real  fact,  but  he  would  also  have  obscured 
rather  than  strengthened  his  argument  l)y  a  superflu- 
ous remark.  For  it  is  a  fact,  which  will  ever  remain 
perfectly  the  same  from  the  time  of  the  apostles  to 
the  end  of  the  world,  that  tiie  life  of  Christians  in 
the  Spirit  is  related  to  their  physical  perfection  and 
glorification,  as  the  firstlings  are  to  the  harvest.  But 
tlie  following  division  has  just  as  little  force. 

2.  Our  present  reception  of  the  Spirit  is  only 
preliminary,  in  contrast  with  the  future  complete 
outpouring  in  the  kingdom  of  heaven  (Chrj-sostom, 
and  others ;  also  Hiither,  Calvin,  Beza,  Tholuek, 
Philippi  [Ilodge,  Alford,  Stuart]  ).  Apart  from  the 
fact  that  this  view  is  not  altogether  apostolical,  it 
adds  nothing  to  the  matter  in  (|uestion,  and  removes 
the  f)<)int  of  view  :  the  inference  of  the  future  Jdjw 
from  the  present  nvH^a. 

3.  Therefore  the  genitive  of  apposition. f     The 

•  (Alford,  who  adoplH  rjtitX^  with  the  second  xai  airoi, 
iays  It  is  "inserted  to  involve  himself  and  his  fellow- 
workoD  in  the  peniTal  description  of  the  last  clause." 
-K.l 

t  (Both  1  and  2  take  the  f^enitive  as  partitive,  which  i.s 
nndoiihtcUy  the  common  usape.  In  every  ease  in  the  New 
Testament  where  anapxi^  is  fillowed  by  iv  penitive,  it  hiin 
tills  force;  comp.  xvi.  5  ;  1  Cor.  xv.  20;  xvi.  1.'5 ;  John  i.  l.'<. 
Th'-  name  is  true  of  tho  LXX.  and  clas-sical  authors.  It  is 
difficult  to  wi-rtiln  any  otlier  view  here.  If  we  adopt  tho 
me:iiiinK:  tho  first-fruits  of  a  harvest,  whioli  i'.«  tho  Spirit 
given  to  ub,  and  refer  it  to  the  commcm  pift  of  tlio  Spirit  in 
Qiifl  Ufij,  rather  than  to  tho  gift  of  the  fii<\nt  in  that  par- 


Holy  Spirit  is  hira.self  the  gift  of  the  first-fruits,  if 
the  comjiletion  of  Christian  life  is  regarded  as  the 
harvest  (Bengel,  Winer,  Riickert,  and  others).  The 
Spirit  is  the  earnest,  au()afiv'n;  ot  the  future  perfec- 
tion (2  Cor.  i.  22  ;  v.  5  ;  Gal.  vi.  8).  Eph.  i.  14  , 
iv.  30  ;  and  1  Peter  iv.  14,  to  rtvtvfia  tiji;  <)oi;y,-, 
are  of  special  importance.  Meyer's  only  objection 
to  tills  explanation  is,  that  the  Apostle's  expression 
would  have  been  misunderstood,  since  the  a;ra^//j 
would  have  to  be  understood  as  a  part  of  a  similar 
whole.  But  the  sheaves  offered  as  first-fruits  are 
not  merely  the  first  portions  of  the  first  sheaves 
collectively  ;  they  are  the  precious  tokens  and  sure 
pledges  of  the  full  harvest,  to  which  they  constitute, 
if  we  may  so  speak,  a  harmonious  antithesis.  But 
the  doia  must  be  regarded  sis  commensurate  with 
the  spiritual  life  ;  yet  not  as  a  new  and  higher  out- 
pouring of  the  Spirit,  but  as  the  perfect  epiphany  of 
the  operation  of  the  Sjiirit.  Tlioluck  admits,  at 
least,  that  this  third  exi)laiiation  is  also  admissible 
with  the  second.  On  the  singular  explanations  of 
Fritzsche  and  Schneckenburger,  see  Meyer. 

Even  ■we  ourselves  groan  within  our- 
selves [xot  cii'Toi  IV  eai'Tofi;  rrrfva^o- 
fifv.  We,  although  we  have  the  first-fruits,  are  far 
from  being  comjilete  ;  despite  this,  we  groan  within 
ourselves.  The  inward,  profound  nature  of  the  feel- 
ing is  thus  emphasized. — R.]  Groaning  is  the  ex- 
pression of  the  longing  which  feels  that  it  is  delayed 
in  its  course  toward  its  object ;  expression  of  the 
inclination  contending  immediately  with  its  obsta- 
cles. 

Waiting  for  the  adoption  [vlof>faiav 
aTtfy.<)f/6fifvoi..  Wait  for,  await,  wait  to  the 
end  of  (Alford).  The  adoption  is  already  ours  (vcr 
15)  as  an  internal  relation,  but  the  outward  condition 
does  not  yet  corresfjond  (Meyer).  Alford  para- 
phra.scs  :  aw  itinr/  the  fulness  of  our  adoption. — R.l. 
The  object  of  the  longing  is  the  vlo  OktIcc,  which 
believers  wait  for  in  perfect  patience.  This  is  here 
identified  with  the  redemption  of  our  body.  It  is 
the  perfect  outward  manifestation  of  the  inwiird 
vioOKJia;  it  is  the  soul's  inheritance  of  the  glori- 
fied life  which  is  attained  on  the  perfect  deliverance 
of  the  body  from  the  bondage  of  the  first  state  of 
nature,  and  from  sulyeclion  to  death  and  corrup- 
tion ;  see  2  Cor.  v.  4.  The  Apostle's  addition  of 
"  the  redemption  of  our  body,"  proves  that  he  does 
not  mean  merely  the  entire  t'loOKjIa,  but  this  riV 
Of  a  In  viewed  specifically  as  complete. 

[The  redemption  of  our  body,  r/;v  ano- 
}.vT(iii)(jiv  rov  (T(i'>iiaT(ii;  Ijfit'iy.  Epexegeti- 
cal  clause.]  '/'or  fT(.i/(«ro<,-  is  explained  by  Eras- 
mus, Luther,  and  others  (also  Lutz,  Jiibl.  Dof/m.),  as 
redemption  from  the  body  ;  but  this  is  totally  for- 
eign to  the  connection,  and  also  to  the  matter  itself. 
[Were  this  the  meaning,  there  would  ]irobably  be 
some  quiilifying  term  added,  as  Piiil.  iii.  21  (Meyer). 
— It.]  Tlioluck  explains  the  redemption  of  the  body 
as  applying  to  its  materiality  ;  this  is  also  the  object 

tieular  ape,  all  seems  to  he  pained  that  r>r.  Lnnpe  seeks  in 
view  ;t,  wliile  we  do  not  unnecessarily  depart  from  the  11111.1 
liKjii^tnli,  The  reference  to  the  first  Cliristinns  is  perhnps 
sliL'htly  favored  by  adoptinp  riixtU  at  some  point  in  Die 
te.xt,  althouph  ^foyer  rejei-tB  It,  and  yet  upholds  this 
reference.  In  his  comments  on  ver.  'J6,  Pr.  JLinpe  sjivs 
that  here  tho  new  spiritual  life  i.s  spoken  of,  not  the  Holy 
."Spirit  itself.  Thi.s  suhjectivo  eenso  can  only  im  admitted  if 
the  pnrtiuve  sense  of  the  penilivo  ho  piven  up.  The  term 
"  liody  "  cannot,  in  any  ca^e,  be  reparded  as  antitlietieal ; 
did  "llosh"  occur,  there  mipht  be  some  reiuson  for  taking 
"Sjiirit"  in  this  sense  of  "spiritual  life,"  a  meaning  for 
which  our  author  liiia  an  unustial  fondness.— R.] 


CHAPTER   Vm.    18-39. 


275 


of  the  earnest  expectation  of  the  xriatq.  Perhaps 
this  is  from  Origen  and  Rothe ;  see,  on  tiie  contrary, 
1  Cor.  XV.  ThoUicii's  quotation  from  Augustine  is 
better  (De  doctr.  christ.) :  Qnod  nonvuUi  dicunt, 
malle  se  omnino  esse  sine  corf  ore,  ornnino  faUimttir, 
non  enim  corpses  swim  "ed  co7'ruptiones  et  pondus 
ode  runt ;  Pliil.  iii.  21 ;  1  Cor.  xv.  The  most  unten- 
able view  is  :  deliverance  from  the  morally  injurious 
influence  of  the  body  by  death  (Carpzov,  and  otli- 
ers).  [It  is  so  natural  to  refer  this  phrase  to  the 
glorification  of  the  body  at  the  coming  of  Christ, 
that  it  is  unnecessary  to  state  arguments  in  favor  of 
this  reference  (comp.  Piiil.  iii.  21  ;  2  Cor.  v.  2  fl".  ; 
1  Cor.  XV.  42  if.).  The  redemption  is  not  complete 
until  the  body  is  redeemed.  Any  other  view  is  not 
accordant  with  the  grand  current  of  thought  in  tliis 
chapter.  The  fact  that  even  here,  where  the  long- 
ing of  Christians  is  described,  so  much  stress  should 
be  laid  on  the  redemption  of  the  body,  the  material 
part  of  our  complex  nature,  confirms  the  view  of 
xTtau;,  wliich  takes  it  as  including  material  exist- 
ences. In  fact,  since  "  even  we  ourselves  "  are  rep- 
resented as  waiting  for  an  event,  which  shall  redeem 
that  part  of  our  nature  most  akin  to  the  creation  (in 
the  restricted  sense  of  Meyer,  and  others),  it  would 
appear  that  the  subject  here  is  not  necessarily  in  an- 
tithesis to  "  creation,"  but  rather  a  part  of  it ;  "  sub- 
jected in  hope,"  liiie  the  whole  creation,  but  also  as 
having  the  first-fruits  of  the  Spirit,  "saved  in  hope" 
(ver.  24).— R.] 

Yer.  24.  For  we  ■were  saved.  {  err «')& ri- 
ft f  v.)  Delivered,  and  participating  in  salvation. 
The  dative  rfj  sXTttdi.,  in  hope,  does  not  describe 
the  mean."*,  but  the  mode  of  the  deliverance.  [So 
Bengel,  and  many  others.  Comp.  Winer,  p.  203. 
The  phrase  is  emphatically  placed.  Lather  is  ex- 
cellent :  we  are  indeed  saved,  yet  in  hope. — R.] 
Even  if  we  were  to  admit  that  the  Apostle  under- 
stood fiiith  to  be  the  hope  here  mentioned  (Chrysos- 
tom,  De  Wette,  and  others) — which,  as  Meyer  cor- 
rectly observes,  is  controverted  by  Paul's  definite 
distinction  between  faith  and  hope,* — the  admission 
of  the  dative  of  instrument  would  be  too  strong. 
But  even  if  we  accept  the  dative  as  denoting  modal- 
ity, it  does  not  denote  "  that  to  which  the  tfftiiO.  is 
to  be  regarded  as  confined  "  (Meyer),  but  the  con- 
dition :  in  hope  of.  Therefore  the  ((jn'tOfiufv  must 
be  here  explained  conformably  to  the  conception  of 
the  I'loOfaia  in  ver.  23,  not  as  being  tlie  principial 
attainra.">nt  of  salvation  in  the  Spirit — which  is  already 
complete  there — but  as  being  the  perfect  attainment 
of  salv{;t;on  in  glory.  This  has  become  the  portion 
of  Christians,  but  in  such  a  way  that  their  faith  is 
supplemei'.ted  by  their  hope.  They  have  the  inward 
I'loOtala  in  the  ivitness  of  the  Spirit;  but  the  vlo- 
&«jla  of  i'o'ia  in  the  pledge  of  the  Spirit. 

Now  hope  that  is  seen  is  not  hope  [i).ni(; 
Si  ftkfTTGifiivT]  oi<y.  tiTTiv  eATTtt;].  Tholuck: 
the  second  i/.nli;  is  concrete,  the  object  of  hope. 
[This  u.sag?  is  common  in  emphatic  phrases  in  all 
languages  (Philippi).  Comp.  Col.  i.  5  ;  1  Tim.  i.  1  ; 
Heb.  vi.  18,  where  if.TTiq  is  objective. — R.]     Luther: 

*  [De  "Wotte  urges  the  instnimontal  sense,  on  account 
of  the  definite  aorist;  but  the  fact  of  Kalvafion  is  regarded 
as  placing  us  in  a  condition  of  hope.  The  hojie  differs  from 
Jaith,  but  is  inseparably  connected  wiih  it.  Alford  says 
the  hope  is  ''faith  in  its  pros^pective  altitude."  Philippi : 
"  Inasmuch  as  the  object  of  salvation  is  both  relatively  pres- 
ent and  also  relatively  future,  hope  is  produced  from  faith 
and  inJiseohibly  linked  with  it ;  for  faith  apprehends  the 
object,  in  so  far  as  it  is  present ;  hope,  in  so  far  as  it  is  still 
future."— K.] 


"  The  word  hope  is  used  in  two  ways.  In  one  cas« 
it  means  great  courage,  which  remains  firm  in  all 
temptations  ;  in  the  other,  the  finite  salvation  which 
hope  shall  get ;  here  it  may  mean  both."  Seeing 
means,  here,  the  acquired  presence  of  the  object, 
wliich  can  be  "  grasped  with  the  hands  ;  "  however, 
the  beholding  also  may  momentarily  afford  heavenly 
satisfaction  ;  see  1  Cor.  xiii. ;  2  Cor.  v.  7. 

For  what  a  man  seeth  [S  ya^  p)Ann 
Tit,-].  Thus  the  hope  of  believers  proves  that  they 
are  to  expect  a  state  of  completion,  but  that  they 
must  wait  for  it  perseveringly. 

Why  doth  he  still  hope  for  ?  [  t  t  y.al 
D.ni'Cn;  See  I'extual  JVote  '".  Adopting  xal  aa 
well  established,  it  seems  best  to  take  it  as  =  etiarn 
(Meyer).  Why  does  he  still  hope,  when  there  is  no 
more  ground  for  it  ?  Comp.  Hartung,  Partikellehre, 
i.  p.  137,  on  this  use  of  xaL  Bengel :  cum  visione 
non  est  spe  opus. — R.] 

Ver.  25.  But  if  we  hope  for  that,  &c.  Hope 
is  no  vain  dreaming  ;  it  is  proved  as  religiotis  confi- 
dence in  the  ethical  labor  of  patience.  The  vno- 
novf]  denotes  perseverance  amid  obstacles;  there- 
fore always,  also  passiveness,  or  patience  and  stead- 
fastness. But  the  connection  here  authorizes  the 
predominance  of  the  former  idea.  And  though 
complete  salvation  comes  from  the  future  and  from 
above,  patience  in  this  life  must  cooperate  with  ita 
future — therefore  :  to  persevere.*  Grotius  :  Spe* 
isia  non  infi~uctuosa  est  in  nobis,  sed  egref/iam  virtu- 
tern  operatur,  malorwn  fortem  tolerantiam. 

Ver.  26.  Likewise  the  Spirit  also  [waav- 
Twc;  m  xal  TO  nvfvfia.  LiJccivise  (oxjav- 
r'loi;)  introduces,  as  contemporaneous  with  the 
"  waiting "  (ver.  23),  the  divine  assistance  of  the 
Holy  Sp^irit  (Tholuck).— R.]  De  Wette  and  Meyer 
explain  :  The  Holy  Spirit.  The  latter  commentator 
appeals  to  vers.  16,  23.  But,  in  ver.  23,  the  new 
spiritual  life  is  spoken  of,f  which  certainly  consists 
in  the  fellowship  of  the  human  spirit  with  the  Holy 
Spirit,  but  is,  nevertheless,  not  the  Holy  Spirit  itself. 
To  say  of  the  Holy  Spirit  in  himself  that  He  groans 
— indeed,  that  He  gives  vent  to  groaiiings  which  are 
unutterable  by  Him  —  is  altogether  inadmissible. 
Neither  can  we,  with  Nosselt,  substitute  the  gospel ; 
nor,  with  Morus,  the  Christian  disposition ;  nor, 
with  Kollner,  the  Christian  element  of  life.  Ac- 
cording to  the  opposition  of  nvfr/ia  and  voTq  in 
1  Cor.  xiv.  14,  it  is  the  new  basis  of  life,  which  con- 
stitutes to  the  conscious  daily  life  an  opposition  of 
the  life  which,  though  apparently  unconscious,  is 
really  the  higher  consciousness  itself,  the  heavenly 
sense  of  the  awakened  soul.  As,  in  the  unconvert- 
ed state,  the  influences  of  the  unconscious  basis  of 
the  soul  invade  the  conscious  daily  life  with  demo- 
niacal temptation,  so,  vice  versd,  does  the  uncon- 
scious spiritual  life  of  the  converted  man  come  as  a 
guardian  spirit  to  the  help  of  the  daily  life.  There- 
fore the  groaning  of  the  spirit  itself  (see  ver.  15) 
corresponds  with  the  groaning  of  the  consciousness 

*  [On  viro|uoKij,  6ee  p.  162;  also  Col.  i.  11;  Lange's 
Com  Hi.,  p.  19.  Constoncy  seems  to  be  always  prominent  in 
the  word.  The  preposition  fiia  with  the  penitive  denotes 
that  throuprh  which,  as  a  medium,  our  waiting  takes  place 
(Alford).  It  is  more  than  an  accompaniment — it  is  the 
state  which  characterizes  the  waiting  ttirovighout.  On  the 
connection  of  hope  and  patience,  comp.  1  These,  i.  3 ;  Heb. 
s.  36.  -R.] 

t  [Ag:iinst  this,  see  notes  in  loco,  where  Dr.  Lange  him- 
self does  not  defend  this  view.  It  is  opposed  to  the  most 
natural  tn-ammatical  construction  of  that  passage,  and  ob- 
jectionable on  other  grounds.  Comp.  the  additional  notea 
on  vars.  16,  23,  and  the  excursus,  chap,  vii.— K.] 


270 


THE   EPISTLE    OF   PAUL   TO   THE   ROMANS. 


in  its  natural  feeling.  [This  position  of  Dr.  Lange 
is  not  in  accordance  with  the  view  of  the  best  mod- 
ern oonnnentators.  Thoiuck,  De  ^Vette,  Ewald, 
Stuart,  Hodge,  riiili[)pi,  Meyer,  Alford,  Wordsworth, 
Jowett,  a.s  well  as  tiie  older  eoiunientators  in  gen- 
eral, all  refer  it  to  the  oiycetive,  Holv  Spirit.  Ols- 
hau.ien,  however,  adopts  the  subjective  .sense.  The 
proof  must  be  very  strong  which  will  warrant  us  in 
referring  it  to  any  thing  other  than  the  Holy  Spirit 
itself;  for  the  Apostle  uses  to  nr>r/ia,  as  he  has 
done  in  vci-s.  23,  lf>,  &c.,  where  the  Holy  Spirit  is 
meant.  The  only  reason  in-ged  against  such  a  mean- 
ing here  is,  that  the  "  groaning,"  &c.,  cannot  be 
predicated  of  Him.  But  wo  have  no  right  to  de- 
part from  the  obvious  meaning,  because,  in  the  next 
clause,  that  is  predicated  which,  we  fancy,  cannot  be 
predicated  of  the  Holy  Spirit.  The  predicate  in 
this  clause  cannot,  with  strict  propriety,  i)e  referred 
to  any  spirit  save  the  Holy  Spirit.  That  Dr.  Lange's 
view  weakens  the  tlmuglit,  i.-  also  evident. — R.] 

Helpeth  our  wreakne8,s  [^a rvavri,/.a/( ^d- 
vtTcii,  T  fj  ua  0  trt  ia  i^  /<  w  v .  See  Textual  Note 
*'.  On  tKe  verb,  comp.  Luke  x.  40,  where  Martha 
asks  that  Mary  be  bidden  to  help  her — i.  e.,  take  bold 
of  in  connection  vith.  It  requires  a  weakening  of 
its  force  to  make  this  applicable  to  the  new  spiritual 
life.  The  subjective  side  has  been  brought  out  in 
vers.  23-25.  Hence  a  reference  to  the  Holy  Spirit 
accords  with  the  progress  of  thought. — R.]  Meyer 
urges,  with  Beza,  the  trrv  in  (TivarTi}.. :  ad  ties  laho- 
ratites  re/ertur.  At  all  events,  it  would  refer  to  only 
the  conscious  side  of  our  etfort.  But  it  is  clear, 
from  the  further  dcrinition,  that  a.aOivfi,a,  is  the 
only  correct  rcailing.  Thoiuck  understands  this 
aahivfia  as  referring  to  occasions  of  invading  faint- 
ness.  But  the  Apostle  speaks  of  a  permanent  rela- 
tion of  our  weakness  in  this  life,  which  certaiidy  be- 
comes more  prominent  in  special  temptations.  This 
is  the  incongruity  between  the  new  principle  and 
the  old  psychical  and  carnal  life. 

[The  singular  must  be  accepted  as  the  true  read- 
ing. It  then  refers  to  a  state  of  weakness,  already 
described  (ver.  23).  The  ilative,  as  in  Luke  x.  4<i, 
denotes  not  the  burden  which  the  S[)irit  helps  us 
bear  (so  Hodge,  and  many  others),  but  that  which 
it  helps.  (Alford  :  "  helps  owe  weakness — us  who 
are  weak,  to  bear  the  burden  of  ver.  23."  Meyer : 
"  JEr  le</l  viit  Hand  an  mil  unserer  Sch'i'achheit.") 
It  should  not  be  limited  to  weakness  in  prayer  (Ben- 
gel),  but  is  the  general  weakness  in  our  waiting  for 
final  redemption. — H.] 

For  we  knowr  not  what  we  should  pray 
for  as  we  ought  [to  ya(j  ri  tt  (j  o  i;  n' i  i!) /i  t  &  a 
x«i9-o  r)fi  orx  oi<)a/ifv.  To  belongs  to  the 
whole  cliiuse.  rdo  introduces  an  illustration  of 
our  weakness,  and  how  it  is  helped.  The  aorist 
nQoiiU'iiiifttfya,  which  we  accept  as  the  correct 
reading,  is  more  usual  than  the  future,  liut  either  is 
grammatically  admissible.  See  Winer,  p.  280. — 
R.]  Tlioluck  holds  that  this  tiol  knowhig  refers  to 
special  states  of  obscure  faith,  and  has  a  twofold 
meaning :  ignorance  of  the  <)bject  toward  which 
prayer  should  be  directed,  and  the  language  in  which 
we  should  pray.  But  the  supposition  of  special 
states  is  incorrect ;  otherwise  the  expression  would 
be :  we  often  do  not  know.  But  the  language  can 
by  no  means  be  uniler  consideration,  neither  can  a 
mere  ignorance  of  the  object  be  meant.  Therefore 
De  Wette  and  Meyer  explain  thus  :  we  do  not  know 
what,  under  exixtinf/  circntiistanccs,  it  is  necessary 
to  pray  for.     We  refer  the  aaOo  dtl  as  well  to  the 


heavenly  clearness  of  the  object  of  redemption  aa 
to  the  subjective  purity,  detinitencss,  and  energy  of 
desire  corresponding  to  it.*  The  conscious,  verbal 
prayer  is  related  to  the  spirit  of  prayer,  as  the  falli- 
ble dictate  of  conscience  is  to  the  infallible  con- 
science. 

But  the  Spirit  itself  intercedeth  [c't/i' 
wi'To  TO  nvtrna  {■  nm  t  vr  ty/  dv  tt, .  On  th* 
omission  of  vjiiit  ijiiiJiv  (AV/,.),  which  Meyer  finds  in 
the  verb  itself,  see  Textual  Note  ".  The  verb  oc- 
curs only  here.  The  simple  verb  means,  to  meet ; 
then,  compounded  with  ir,  to  approach  in  order  to 
make  supplication  (Acts  xxv.  24,  hrvy/dvuv);  the 
vnm  seems  to  show  that  the  supplication  is  in  favor 
of  the  persons  in  question.  Dr.  Lange  rejects  this, 
m  order  to  avoid  a  reference  to  the  Holy  Spirit. — 
Alto  TO  7TvtT'/ia  brings  into  prominence  the 
Intercessor,  who  knows  our  wants  (Thoiuck,  Alford). 
— R.]  Since  the  vTTi^fvr  vy/dvf  i.  must  be  read 
without  the  addition  of  the  liecejtta,  we  refer  the 
vnti)  to  our  want  in  not  knowing  what  to  pray  for, 
as  it  is  proper  for  us,  and  in  harmony  with  our  des- 
tiny. Thoiuck  regards  the  vnn)  as  merely  a  higher 
degree,  as  in  vnf(j7if^i<T(Tn'inv  ;  Meyer  [so  Philippi] 
sees  here  a  vntfj  tj/toiv,  according  to  the  analogy  of 
vntounoKfjivouai,,  &c. 

With  groanings  which  cannot  be  uttered 
[rTTf  raj'.d  ofs  «/.«/.;)  Ton;].  Analogous  to  1  Cor. 
xiv.  14  ;  against  which  Thoiuck  remarks,  that  there 
the  subject  in  question  is  the  human  nvuua.  Meyer 
even  declares  that  those  explanations  are  rationalis- 
tic which  do  not  interpret  the  m'tT/ia  to  be  the 
Holy  Spirit  (Reiche  :  the  Christian  sense  ;  Kdllner : 
the  Spirit  obtained  in  Christ).  Chrysostom's  calling 
it  the  /d(ji.aitn  n'/^c,  and  Theodoret's  not  under- 
standing by  the  expression  the  Inoaraau^  of  the 
Spirit,  are  declared  to  be  an  arbitrary  alteration. 
Meyer  does  not  acceile  to  the  opinion  of  Augustine, 
atui  most  connnentators,  that  the  sense  is,  that  man 
himself,  stirred  up  by  the  Holy  Ghost,  utters  groan- 
ings. It  is  rather  the  Holy  Spirit  himself;  but  cer- 
tainly He  needs  the  human  organ  for  His  groanings. 
He  claims  that  the  analogy,  "  that  demons  s])eak  and 
cry  out  of  men,"  is  adai)ted  to  this  view.  The  anal- 
ogy of  demoniacal  possession  !  Besides,  Meyer,  in 
his  exposition  of  the  d/.a/.//roK,-,  prefers  the  inter- 
pretation of  most  expositors,  nuulferaljle,  to  the  op- 
posite rendering,  wnitt'red,  (lu)nb  (Grotius,  Fritzsche, 
and  others),  because  it  denotes  greater  inten.sity. 
But  we  get  from  this  the  result,  that  the  Holy  Spirit, 
the  Spirit  of  God  in  His  glory,  not  only  groans,  but 
also  cannot  utter  His  groans. 

[Notwithstanding  this  attempt  at  a  reductio  ad 
ahsurdnm,  the  view  must  still  1)0  held,  that  the  Holy 
Spirit  is  here  represented  as  interceding.  To  avoid 
this  conclusion.  Dr.  Lange  nmst  first  weaken  the 
subject  into  the  human  spirit,  and  then  the  force  of 
I'TTH)  in  the  verb.  It  is  far  better  to  accept  the  ob- 
vious sense,  and  then  explain  it  in  a  way  which 
escapes  the  extreme  conclusions  of  Meyer.  The 
Holy  Spirit  is  here  spoken  of  as  dwelling  in  us  ;  in 
this  indwelling  He  makes  th«  intercession.  This 
view  presents  no  absurdity ;  it  rather  accepts  the 


•  (Pr.  IIo^Irp  refers  to  the  fact  th.nt  heathen  philoso- 
phers uifteil  this  as  a  ivn."on  whjr  men  ou(;ht  not  to  pray. 
Tlie  Ajiiistlc  intiiniite.s  that  whol  is  true  of  men  in  (fenonil, 
is  true  still  of  I'lirijtiunn  (olja^cf),  because  their  knowl- 
ed^'e  in  ns  vet  in  no  re-'pcct  such  as  to  make  their  prayer 
(KaOb  Sti)  as  it  ought  to  bo.  llencc  the  refercice  1h  to 
a  ciiutinuing  stutc,  ruthor  than  to  times  of  Rpccial  woak* 
ncss.— K.J 


CHAPTER   VIII.    18-39, 


271 


prominent  thought  of  the  previous  part  of  the  chap- 
ter (vers  9,  11,  14,  16),  and  implies  not  only  that, 
by  this  indwelling,  we  are  taught  to  pray  what  would 
otherwise  be  unutterable  (Calvin,  Beza),  but  that  the 
Holy  Ghost  "  himself  pleads  in  our  prayers,  raising 
us  to  higher  and  holier  desires  than  we  can  express 
in  words,  which  can  only  find  utterance  in  sighin";s 
and  aspirations "  (Alford).  So  Hodge,  Stuart,  De 
Wctte,  and  most  commentators. — R.] 

On  the  threelold  view  of  «/.a/AyTo«;  (not  utter- 
able,  not  spoken,  not  speaking),  see  Tholuck.* 

Ver.  27.  But  he  ■who  searcheth  the  hearts 
[6  di  iQf}iV(7)v  T«c  xa^r)  ('«<;.  Ji  is  slightly 
adversative :  These  groanings  are  unutterable,  but 
He,  &c.  The  e^fvv<7)v  describes  God  according 
to  the  Old  Testament  phraseology  (1  Sam.  xvi,  7  ; 
Ps.  vii.  10;  Prov.  xv.  11),  as  omniscient, — R.]  In 
1  Cor.  ii.  10  it  is  said  of  the  Holy  Spirit  that  He 
searcheth  all  things ;  here,  according  to  the  just 
cited  reference  of  the  groaning  Spirit  to  the  Holy 
Spirit,  this  very  Holy  Spirit  would  be  an  ol)ject  of 
the  searching  God.  [This  objection  is  of  little 
weight,  since  the  object  of  the  all-searching  God  is 
the  mind  of  the  Spirit,  hidden  (even  to  us)  in  the 
unutterable  sighings,  «&e. — R.] 

The  mind  of  the  Spirit.  His  qiQovrjfia; 
see  chap.  viii.  6.  His  purely  divine  and  ideal  striv- 
ing, but  here  as  clear  thought,  denoting  the  excogi- 
tated sense  of  that  language  of  groans.  [If  the 
reference  to  the  Holy  Spirit  be  accepted,  then  the 
sense  not  even  excogitateif  by  us  is  included. — R.] 

Because  he  pleadeth  for  the  saints  [ort 
.  .  .  i V r I' y / u V I u  vne^  dyloiv.  How  can  the 
human  spirit,  even  when  possessed  by  the  Holy 
Spirit,  be  said  to  plead  for  the  saints '? — R.]  The 
explanation  of  on  by  for  [because],  according  to 
most  expositors  (De  Wette,  Philippi,  kc),  is  opposed 
by  Meyer  (in  accordance  with  Grotius,  Fritzsche, 
Tholuck,  and  others),  who  urges  instead  of  it,  that. 
A  very  idle  thought :  God  knows  the  mind  of  the 
Holy  Spirit,  that  He  intercedes  for  the  saints  in  a 
way  well-pleasing  to  God.  The  oWf  is  perfectly 
plain  in  itself,  even  if  not  taken  in  the  pregnant 
sense  (with  Calvin  and  Ruckert).f  He  knows  well 
that  He,  as  the  searcher  of  hearts  (Ps.  cxxxix.  1) 
and  as  hearer,  is  conscious  of  the  thought  and  pure 
pui'pose  of  these  holy  ,  groans.  Wherefore  ?  Be- 
cause it  is  tueU-pleasi'/iff  to  God. 

[According  to  the  w^ill  of  God  (xa-i  a 
&f6v)  is  the  correct  paraphrase  of  the  E.  V. — R.] 
Not,  according  to  Deity  (Origen) ;  nor  before  God, 
nor  with  God  (Reiche,  Fritzsche) ;  nor  bi/  God,  by 
virtue  of  God  (Tholuck. — How  can  we  hold  that  the 
Holy  Ghost  should  intercede  because  of  God's  im- 
pulse ?),  but  according  to  God,  in  harmony  with  the 
Divine  will  (Meyer).|     The  Divine  impulse  is,  in- 


*  [The  meaning  unulteroble,  whicli  cannot  be  expressed 
in  word~,  is  favored  by  the  analoorv  of  verbals  i:i  -to?,  and 
is  idi'ptpd  by  Luther,  Calvin,  Beza,  Meyer,  Thohick,  De 
Wette,  Hodsre,  Stuart,  Alford,  and  many" others.  Pliilippi 
admits  this  sense,  but  includes  with  it  that  of  unspokeii, 
which  are  not  expressed  in  words.  Comp.  2  Cor.  xii.  4 ; 
1  Peter  i.  8.— R.] 

t  [It  is  held  by  many  commentators  (among  them  Stu- 
art, Hod?e,  Meyer),  that  if  ort  be  taken  as  causal,  olSe 
must  be  rendered  apprnves ;  i.  e..  He  approves  what  is  the 
mind  of  the  Spirit,  beatuse,  &c.  Dr.  Lange's  estimate  of 
Meyer's  interpretation  is  very  jnst,  .<ind  he  seems  to  be 
equally  correct  in  denying  the  necessity  for  the  pregnant 
Ben-e  of  oiSe.  Comp.  A.l;'ord  in  loco.  The  E.  V.  is  exceed- 
ingly happy  in  its  rendering  of  this  verse. — R.] 

+"  [Alford:  "All  these  pleadings  of  the  Spirit  are  heard 
and  answered,  eve  i  when  inarticulately  uttered.  We  may 
sxtcnd  the  same  comforting  assurance  to  the  iiupcr/tcl  and 


deed,  indirectly  implied  here ;  but  then  it  followa 
again,  that  the  groaning  Spirit  cannot  be  identical 
with  the  Holy  Si^irit.  [Not  with  the  Holy  Spirit  aa 
without  us,  but  as  within  us. — R.] 


Secokd  Paragraph,  vehs.  2&-37. 

Yer.  28.  And  we  know^  [o  ifyau  f  v  <H. 
Meyer,  Philippi,  and  others,  take  di  as  introducing 
a  general  ground  after  the  more  special  ones  in  vers. 
26,  27.  Alford  finds  it  sliglitly  adversative,  the  an- 
tithesis being  found  in  ver.  22.  The  former  is  prefer- 
able. (Jidufifv,  Christian  c(msciousness. — R.] 
The  subjective  assurance  of  the  future  consumma- 
tion reaches  its  climax  in  the  fact  that  believers  are 
lovers,  of  God.  But  in  this  form  it  indicates  the 
objective  certainty,  which  is  its  lowest  foundation. 
However,  instead  of  the  most  direct  inference,  that 
those  who  love  God  are  previously  beloved  by  Him, 
and  are  established  on  God's  love  (an  inference  con- 
trolling this  whole  section  ;  see  vers.  29,  31,  32,  35, 
39),  the  Apostle  applies  this  inference  to  the  condi- 
tion of  Christians  in  this  world.  The  whole  world 
seems  to  contradict  their  hope  of  future  glory.  All 
things  visible,  especially  the  hatred  of  the  hostile 
world,  seem  to  oppose  and  gainsay  their  f;iith.  And 
yet  this  fearful  appearance  can  have  no  force,  since 
all  thir.gs  are  subject  to  the  omnipotent  and  wise  ad- 
ministration of  God,  on  whose  loving  counsel  their 
confidence  is  established.  Still  more,  if  all  things 
are  subject  to  God's  supreme  authority,  and  this  au- 
thority IS  exhibited  in  the  development  of  His  lov- 
ing counsel,  they  know,  with  the  full  certainty  of 
faith,  that  all  things  work  together  for  their  good. 
This  follows,  first,  from  the  decree,  plan,  and  order 
of  salvation  (vers.  28-30).  It  follows,  second,  from 
God's  arrangement,  ad,  and  lacts  of  salvation  (vers. 
31-34).  It  follows,  third,  from  the  experience  proved 
in  the  Old  Testament,  that  the  Lord's  companions  in 
salvation  and  the  covenant  are  His  companions  in 
suffering,  as  His  companions  in  conflict ;  but  as  His 
companions  in  suffering,  they  are  also  His  compan- 
ions in  victory,  for  whose  glorification  all  surmount- 
ed obstacles  are  transformed  into  means  of  advance- 
ment (vers.  35-37).  The  conclusion  (vers.  38,  39) 
expresses  so  strongly  the  subjective,  and  also  the 
objective  certainty  of  the  future  completion,  that  we 
believe  it  necessary  to  make  it  prominent  as  a  spe- 
cial paragraph. 

That  all  things,  Travra;  not  merely  all 
events  (Meyer),  or  all  aflSictions  (Tholuck)  [Calvin, 
Hodge,  Stuart]  ;  for,  besides  events  (ver.  35),  all  the 
powers  of  the  world  are  mentioned  (vers.  38,  39). — 
Work  together,  o- erf  (» /f  i.*  The  beautiful  and 
correct  term,  serve  for  the  good  of,  must  neverthe- 
less follow  the  more  specific  definition.  For  the 
principal  factor  of  the  completion  of  Christians  is 
the  central  one  :  Christ  over  them  and  in  them,  the 
love  of  Christ  or  the  Spirit  of  glory,  the  free  and 
dominant  impulse  of  their  new  life.  With  this  first 
and  central  factor  there  now  cooperates  the  second 


mistciken  verbal  utterances  of  our  prayers,  which  are  not 
themselves  answered  to  our  hurt,  but  the  answer  is  given 
to  the  voice  of  the  Spirit,  which  speaks  through  them, 
which  we  would  express,  but  cminn'V — E.] 

*  [See  Tix:it'tl  Xole.  '<.  Tholuck  would  refer  the  iriv  to 
the  loving  God,  but  the  s'tnplest  sense  is  that  of  coi-perat- 
ing  (Bengel,  Alford,  and  others).  Meyi-r,  however,  finds  in 
it  the  iciea  of  the  fellowship,  in  which  He  who  support* 
neci'sguily  stands  to  liim  who  is  supported.  So  Pnilippi 
and  others,  all  taking  (Twcpyei  as  =  ;8o7)9ei.—  K.] 


278 


THE   EPISTLE   OF   PAUL   TO   THE   ROMANS. 


and  periphcrical  one — that  course  of  all  tilings  and 
all  destinies  about  tliem  which  is  placed  under  God's 
authority  and  Christ's  power,  and  constitutes  their 
guidance  to  glorification. 

For  good,  f  1 1,-  d'/a&^ov.  Strictly,  for  good. 
The  article  is  wanting,  for  the  Apostle  has  in  mind 
the  aiititliesis  :  not  for  evil,  injurious,  and  destiuc- 
tive  working;  and  because  every  thing  shall  be  use- 
ful to  them,  and  promotive,  in  a  special  way,  of  their 
good.  For  the  good  is,  (he  frrontotiou  of  life. 
Every  good  thing  of  this  kind  relates,  indeed,  to  the 
realization  of  their  eternal  salvation,  but  it  is  not 
directly  this  itself  (Reichc).  [Beugel :  In  bonum 
ad  f/lorlficidioitein  usijiir. — R.] 

Those  'who  love  God  [rots  ayanitxrtv 
TO)'  0^  t  dv .  Allord  :  "  A  stronger  designation 
than  any  vet  used  for  believers."  Comp.  1  Cor  ii. 
9;  Eph.  vi.  24;  James  i.  12.— R.]  Tlie  Apostle 
defines  this  expression  more  specifically  with  refer- 
ence to  its  purpo.se,  by  tlie  addition  : 

To  those  who  are  the  called  according  to 
his  purpose  [toT,-  xara  n  {i  u  1)^  kj  i.  v  x/.IjToIi; 
orfftv].  Yet  the  addition  is  not  designed  to  fur- 
nish a  definition  for  the  explanation  of  the  name, 
th'j-se  who  love  God  (Meyer);  nor  did  the  Apostle 
wish  thereby  to  qualify  tlie  preceding  clause  (Riick- 
crt),  but  to  represent  more  clearly  the  foundation 
of  the  life  of  those  who  love  God,  &c.  (Tholuck, 
Fritzsche,  Philippi,  and  others).  The  intention  or 
purpose  of  God  is  the  rock  of  their  salvation,  and 
the  same  purpose  directs  all  things.  The  love  of 
believers  for  God  is  therefore  not  the  gi-ound  of  their 
confidence,  but  the  sign  and  security  that  they  were 
fii-st  loved  by  God.  But  the  Apostle  uses  for  this 
another  expression,  which  indicates  as  well  the  evi- 
dence as  the  firmness  of  the  love  which  has  gone 
out  for  them.  The  evidence  of  their  salvation  lies 
in  the  fact  that  they  are  called  by  God  to  salvation 
(in  the  operative  xj.Tj<th;  with  wiiich  the  gospel  has 
pervaded  their  hearts).  This  evidence  rclers  to  the 
firmness  of  their  salvation  in  the  purpose  of  God ; 
the  genuine  xlTjUn;  of  true  Christians  depends  upon 
the  n(j60-KTn;,  and  testifies  of  it.  See  Doctr. 
NoUh* 


*  ^Tholuck  :  "  They  are  not  called  merely  according  to 
a  Divine  decree  {nud  ),  but  acoorilinp:  to  <>n<'  wlm-c  slaaes 
are  set  forth  up  to  the  final  i<oiil  of  the  iSo^aae."  Meyer  : 
"The  jrpo9<(n«  is  the  free  decree,  fonrn-d  by  tiod  in  oter- 
nitv,  of  siivin^;  the  l»elicv<T.-<  through  Christ  (chap.  ix.  11; 
Eph  i.  11  ;  iii.  11;  2  Tim.  i.  9,  a'.).  Aecordinc  to  this,  the 
cm/'  of  Ood  to  the  Mcs;iianic  i«ilviition  tbrouifh  the  prearh- 
iiiB  of  the  i^uspel  (chap.  x.  14  ;  2  Thefs.  ii.  U)  is  proniulRa- 
t«d  to  thofto  who  are  includud  m  that  decree.  When, 
therefore,  Paul  calls  the  ChrL-.tians  <cA>jToi,  it  is  self->'\-i- 
dont  that  the  call,  in  their  ca.se,  meets  with  success  (1  Cor. 
U  24).  a  id  hi'ncc  has  been  united  with  the  converlini;  eflVct 
of  IJivino  priico ;  although  this  is  not  found  in  the  wrvl 
iUelf,  which  In  that  case  woubl  be  equivalent  lo  iK\ncroi. 
.  .  .  Weiss  (.hihrhUch-r  fur  D.  TlfoViyie,  1S,57,  p.  79)  aptly 
Bays:  'Kloction  and  calling  are  Inseparable  correlative 
ideas;  where  one  takes  place,  the  other  does  also;  only  the 
former,  as  a  pre-temporal,  intemal'iv  Divine  act,  cannot  bo 
perceived,  but  the  latter,  as  a  historical  fact,  is  mnilo  manl- 
iest.' "  The  remarks  of  Alford  i»i  Inni  may  well  be  an- 
l)oiided  at  this  point  in  the  exesosis  of  the  Epi-tio  :  "It 
may  hufBcc  to  say,  that,  on  the  one  hand.  Scripture  bears 
Oonstant.  testimony  to  the  fai.-t  that  all  believers  arc  chosen 
and  called  by  (lixl— their  whole  spiritual  life  in  its  oriirin, 
progress,  and  eoinpletlon,  beinc //•'//«  Him;  while,  on  the 
other  hand,  its  test  mony  is  no  less  pr<'cLse  that  lie  wilieth 
all  to  bo  saved,  and  that  none  shall  perish  except  by  wilful 
rejection  of  the  truth.  So  that,  on  the  o  e  side",  Ood's 
Bovr.ttP.ioNTY,  and,  on  thf  other,  mak'b  pbbk  wii.i,,  is  plain- 
ly declared  to  im.  Tn  rrcive,  b'liivr,  anil  acl  on  Imth  t/if<e, 
is  our  ilu  >/  ■ind  onr  wixilnm.  They  bidonif,  as  truths,  no  less 
to  nituxil  than  to  revoalc<l  reliirion;  and  every  one  who 
believes  in  u  Ood,  must  uoknowledKe  Imth.  liut  ull  at- 
tempts to  bridijr  uee.r  tif  ijulf  hilio,<  it  Ihr  luxi  are  J'ulilr,  in 


Versw  29,  30.  In  the  following  grand  and  glori- 
0U9  exposition,  the  Apostle  represents  God's  purpose 
as  being  unfolded  and  realized  in  its  single  elements. 
It  is  developed  as  the  ai-te-mundane  and  eternal 
foundation  of  the  historical  order  of  .salvation  in  the 
two  parts,  foreknowing  and  predestinating,  with  ref- 
erence to  tiie  eternal  limit,  the  <ilory.  It  is  then 
historically  realized  in  the  saving  acts  of  the  calling 
and  tlie  justifying.  It  is  finally  completed  in  the 
glorifying  of  believers.  The  foreknowing  proceeds, 
in  truth,  from  eternity  to  eternity ;  the  predestinat- 
ing passes  from  eternity  over  into  time  ;  and  finally, 
the  glorifying  pas.^es  from  time  over  into  post-tem- 
poral eternity,  while  in  the  calling  and  justifying  the 
two  eternities  are  linked  together,  and  reveal  eter- 
nity in  time. 

For  w^hom  he  foreknewr,  he  also  predesti« 
nated  [oti  ois'  THioiyvio,  y.ai  n {; o dt (> i a t v'\. 
The  twice-repeated  ;r(JO  comes  under  tlie  treatment 
before  the  examination  of  the  single  elements.  Tho- 
luck :  "  According  to  a  later  view  of  Meyer,  the 
Tt^o  expresses  only  precedence  before  the  call ;  but 
it  is  against  the  analogy  of  nooyirom/.M  in  chap.  xi. 
2  ;  1  Peter  i.  20  ;  and  of  ni>oo(ji'^ii)  in  1  Cor.  ii.  7 ; 
Eph.  i.  5,  11."  It  is  certainly  clear  that  the  Apostle 
will  here  establish  the  eternal  end,  the  <)o;«,  upoD 
an  eternal  beginning  («(V'f)- 

First  elnnent :  Whom  he  foreknew.  Tho- 
luck says,  that  "  n^iuytriofTxnv  h.is  been  explained 
in  four  different  ways,  and  in  such  a  manner  that 
each  of  the  accepted  meanings  has  its  prcdestinarian 
as  well  as  its  anti-predestinarian  advocates."  These 
four  definitions  are :  1.  To  /enow  beforehand ;  2. 
To  acknowledge  beforehand,  ap/irobare  ;  3.  To  te- 
lect,  or  choose  b(forehand ;  4.  To  determine  before- 
hand, decernere,  prcedestinare. 

The  knowing  beforeh  ind  was  understood  by  the 
Greek  and  Armiiiian  expositors  in  an  anti-prodesti- 
narian  sense  as  the  foresight  of  faith  ;  and  by  the 
Lutheran  exegetical  writers  as  the  foresight  of  per- 
severance in  the  bestowed  faith.  Meyer:  Fore- 
knowledge of  those  destined  for  salvation.  X  know- 
ing of  the  predestinated  beforcliand,  as,  according 
to  Tholuck,  wa.s  accepted  by  Augustine  in  later  life, 
and  by  Zwingli,  is  very  tautological.*  But  this  view 
passes  over,  in  reality,  into  a  second  :  approbarif ; 
and  we  then  have  Tholuck's  arrangement,  by  wliiih 
ci,f:ht  antitheses — four  predestinarian  and  four  anti- 
predestinarian — must  be  limited,  yet  not  carried  out. 
The  approbavit  i?,  indeed,  defendeil  in  both  an  Au- 
gustinian  and  an  Armiiiian  .sense.  But,  in  the  for. 
mer,  it  coincides  with  the  third  view,  fhr/it  (Calvin, 
and  others).  But  if  the  deccrmrc  is  al.<o  understood 
in  a  predestinarian  sense,  to  determine  concerning  a 
person,  it  is  only  a  stronger  expri'S.-iion  for  the  clcijil 
in  the  predestinarian  sense.  With  respect  to  further 
treatment  of  this  jioiiit,  we  must  refer  to  the  well- 
known  commentaries. 

If  we  turn  away  from  the  verbal  explanation, 
there  are  really  but  two  eonstructions  of  tliis  pas- 
sage, the  preilestiiiaiiaii  and  the  anti-predestiiiiirian  ; 
in  addition  to  these,  there  comes  at  most  only  tJia 

♦he  present  imperfect  rondition  of  man.'*  .See  clinp.  ix. 
thrDUifbout.  He  who  would  understand  t'lO  Epi-tle  to  the 
Komans,  mU''t  a.<;i)ine  this  position,  and  ri'm'-mber  iliat  the 
difficulty  bilonirs  to  'I'hi'ism,  not  to  Christianity  alone, 
much  less  l<i  the  Cnlvlnistio  ccmeeptiim  of  it. — It.) 

•  [.Towett  thus  avoids  the  InutoluRy  :  "  FnrHifw,  as  the 
internal  purpose  of  (tod — if  such  a  fllturo  of  spei-ch  raiy  be 
allowed ;  and  pmlrsiinrd,  ns  the  solemn  external  a<'t  by 
which  lie,  a»  it  were,  set  apart  Ilis  chosen  ones."  See  th* 
view  of  Dr.  Hodge,  beluw.— K.J 


CHAPTER  VIII.    18-39, 


279 


germ,  or  intimation  of  the  possibility,  of  a  third. 
Tlie  predestinarian  explanation  of  the  word  nijoyi,- 
v(o(Ty.nv  by  "  to  acknowledge,"  approbare  (Beza,  and 
others),  or  by  deccrna-e,  "  to  determine  "  (Luther  : 
"  ordained,"  not  foreseen),  is  linguistically  untena- 
ble ;  but  it  is  linguistically  tenable  when  explained 
by  'o  elect  beforehand,  to  choose  (Calvin,  Riickert,  De 
Wette) ;  *  and  now  means  predestination  as  a  doc- 
trinal truth,  now  as  a  temporary  Pauline  view,  and 
now,  in  the  most  universal  sense  possible,  the  gen- 
eral election  for  salvation  (De  Wette,  and  others). 

The  anti-^Dredestinarian  interpretation  of  the  ex- 
pression is  also  varied  :  the  seeing  or  knowing  before- 
hand of  those  who  are  worthy  through  faith,  of  those 
endowed  with  faith,  &c. ;  and  again,  in  the  sense  of 
loving  or  approhans  beforehand  (Grotius,  and  oth- 
ers). 

As  far  as  a  third  exposition  is  concerned,  the  ob- 
servation has  been  made  that  God's  foreknowledge 
is  a  loving  knowledge  (see  Tholuck,  p.  449),  or  a 
creative  knowledge,  a  being  placed  in  the  idea  of 
Christ  (Neander,  Apost.  Zeiialter,  p.  822).-|-  Yet 
Neander's  explanation  does  not  go  to  the  bottom  of 
the  matter.  It  is  this :  "  Those  whom  God,  in  His 
eternal  view,  has  known  as  belonging  to  Him, 
through  Christ,  have  been  predestinated  thereto  l>y 
Him."  We  are,  indeed,  in  want  of  a  term  which 
definitely  expresses  the  truth  that  the  loving  or  fix- 
ing knowledge  is  an  absolutely  original  one,  which 
determines  the  idea  of  the  one  to  be  perceived,  but 
does  not  predetermine  \i.\  Meyer's  reminder,  that 
7T(_ioyi,vo')a/.fiv,  in  the  classical  sense,  never  means 
any  thing  but  foreknowledge,  has  no  weight  here, 
■where  we  have  to  do  with  an  a.T«S  J.fy6/.iivov  in 


*  [So  Jowett,  Stuart  (substantinlly),  and  Calvinistic  in- 
terpreters generally.  Dr.  Hodge  thus  presents  th's  view: 
"It  is  evident,  on  the  one  hand,  th:it  irpoyvojais  expresses 
something  more  than  the  presence  of  which  all  men  and  all 
events  are  the  objects;  and,  on  the  othi-r,  something  diifer- 
ent  from  the  irpoopicrnoi  (predestination)  expressed  hy  the 
following  word  :  'whom  he  foreknew,  them  he  also  predes- 
tinated.' The  predestination  follows,  and  is  grounded  on 
the  foreknowledge.  The  foreknowledge,  therefore,*express- 
es  the  act  of  cognition  or  recognition — the  fixing,  to  to 
ppeak,  the  mind  upon,  which  involves  the  idea  of  selection. 
If  we  look  over  a  number  of  objects  with  the  view  of  se- 
lecting some  of  them  for  a  definite  pui-pose,  the  first  act  is 
to  fix  the  mind  on  some,  to  the  neglect  of  the  others  ;  and 
the  second  i;;,  to  destine  them  to  the  proposed  end.  So  God 
is  represented  as  lonkintr  on  the  fallen  mass  of  men,  and 
fixins  on  some  whom  He  predestines  to  siilvation.  This  is 
the  np6yva)<Ti<;,  the  foreknowledge,  of  which  the  Apostle 
here  speaks.  It  is  the  knomnL"-,  fixing  upon,  or  selecting 
those  who  are  to  be  predestinated  to  be  conformed  to  the 
image  of  the  Son  of  God."  As  little  can  be  gained  by  a 
philological  discussion  of  the  word,  and  as  theological  bias 
will  affect  the  views  of  many,  it  need  only  be  added,  that 
the  Trpd9e<7iv  of  ver.  28  gives  the  best  clue  to  the  meaning 
of  Trpo,  in  t'le  compounds  of  this  verse  ;  that  the  words 
should  be  as  little  as  possible  confused  by  the  introduction 
of  the  idetis  of  approving,  lo\'inK,  &e.  ;  th:it  chap.  xi.  2, 
where  npoeyvia  is  used  of  Israel,  most  of  whom  were  not 
saved,  does  not  affect  the  specific  sense  here  ;  for  there,  the 
matter  under  discussion  is  a  whole  people  as  a  chosen  peo- 
ple ;  here,  individuals,  who  are  first  of  all  brought  into 
prominence  as  personal  lovers  of  God,  then  as  "called  ac- 
cording to  His  purpose  ;  "  that  the  idea  of  the  certainty  of 
salvation  is  so  clearly  tne  main  thought  of  the  passage,  as 
to  warrant  us,  where  two  meanings  are  presented,  in  lean- 
ing to  that  which  otTers  the  best  grounclfor  such  security. 
Hence  we  adopt  the  predestinarian  view  throughout. — R.] 

t  [This  seems  to  be  the  view  of  Wordsworth,  and  many 
Anglican  divines,  who  would  avoid  both  Calvinism  and 
A-rmiiiianism.  "Wordsworth  is  very  full,  both  in  his  imro- 
iuctioQ  anl  notes,  upon  this  subject,  but  lacks  clearness. 

t  [If  any  thing  is  gained  in  clearness  by  this  distinc- 
tion, It  should  by  all  means  be  accepted,  ae  distinguishing 
the  foreknowlc'lge  from  the  predestination  ;  but  many  will 
fail  to  find  more  than  a  verbal  ditference  in  the  plirases 
tmployea.— B.] 


the  centre  of  the  Christian  doctrine  of  salvation. 
[See  Meyer's  note.]  The  one  collective  Hebrew 
term  for  knowing^  loving,  being  present  at,  and  be- 
getting (Gen.  iv.  1),  is  only  a  modification  of  the 
theocratic  thought  that  God  calls  by  name  those  who 
do  not  yet  exist,  as  if  He  would  be,  and  in  order 
that  He  may  be,  their  God  (Jer.  xxxi.  3  ;  Ps.  cxxxii. 
9  ;  cxlviii.  6).  "  To  call  by  name "  (Is.  xliii.  1), 
"  to  grave  upon  the  hands"  (Isa.  xlix.  16),  and  simi- 
lar expressions,  denote  figuratively  the  unity  of  that 
knowing  and  loving  which  fix  in  idea  the  subject  in 
its  peculiarity  (certainly  in  Christ),  in  order  that,  in 
consequence  of  the  idea,  they  may  be  called  into 
existence.  The  distinction  of  prescience  and  pre- 
destination in  the  first  foundation  of  the  world,  is 
connected  with  a  defective  comprehension  of  the 
peculiar  character  of  personal  life.  (See  the  Doctr. 
JSi'otes.) 

Second  element :  He  also  predestinated.  The 
nqoofjitti'V  presupposes  God's  first  determination 
of  man,*  which  establishes  his  individuality  in  rela- 
tion to  other  individualities,  and  to  Christ,  the  cen- 
tre. Here  the  ciuestion  is  the  predetermination  of 
the  historical  destiny  of  the  individual,  the  establish- 
ment of  the  historical  guidance  to  salvation,  just  as 
all  kindred  definitions,  together  with  n^oo!ji'Zn.v  in 
Acts  iv.  28  ;  1  Cor.  ii.  7  ;  Eph.  i.  5-11  ;  aii;o(>itfi,v 
\r.  Koin.  i.  1 ;  Gal.  i.  15 ;  and  b{ti'Zn,v  in  Acts  x.  42; 
.wii.  20  (where  we  have  o^oOnjla  also),  are  deter- 
h.ined  by  the  fundamental  thought  of  the  6(joi;, 
which  is  the  limitation  and  condition  in  time  and 
space,  that  are  identical  with  the  destiny  in  its  rela- 
tion to  salvation,  the  object  of  man — a  relation 
which  reaches  its  climax  in  the  rdaanv  (Acts  xiii. 
48).  Therefore  the  Apostle  also  adds  here  the  des- 
tination to  conformity  to  the  image  of  God's  Son, 
undoubtedly  with  reference  to  the  definite  conform- 
ity of  the  historical  way  of  life — through  suft'erings 
to  glory  (chap.  vi.  4  fi"  ;  2  Tim.  ii.  11  ;  Heb.  ii. 
9-11),  and  to  historical  confirmation  and  completion 
(Phil.  ii.  5-11,  and  elsewhere). 

[To  be  conformed  to  the  image  of  his  Son, 
CT  V /I /(  6q  (f  ni'c;  T^t;  fty.ovoi;  toT  I'tor  aiiTOr. 
The  word  avufio^qdf;  is  followed  by  the  genitive 
here ;  by  the  dative,  Phil.  iii.  21.  Hence  Stuart 
thinks  it  is  to  be  taken  as  a  substantive  in  this  case ; 
but  Al ford  remarks  that  it  is  like  arofitoc  (chap, 
vi.  5),  in  being  followed  by  either.  Comp.  Kiihner, 
ii.  p.  172.  It  is  the  accusative  of  the  predicate  ;  see 
Winer,  p.  214. — R.]  Evidently,  we  have  to  deal 
here  with  a  specifictilly  new  ordination  on  God's  part, 
though  it  !s  in  harmony  with  the  previous  one.  The 
meaning  of  fio(j(itj  comes  into  consideration  in  order 
to  explain  more  definitely  the  affi/i6Qffoi%  (to  which 
we  need  not  supply  an  tlrai,  because  the  predestina- 
tion involves  a  predescription).  Tholuck  :  "  Tlte 
term  />0Qqi^  means  frequently,  but  not  invariably, 
the  phase  of  the  hnmnn  form,  as  well  as  the  form 
in  general,  and  even  the  fio(jqjtj  iniwv  (see  Plato, 

♦  [Alfnrd  :  ''  His  foreknowledge  was  not  a  mere  heirrg 
previously  aware  how  a  series  of  events  would  happen,  but 
was  co(jrdinate  with,  and  inseparable  from,  His  having  pn- 
oidoiTJ'o!  all  things."  That  the  word  means  foromdained, 
predestinated,  is  certain  ;  that  it  is  here  applied  to  indi- 
viduals, is  obvious ;  that  it  implies  a  pretcrrestrial  act  of 
the  Divine  mind,  is  in  accordance  with  the  current  ol 
thought  in  the  c^l!^pter,  the  scriptural  conceptim  of  God's 
purpose,  and  tl  e  use  of  the  word  in  other  passages.  It  is 
only  one  side  of  the  truth,  indeed,  but  the  other  side  is  not 
more  firmly  established  by  ignoring  this.  The  only  recor- 
ciliation  of  the  dilScuUy  "is  in  practical  Christian  experi- 
ence, and  Paul  is  a<ldr"fssing  himself  to  this  throughout 
And  ive  know  (ver.  ->>). — R.l 


280 


THE   EPISTLE   OF   PAUL   TO   THE   ROMANS. 


Phcetl.,  pp.  103,  104)  Aristotle  distitiguishes  hiJoi,-, 
Uie  inwani  forming  powor  ;  /io(iqi;,  the  phcnoineiial 
form  ;  und  ifi(>-/mt,  its  concrete  reality,  &c.,  aiul 
ariiuoofloTaOcu,  tVom  the  couf'orniity  of  appearance 
or  situation." 

The  furtlier  definition,  conformably  to  the  imago, 
or  conformity  of  the  image,  which  is  still  stronger, 
brini's  the  idea  of  the  phenomenal  form  still  more 
strongly  into  the  liglit.  Tliercfore  Theodoret,  Au- 
gustine, Frit/.sche,  and  Meyer,  would  confine  the  ex- 
pression merely  to  a  share  in  the  glorified  corporeal- 
neis  of  Clirist  (Phil.  iii.  21),  or  to  the  doici  (vcr. 
10).  Meyer  and  De  Wette  maintain,  contrary  to 
Calvjn,  (irotius,  Calovius,  and  otliers,  that  "fellow- 
a/iip  of  siiffcrhn/  is  here  remote ;  "  against  which 
view  Tholuck  ol)serves,  that  the  object  is  expressed 
by  the  subse((uent  idoiciat.  Tholuck,  p.  450,  says, 
iu  .speaking  of  (Ti'fi/i6(>i(oi\:,  "  that  the  grand  thought 
of  Christ,  as  the  prototypi;  of  all  humanity,  elevated 
llirough  sutl'erings  to  tiie  doia  and  to  the  avfi[ia- 
fft/ft'fu'  TtJ)  OnJ),  Occurs  in  the  Scriptures  in  inter- 
changeable forms  ;  John  xii.  26  ;  xvii.  22-24  ;  Rom. 
viii.  17  {Ky.U.  iv.  13) ;  2  Tim.  ii.  12 ;  1  John  iii.  3  ; 
Rev.  iii.  21."  He  also  says,  on  p.  4.51:  "Since 
mention  was  made  of  tiie  sufferings  of  Christians, 
many  expositors  (Calvin,  and  others)  have  been  led, 
by  reference  to  Ueb.  ii.  K),  to  suppose  a  conformity 
to  the  glory  to  be  obtained  througii  sufferings ;  but, 
as  Cocceius  remarks,  this  declaration  of  gradation  is 
justified  neitlier  Ijy  the  expression,  nor  by  the  Apos- 
tle's purpose."  These  two  statements  do  not  har- 
monize well.  But  the  predestination  of  the  suffer- 
ing life,  and  of  tlie  end  to  be  attained,  is  here  a  col- 
lective idea.  Tiio  end  is  Imlorical  confirmation 
("  the  Lamb  that  was  slain,"  Rev.  v.  12  ;  "  these  are 
they  which  came  out  of  great  tribulation,"  Rev.  vii. 
14),  and  the  way  thither  is  notiiing  else  than  the  fol- 
lowing of  Cln-ist  crucified  (comp.  Ueb.  ii.  10,  11). 
A  sundering  of  the  two  elements  thus  destroys  the 
specific  cliaractcr  of  the  determination.  As  doubts 
in  regard  to  the  apparent  conformation  of  believers 
with  Cln-ist  himself  have  been  raised  into  promi- 
nence, and  attem[)ts  have  been,  made  to  solve  them, 
they  will  disappear  of  themselves,  if  we  adhere 
closely  to  the  idea  of  the  (Trfifi('><)ifov<;  (see  Tholuck, 
p.  451  ;  Cln-ysostoni  :  "(j7Tf(>  yao  o  /loroytviji;  ijv 
qiiKTfi,  ToT'To  xai  avToi  ytyovaai.  xura  yu(Ji,v,  &c.). 

[Tlie  word  (Trfi/(oi>(i()(;  occin-s  only  here  and  in 
Phil.  iii.  21,  where  the  reference  is  to  the  body  of 
Christ.  (Tlie  cognate  verb  is  found  in  Phil.  iii.  li>, 
in  connection  with  the  death  of  Christ.)  Tiie  view 
which  restricts  the  meaning  to  the  glorified  corpo- 
realne.ss  of  Christ  (Meyer,  Ue  Wette),  seems  .scarcely 
in  keeping  with  the  context.  Doubtless  this  is  in- 
clud(!(I.  We  may  tiieu  clioose  between  the  reference 
to  "that  entire  form,  (>(  (/lorifical  on  in  bodi/  and 
aanctificatidn  in  npirif,  of  which  Christ  is  the  perfect 
pattern,  and  all  His  people  shall  be  partakers"  (Al- 
ford  ;  so  I'hilipjii) ;  or  may  extend  it  also  to  the 
present  partaking  in  suffcrinf/K  and  moral  c/iorndrr 
like  His  (Stuart,  Hodge,  Webster  and  Wilkinson, 
following  Calvin,  &c.).  There  seems  to  be  no  olijec- 
tion  to  this  wide  reference  ;  in  fact,  the  innnediate 
context  rather  favors  it,  but  the  latter  idea  (moral 
character)  has  perhaps  gained  too  gr(Mit  prominence, 
IL  th;  effort  to  justify  thereliy  the  fact  of  predesti- 
liatir<n,  as  pn-ijcstination  to  holiness.  The  thought 
»f  siffiriiigif  is  not  so  "  remote,"  as,  besides  being 
the  keynote  of  tin;  section  (ver.  IS),  it  is  implied  in 
ver.  2H,  and' recurs  in  ver.  3],  to  be  the  prondnent 
thought  throughout  the  rest  of  the  chapter. — It.] 


That  he  might  be  the  first-born  among 
many  brethren.  The  f(\-  to  tlvcn  ulxov 
7Ti>oiT oTO/.ov  Iv  Tto).).ol<;  aUt ).(f<oTc  is,  at  all 
events,  a  clause  not  merely  of  result,  but  of  pur- 
pose. [The  reference  in  the  aorists  to  the  past  de- 
cree of  redemption  requires  us  to  take  this  clause  al 
telic. — R.]  According  to  De  Wette,  the  principal 
tiiought  is,  that  He,  the  first-born,  might  be  among 
many  bnl/ircu  ;  according  to  Meyer,  that  He  might 
be  the  firsf-born  among  many  brethren.  Tholuck : 
The  chief  thought  i.s,  the  share  of  tlie  ai)t/.(foi  in 
the  possessi(m  of  the  Pirst-born.  The  7ii)(OT6Toxo(i 
(Col.  i.  15-17)  implies  not  merely  the  element  of 
time  and  rank  (Tholuck),  but  also  that  of  causal 
priority  ;  an<l  this  element  cannot  be  wanting  in  the 
present  passage.*  The  expression  tlierefore  denotes, 
according  to  the  prominence  given  to  His  conformity 
with  believers,  also  his  elevation  above  tiiem  ;  but  it 
is  an  elevation  which  is  in  harmony  with  inward  uni- 
formity, a  true  fraternization. 

We  do  not  think  it  advisable  to  lay  stress  on  either 
the  many  brethren  or  on  the  Jirst-born.  The  real 
aim,  after  all,  is  Christ  (for  /t/w.  Col.  i.  It)),  but 
Christ  as  the  first-ljorn  (not  merely  the  /loroj'f  »•/;<; 
of  God)  among  many  brethren  ;  therefore  the  peo- 
ple of  His  kingdom,  a  choir  of  brethren,  are  to  be 
with  Christ,  and  ail  around  Him.  [The  end  of  the 
foreknowing  and  predestining  is  the  glorification  of 
Christ  in  us.  His  people.  The  ideas  become  as  in- 
separable a.s  the  glorified  brethren  themselves  are. 


-R.1 

Ver 


■r.  30.  Them  he  also  caUed  [toi'toi? 
xai  fxa/f(Tf)'].  The  xalnv,  like  the  x/.^ffn;,  is 
without  suffix,  since  the  idea,  prepared  by  the  Old 
Testament  bni^  ,  is  generally  known  and  elucidated ; 
in  addition  to  this,  tiiere  is  a  still  greater  New  Tes- 
tament fundamental  conception.  The  sense  is  this  : 
called  to  the  community  of  Christ  as  to  the  com- 
munion of  salvation,  to  the  Supper  of  the  Lord,  to 
life,  &c.  But  as  election  comprises  a  twofold  idea,  a 
historical  (John  vi.  70)  and  a  mystical  or  tiaiK-;een- 
dental  one,  so  does  xlT^ffn;  also  comprise  a  twofold 
conception  (Matt.  xxii.  14).  Evidently,  we  have 
here  to  (leal  with  the  idea  of  an  inward  x/./"(rn; ;  that 
is,  a  x/.^ffii;  become  inward  from  a  merely  external 
one.  Meyer  denies  that  this  x/.^ffn,-  relates  to  the 
inward  operations  of  grace,  but  holds  that  the  etl'ects 
of  the  call  result  from  the  relation  of  jireaehimi  to 
the  existing  qualification  of  men.  But  such  an  effect 
is  hardly  conceivalile  without  the  operation  of  grace. 
Tholuck  ojiposes  any  distinction  between  a  vocatio 
exti'rna  and  interna,  between  a  vocatio  iiirfficax  and 
ijficnr.  The  idea  may  have  been  represetiled  one- 
sidedly  by  predcstinarian  theologians;  but  the  fact 
of  the  distinction  is  continually  corroborated  in 
every  village  chureh  where  the  gospel  is  preached. 
We  gain  no  clearer  view  by  the  remark,  that  the 
spirit  of  Plato  is  contained  in  the  Platonic  writings, 
for  thousands  have  not  found  the  Platonic  .-pirit  in 
them.  This  remark  applies  only  to  such  spiritualists 
as,  on  the  one  hand,  place  the  "  dead  "  word  with- 
out the  spirit,  or,  on  the  other,  the  .spirit  without 
the  word.  We  may  enlarge  by  saying,  that  if  the 
x/.';(Tn;  stands  midway  between  ;T()()r»^)(l'ni'  ami  the 
t)ixttin'v,  the  specific  idea  necessarily  Ijeeomes  a|)- 
parent.  The  xa/.tiv  is  that  effect  of  (Jod's  word 
completed  in  the  gospel,  which  is  divided  into  illu- 


•  [Tomp.  I.iin(r<"'8  Comm.,  Oilnssinns,  p.  21  ff.  on  irpwro* 
TOKov,  wfioro  nil  throo  idcii.s  nro  involved,  that  of  timo  bo« 
ing  njiecially  prominent  there. — R] 


CHAPTER  VIII.    18-39. 


281 


mination  and  awakening.  It  is  prepared  by  the 
effect  of  the  7T^oo(}i<fiv  :  Zabni-iousncss  and  hurdcn- 
somenesf  (Matt.  xi.  28) ;  it  unites  with  these,  and, 
by  conversion  through  penitence  and  by  believing 
confidence,  prepares  the  di/.aii»fri.i;  for  saving  faith.* 
But,  of  course,  if  tlie  question  is  concerning  the 
x/./^Tou-,  the  yJ.TjaLi;  also  comprises  the  (^tzKi'wmc, 
and  even  the  beginnings  of  the  (VoioLfn'. — In  that 
case,  also  tlie  idea  of  the  di,y.cuovv  between  /.a/.Hv 
and  doidtfi-v  results  in  the  most  definite  way  (see 
chap.  iii.). 

[Them  he  also  justified,  toi'tocc;  xai  i(U- 
xaioxTf  V .  See  the  exhaustive  notes  of  Dr.  Schaff, 
pp.  no  ft".,  138  ff.— R.] 

And  whom  he  justified,  them  he  also  glori- 
fied [  0  r  q  d  e  t  d  i,  y.  a  i  (ii  a  f  v ,  TO  i'  T  0  i'  i;  /.  a  i 
idotnaiv].  The  exegetical  writers  begin  hereto 
wonder  at  the  aorist,  while  their  surprise  ought  to 
have  begun  at  least  with  the  iy.dXfatv.  For,  at  the 
time  when  the  Apostle  wrote  these  words,  only  a 
very  few  of  the  whole  future  body  of  believers  were 
really  called.  Therefore  the  aorist  t'fJoSao-f  can- 
not stand  here  for  the  future  (according  to  Vorstius 
and  GLlss),  nor  for  the  present  (according  to  KiJll- 
ner),  nor  in  the  sense  of  taking  care  of  (according 
to  Flatt).  Meyer  holds  that  the  Apostle  here  de- 
scribes the  actually  certain  future  glorification  as  so 
necessary  and  certain,  that  it  is  the  same  as  if  it  had 
already  taken  place.f  Tholuck  regards  the  aorist 
here  as  the  prophetic  preterite.     [So  Stuart.] 

We  will  now  consider  more  particularly  the  an- 
tithesis which  Meyer  calls  special  attention  to — that 
Grotius,  and  others,  have  regarded  the  act  of  rVoSa- 
uu'  as  having  only  happened  in  the  purpose  of 
God,:]:  but  that  Chrysostom,  and  others,  on  the  con- 
trary, have  referred  the  rfoSa  to  the  gif^t  of  grace  in 
this  world.  The  Apostle's  starting-point  is  evidently 
his  present  time,  the  fellowship  of  the  y./.ijTol  and 
of  the  ()t.y.ai,oi'/u fvoi-  in  which  he  stands.  This  is 
even  literally  established,  in  a  certain  relation,  by 
the  expression,  xai  (doiaafv.  For  dotd^fiv 
means  not  merely  to  invest  one  with  do'Sa  at  the 
end  of  time,  but  to  lead  gradually  by  the  nvn'fia 
•rTji;   (5o;>/?  (1  Peter  iv.   14)  to  glory.     The  whole 


*  [As  the  Apostle  is  speakine  of  God's  acts,  not  ours, 
thero  is  no  mention  of  faith,  or  any  other  huni:in  exercises, 
and  there  need  be  none  ;  for  who  can  misundorslnnd  him, 
when  this  side  of  the  matter  is  in  question  ?  The  justice 
of  Dr.  Lange's  view  of  "  called "  is  apparent.  For  the 
whole  verse  with  remarkable  particulaxity  declares  that  the 
same  persons  were  predestinated,  c:\lled,  justified,  sloiified  ; 
and  to  understand  by  the  C"lii»g  only  the  general  invitation 
to  believe  and  accept  the  gospel,  weakens  tlie  force  of  the 
passage.  Besides,  it  is  not  hue  that  those  whom  God  in- 
vites to  believe  through  the  gospel.  He  justifies  also,  ai  d 
glorifies.  To  admit  this,  i^  to  obliterate  the  distinction 
between  the  wavside  and  fruitful  hearers  (Matt.  xiii.  1&-23) 
— to  fly  in  the  face  of  fact,  as  well  as  the  plain  teaching  of 
the  Word  of  God.  Dr.  Hodge,  and  Calvinistic  interpreters 
generally,  make  "called"  =  efiectually  called.  U.  doubt- 
edly  the  call  is  cfFectnal,  linked  inseparably  with  predesti- 
nation and  justification;  but  since  the  technical  meaning 
of  effectual  calling  is  really  regeneration,  we  may  hesilote 
in  giving  to  the  word  here  used  a  force  so  extended.  The 
BUbjcctive  aspect  of  effectual  calling  is  not  introduced, 
at  all  events,  we  have  ouiy  the  order  of  the  Divine,  acts 
respcctiig  the  salvation  of  individuals,  as  presenting  the 
dbjerthv  certninty  of  that  salvation. — R.l 

r  [So  Philippi,  De  "Wette.  Alford  combines  with  it  that 
Df  Grotius,  much  as  Dr.  Lange  does:  "The  aorist  tio^a- 
rev  being  used,  as  the  other  aorists,'to  imjily  the  comple- 
tion in  the  Divine  counsel  of  all  these,  which  are  to  us,  in 
the  state  of  time,  so  many  successive  steps — simultaneous- 
ly and  irrevocably."' — R.] 

X  [Dr.  Hodge  adopts  a  modification  of  this  view,  though 
he  sugsrests  that  the  aorist  may  imply  frequency,  almost  = 
the  present.  :Xe)ther  of  these  seem  so  satisfactoiy  as  that 
of  Sleyer,  or  that  of  Lange  himself.— K.] 


guidance  of  believers  is  Sotaatioi;  in  the  biblica 
sense.  This  t)oi«o-/(dc  had  therefore  already  begun 
for  the  companions  of  the  Apostle,  and,  in  his  be- 
lieving confidence,  it  was  just  as  good  as  completed 
(see  vers.  38,  39).*  But  if  the  Apostle  had  merely 
wished  to  describe  this  standpoint  of  the  Christians 
of  that  daj' — that  is,  merely  the  standpoint  of  expe- 
rience — he  would  have  had  to  commence  with  the 
ori,'  iy.d/.KTiv,  and  return  from  the  ore  idixaltnirfv 
to  7T(J0il){iiatVi  and  finally  to  n:(JOtyvci.  But  he  has 
changed  the  statement  of  his  experience  of  that  pe- 
riod into  a  doctrinal  statement  for  all  time,  in  order 
to  exhibit  the  7i(jof)f(nq  of  God  in  its  full  splendor. 
His  sorites  has  then  chiefly  a  historiced  meaning. 
Many  had  already  completely  passed  over  this  sta- 
tioned way ;  for  example,  Stephen,  and  James  the 
Elder.  In  the  same  manner  this  way  had,  and  will 
always  have,  to  many,  a  distiitguidung  meaning ; 
that  is,  it  applies  to  the  secure  developing  progress 
of  the  elect  in  a  special  sense.  It  has,  finally,  for 
all :  a.  a  methodological  meaning  ;  that  is,  they  ex' 
perience  here  the  final  consequence  of  God's  saving 
acts  in  the  ordo  S'diitis  ;  b.  the  meaning  of  evangel- 
ical promise.  If  they  stand  in  the  circle  of  the 
yJJ^rnc  and  diy.aioxn:;,  they  can  be  certain,  retro- 
spectively, of  their  election  and  foreordination  (his- 
torical determination),  and  prospectively  certain  of 
their  guidance  to  glory.  Paul  assumes  throughout 
the  ethical  facts  and  conditions  that  correspond  to 
these  acts  of  God  ;  but  he  does  not  name  them  here, 
because  the  connection  requires  that  the  superiority 
of  the  Divine  ground  of  salvation  to  human  weak- 
ness should  alone  be  glorified  f  (see  Doctr.  Kotcs). 

Yer.  31.  What  then  shall  we  say  to  these 
things?  [Tt  ovv  i^ov^ifv  nqbq  TaT'Ta; 
On  Ti  ovv  EQoT'iuiv,  comp.  chap.  iii.  5;  iv.  1 ; 
vi.  1 ;  vii.  7  ;  ix.  14,  where  it  introduces  a  false  con. 
elusion  ;  here,  and  chap.  ix.  30,  a  correct  one  ;  De 
Wette.— R.]  Tholuck:  "  Tt  i(jov,ii(v  is  used 
here,  contrary  to  the  Apostle's  custom,  in  a  conclu- 
sion which  has  vot  a  doubtful  character."  But  the 
apparently  doubtful  element  lies  in  the  conclusion 
v?hich  might  be  drawn,  that  the  Christian  can  have 
no  oppositicii.  He  has, Jndeed,  says  Paul,  no  veri- 
table  oi)|iiosition ;  all  the  opposition  that  he  really 
has,  only  "helps  him.  What  follows  from  the  fact 
that  God  lias  so  securely  estaiJished  our  salvation 
through  all  its  stages  ?  X     The  cou'^-lusion  is  this  : 

If  God  is  for  us,  who  is  agoinst  us  ?  [El 
6  &f6i;vn:iQ  ij  a  (7)  v ,  r  1 1;  x  a  'J  '  >}  /i  i7)  v  ;  ] 
(Ps.  xci.  l-V).     Every  thing  which  is  against  us,  in 

*  [The  omission  of  "them  he  also  sanctified>"  which  we 
would  expect  to  find  in  the  chain,  were  "glorifiou''  limited 
to  the  future,  is  a  sufficient  ground  for  this  positon  f  Dr. 
Lange,  and  favors  also  the  view,  that  the  certainly,  is 
prominent,  rather  than  the  completion  of  all  these  in  the 
purpose  of  God.  Of  course,  the  objective  certainty  rests 
on  this  completion  in  God's  pm-pose,  but  the  latter  is  in- 
cluded only  by  implication. — E.] 

t  [As  the  whole  passage  can  only  be  of  encouragement 
when  viewed  in  this  hght,  Wordsworth  deprives  it  of  its 
force  entirely,  when  he  says  that  the  Church  of  Ei'.gland 
teaches  :  "  She  considers  these  things  as  done ;  for  in  God's 
will,  and,  on  His  side,  they  are  done,  for  all  members  of  the 
visible  Church  of  Chvi.st ;  "  and  then  makes  the  whole  matter 
so  dependent  on  us,  "that,  unless  we  perform  our  part,  all 
God's  gi-ncious  purposes  toward  us  will  fail  of  their  effect." 
See  his  lengthy  notes,  which  touch  (scarcely  grapple)  this 
ditficult  subject.— E.] 

t  [Meyer  takes  vers.  31-39  as  a  conclusion  from  vers.  29, 
30  ;  "  The  Christian  has.  then,  nothing  to  fear  that  can  be 
detrimental  to  his  salvation,  but  he  is,  with  the  love  of  God 
in  Christ,  certain  of  this  salvation."  This  whole  passage 
(notice  the  logical  relation  of  on,  ver.  29,  and  ot'v,  ver.  31,) 
i{i  a  commentary  on  ver.  28; — and  what  a  commentary  i 
-E.] 


282 


THE   EPISTLE   OF   PAUL  TO   THE   ROMANS. 


an  earthly  sense,  must,  in  a  heavenly  sense,  promote 
our  welfare  through  God's  sovereignty.  [How  God 
is  for  us,  has  been  set  forth  ;  the  question  therefore 
implies,  not  doubt,  but  joyous  certainty.  Heuce  the 
E.  V.  is  not  strong  enough.— R.]  Tiiis  confidence 
of  the  Aposllo,  in  opposition  to  the  hostile  forces  of 
the  woild,  assumes  a  bold  and  almost  cliallenging 
tone.  Tholuck  :  "  There  begins  with  this  e.xpres- 
eion  a  series  of  victorious  questions  and  triumphant 
answers,  in  reference  to  which  Erasmus  exclaims : 
'  Quid  unqaam  Cicero  dixit  grandiloqueutius  ? ' 
Just  such  a  triumphant  acclamation  is  found  in 
1  Cor.  XV.  54." 

[Philippi :  "  In  fact,  as  vers.  19-23  may  be  called 
a  sacred  elegy,  so  we  may  term  vers.  31-39  a  sacred 
ode ;  that  is  as  tender  and  fervent  as  this  is  bold 
and  exalted  in  matter  and  in  manner ;  that,  an  am- 
plification of  '  we  do  groan,  being  burdened '  (2  Cor. 
V.  4) ;  this,  a  commentary  on  '  this  is  the  victory 
that  overcomelh  the  world'  (1  John  v.  4).  Augus- 
tine, De  dodr.  christi,  iv.  20,  cites  ver.  31  as  an 
example  of  the  grande  dicendi  genus,  quod  non 
tain  verborum  ornatibus  cei~utum  est,  quatii  violen- 
tnm  aniini  affectibus. — Satis  enim  est  ei  jn-opler 
quod  agitur,  ut  verba  coiigritentia,  non  oris  eli- 
qantur  induatria,  sed  pector's  sequanlur  ardorem. 
Nam  si  aurato  gemmatoque  ferro  vir  fortis  arnii- 
tur,  irdeidissimus  pugiue,  agit  quidem  illis  armis 
quod  agit,  non  quia  pretiosa,  sea  quia  arma  sunt." 
-R.1 

Ver.  32.  He  who  spared  not  his  own  Son 
[o?  yi  ToT'  idiov  v'loTi  o  ti  y.  intiaaro. 
Meyer,  and  others,  take  this  as  an  interrogative  an- 
swer  to  the  preceding  question.  It  does  indeed  an- 
swer it,  but  is,  at  the  same  time,  an  advance  (see 
below).  The  enclitic  yi  has  the  force  of  even, 
quippc  qui,  but  Alford  is  not  justified  in  saying  that 
this  takes  "  one  act  as  a  notable  example  out  of 
all ;  "  for  this  is  the  crowning  proof  of  love,  includ- 
ing all  the  others,  and  hence  establishing  the  main 
clause  :  how  shall  he  not,  &c. — R.]  After  the  Apos- 
tle has  described  negatively,  in  ver.  31,  the  eleva- 
tion of  God's  children  above  the  hostile  world,  he 
portrays  it  positively  in  ver.  32.  The  logical  con- 
struction is  as  follows  :  (  />•',  'nlio  has  already  estab- 
lished our  ()oja,  is  for  i%,  with  the  whole  energy  of 
His  purpose,  a.  He  '.s  for  us  in  jjcrson  as  our  pro- 
tector, and  therefor:,  no  person  and  no  thing  can  be 
against  us ;  b.  Hj  is  for  us  to  such  a  dogiee  that  He 
gave  His  Son  *  for  us.  Ovk  tqtianTo  involves 
here  two  ide;  8 :  He  did  not  save  Iliin  (Bengel : 
palemo  suo  imori  quasi  vim  adhibuil),  and,  He  did 
aot  spiire  ir.m. 

But  delivered  him  up  for  us  aU  [a).).a 
{i7ri(i  r;fu7)v  TTuvriiiv  n  an  i  ()  m  xt  v  avrov. 
O'  the  verb,  comp.  chap.  iv.  25.  On  the  pn-po- 
flition  !<nii>,  in  behalf  of,  comp.  chap.  v.  6. — R.]. 
Deliverance  to  death  for  us,  for  our  redemption.! 
The  notion  which  would  explain  John  iii.  16  as  a 

•  [ninown  Son.  Tholuck,  Olshauscn,  Philippi,  Stunrt, 
Hodjte,  and  mimy  others,  find  an  Implied  anittliosis  here, 
viz.,  hii*  iiiloptod  nons  (ver.  19,  &e.>,  to  which  Meyer  iind  Do 
Wctto  otijiTt.  .\t  all  events,  the  emphasis  restinK  on 
iiiav  reijuires  us  to  underHtiind  it  iw  Hon  In  n  fp'-rific 
eoiiHe,  iLovoytvri<;.  The  chriHtological  hearing  of  the  pius- 
■ugo  is  uumntaUaliln. — H. ) 

■  [MoBt  comment iitofB  admit  the  special  rcferonco  to 
death.  It  is  not  ncce«iiary  to  restrict  it  t"  this,  hut  the 
lhou'.{ht  Ik  c<Ttninly  prominent  in  I'aul's  expressionn  con- 
c<'niinK  Christ.— (/<  <(//,  cvi<lently  means  helievcrs  here. 
The  vSuo  or  the  efhciicv  of  tlie  atoni-meut  Is  not  liroueht 
into  vjcw  at  all.  'I'o  tiiis  commentators  of  all  .doctrinal 
t<iuduiic.e8  uiai'O.  -  U.] 


"  deliverance  to  finitencss  "  (mentioned  by  Tholuck 
on  p.  455),  belongs  rather  to  the  philosophy  of 
Schelling  in  his  early  period,  than  to  the  christologi« 
cal  stanilpoint. 

[Freely  give  us  aU  things  ?  to,  ndvra 
tjfilv  /citj  icr  IT  Hi;  A  (piestion  a  major  i  nd  ml- 
mis  (Meyer).  Phili[)pi  and  Meyer  join  y.ai  with 
nCx;  ov/i,  not  with  avv  avrui.  It  is  perhaps 
more  grammatical,  but  the  tnought  is  still  tne  same : 
that  with  Christ,  and  because  of  Christ,  all  else  shall 
come. — R.]  Ta  ndvra.  Tholuck:  "Every 
thing  which  we  need."  This  is  against  Hrenz,  who 
explains  thus :  "  All  the  blessings  comprised  in 
Christ."  But  why  not  simply,  every  thing,  in  har- 
mony with  ver.  17  and  1  Cor.  iii.  22  ?  For,  after 
all,  we  "  need "  every  thing,  and  the  "  blessings 
comprised  in  Christ"  are  the  whole  universe.  There- 
fore the  avv  is  not  merely  based  on  the  idea  of  the 

TUtOiiO^tlXtl. 

Vers.  33-35.  Two  lines  of  the  certainty  of  sal- 
vation have  been  drawn  from  the  one  finidamental 
idea  of  the  y.'/.T^tni;  xarct  71(}60kji'V;  that  is,  of  the 
assurance  of  salvation.  There  is,  first,  the  line  of 
the  certainty  of  individual,  inward,  and  personal  sal. 
vation  (vers.  28,  30) ;  the  caii^sa  principalis :  grace. 
Then  we  have,  second,  the  line  of  historical  .-ialva- 
tion,  which  corresponds  with  the  first  line  as  the 
causa  mediatrijr.  This  latter  appears  as  the  almighty 
gift  of  salvation,  in  opposition  to  the  contradiction 
of  the  world.  As  the  Apostle  looks  at  the  fearful 
appearance  of  this  contradiction,  he  now  presents 
throughout  the  negative  character  of  the  historical 
salvation.  That  is,  he  develops  the  thought  placed 
at  the  outset — that  nothing  can  be  agiiinst  us,  be- 
cause  God  is  for  us ;  so  very  much  for  us,  that  He 
delivered  even  His  Son  for  us.  But  the  Apostle 
then  brings  out  the  fact,  though  more  indirectly, 
that  God  will,  with  Him,  also  freely  give  us  all 
things.  Thus  there  is,  first  of  all,  the  exalted  me- 
diation of  salvation.  "  Who  shall  lay  any  thing  to 
the  charge  of  God's  elect  ?  " 

Different  constructions  of  the  following  three 
verses  (vers.  33-35) : 

a.  Vers.  33  and  34  are  antitheses  which  must  be 
read  as  question  and  answer,  according  to  our  trans- 
lation. [So  E.  v.]  (See  Luther,  Castalio,  Beza, 
Calvin,  Fritzsche,  Pliilippi  [Stuart,  Hodge],  and  oth- 
ers.) 

6.  The  three  answers  also  stand  in  the  form  of 
questions,  thus :  Who  siiall  lay  any  thing  to  tlio 
charge  of  (Jod's  elect?  Will  God,  who  justifieth, 
doit?  Who  is  He  that  condemneth ?  Will  Christ, 
who  died  for  us,  do  it  ?  (This  is  the  view  of  Angus, 
tine,  Ambrose,  Koppe,  Reiche,  Olshausen,  De  Weite 
[Alford,  Webster  and  Wilkinson,  Jowett],  and  oth- 
ers.) 

c.  An  altered  form  of  presenting  the  antitheses : 
1.  Who  shall  lay  any  thing  to  the  charge?  Answer: 
It  is  God  that  justifieth  ;  who,  therefore,  is  He  thai 
condemneth  ?  2.  Answer :  It  is  Christ  that  died, 
Ac.,  who  also  niaketh  intercession  for  us ;  who, 
therefore,  shall  separate  us  from  the  love  of  Christ? 
This  construction  of  the  antithesis,  which  was  laid 
down  by  Origen,  Chryso^tom,  aiul  Thoodoret,  has 
been  neglected  by  nearly  all  recent  expositors,  but 
is  urgently  n-coinmended  by  Meyer.  [Wordsworth 
follows  it  in  his  text,  but  is  im|)ressively  silent  on 
the  subject  in  his  notes.  See  Meyer,  not  only  in 
defence  of  his  own  view,  but  for  a  resume  of  other 
opinions, — 1{.] 

Tholuck  very  properly  remarks,  iu  opposition  to 


CHAPTER  VIII.   18-39, 


283 


this  third  combination  of  sentences,  as  follows :  "  It 
can  be  lea.st  satisfactory  of  all ;  for,  if  we  adopt  it, 
that  rhetorical  conformity  of  the  sentences  is  lost 
Ifhich  is  apparent  in  the  other  constructions,"  &c. 
But  this  construction  not  merely  obliterates  the 
grand  simplicity  of  the  antitheses,  but  also  obscures 
their  real  order.  The  question,  Who  shall  lay  any 
thing  to  the  charge  ?  remains  totally  unanswered. 
But,  on  the  contrary,  the  question.  Who  is  He  that 
condemneth  ?  would  receive  two  answers  :  first,  the 
expression,  "  it  is  God  that  justifieth,"  and  after- 
ward, "  it  is  Christ  that  died,"  &c.  In  addition  to 
this,  the  clear  thoughts,  justification,  in  ver.  33,  the 
atonement,  in  ver.  34,  and  holiness  or  glorification, 
in  vers.  35-37,  would  be  totally  confused. 

The  second  construction  appears  to  be  favored 
by  the  fact,  that  the  third  question,  "  Who  shall 
separate,  us  from  the  love  of  Christ  ?  "  seems,  in 
turn,  to  be  answered  by  a  rhetorical  question  (tribu- 
lation, or  distress,  &c.  ?).  But  the  third  question 
is  continued  through  vers.  35  and  36,  and  the  an- 
swer to  it  follows  in  a  positive  declaration  in 
Ter.  37. 

Tims  elegance  of  both  form  and  matter  pro- 
nounces it  favor  of  the  antithesis  of  three  ques- 
tions and  three  answers.  If  it  be  objected,  that  the 
answers  would  be  still  strengthened  by  the  form  of 
rhetorical  questions,  we  might  reply,  that  they  would 
indeed  be  strengthened  even  to  overstraining  and 
obscurity.  For  there  are,  indeed,  accusers  and  con- 
demners  enough  against  believers,  which  is  plain 
from  what  follows :  tribulation,  distress,  persecu- 
tion, &c.  But  the  principal  thing  is,  that  they  stand 
as  accusers  against  the  justifying  God  himself,  and 
as  condemners  of  the  future  Judge  of  the  world, 
Christ  the  Messiah,  who  is  the  Saviour  of  believers  ; 
and  therefore,  that  their  charge  and  condemnation 
are  not  only  impotent,  but  must  even  advance  the 
glory  of  believers,  just  as  tribulation,  distress,  per- 
seculion,  &c.,  are  not  only  unable  to  separate  them 
from  the  love  of  Christ,  but  must  establish  them  in 
His  love  as  decided  victors.  But  Paul  could  hardly 
have  expressed,  even  in  the  form  of  a  rhetorical 
question,  the  thought  that  God  could  be  the  accuser 
of  believers,  and  Christ  could  be  their  condemner, 
even  if  we  couj^ider  the  question  apart  from  the  fact 
that  he  would  thereby  have  destroyed  the  antithesis: 
if  God  be  for  us,  who  can  be  against  us  ?  Meyer 
remarks,  against  the  former  construction,  that  5*6? 
6  ()i,/.ot.i,mv  and  rit;  6  y.aTa/.(jivo)v  would  be  essen- 
tially correlative.  This  is  altogether  incorrect.  The 
dixcuiiKTiq  removes  the  charge  of  condemnation  ;  the 
atonement  made  by  Christ  abolishes  the  condemna- 
tion itself.  That  Paul  did  not  write  Tt?  y.aTay.()i,vn 
to  correspond  with  the  rii;  iyxaliafi,,  is  not  only 
unimportant,  but  is  based  upon  the  supposition  that 
there  could  be  many  accusers,  but  that  there  could 
be  only  one  condemner  at  the  tribunal.  Meyer 
holds  that,  by  the  first  construction,  Christ  must 
have  been  represented  as  Judge,  in  harmony  with 
the  6  y.ara/.<)iv«n'  in  ver.  34.  But  apart  from  the 
consideration  that  Christ  opposes  all  the  worldly 
condemnations  of  men  pronounced  on  unbelievers, 
by  interceding  for  them  at  God's  right  hand,  we 
hold  that  the  reading  A'^kttos-  '/(jdor?  (the  Sinaiti- 
cus  favors  the  same),  which  seems  to  have  been 
early  given  up  from  a  misconception,  serves  as  a 
eatisfactory  explanation.  As,  therefore,  the  first  sen- 
tence is :  God  is  the  justifier,  the  second  is  this : 
Christ  the  Messiah,  the  expected  Judge  of  the 
world,  is  'lr]ao7%  6  a,7io&a,vMV.     The  article  before 


'Jtjaovq  is  given  with  the  adjective  designations.' 
Tholuck  has  declined  to  decide  concerning  the 
punctuation. 

[The  pointing  adopted  in  the  E.  V.  has  been  so 
fully  defended  by  Dr.  Lange,  that  the  following  ro 
marks  will  suffice  in  addition.  (1.)  Even  the  most 
rhetorical  style  would  scarcely  indulge  in  seventeen 
successive  questions,  without  an  answer,  as  view  b, 
would  maintain.  (2.)  View  c.  disturbs  the  flow  of 
the  passage,  without  adding  to  this  force.  (3.)  The 
grand  thought  of  the  certainty  of  salvation  seems 
to  be  even  more  fully  established  by  accepting  three 
questions  and  three  answers  following  each  in  turn, 
while  there  is  no  reasonable  objection  to  the  cor 
respondence  thus  claimed  between  each  question  and 
its  answer. — R.] 

Ver.  33.  Who  shall  lay  any  thing  to  the 
charge  of  God's  elect  ?  [r  iq  tyy-akia n, 
Kara  ix/.fKroiv  &{oii ;  The  verb  is  usually 
followed  by  the  dative,  only  here  with  xatd.  The 
article  is  omitted  with  iy.hxron',  giving  prominence 
to  the  attribute  of  the  persons  (Meyer).  That  it 
refers  to  the  persons  under  discussion  throughout, 
is  obvious. — R.]  The  idea  of  the  ix/.eytadau  theo- 
cratically  resting  on  the  Old  Testament  "^HS ,  cor- 
responds with  that  of  the  nQoytvoiffxiw ;  but  in  the 
concrete  name  of  the  ixXfy.Tol,  it  denotes  the  deep- 
est establishment  of  the  whole  character  of  believ- 
ers in  the  ivdoxla  of  God  (see  Boctr.  JVoies). 

It  is  God  that  justifieth!  [5^?  6?  6  (J^- 
)c  a  tJi  V  !  The  expression  is  more  energetic  than 
&f6q  dixaioii ;  comp.  Matt.  x.  20  (Philippi).  The 
flfo?,  occurring  immediately  after  &foTi,  has  a  rhe- 
torical emphasis  (Meyer). — R.]  According  to  Tho- 
luck, the  question  really  is  the  intercessor  in  oppo- 
sition to  the  charge,  and,  on  the  other  hand,  the 
di-y.aiovv  in  opposition  to  the  xarax^lvfiv.  But  this 
would  not  correspond  with  the  connection.  As  the 
authorized  accusers,  the  law  and  the  conscience,  are 
silenced  in  the  dixaio)ai,t;,  which  God  himself  exe- 
cutes, we  must  here  have  in  mind  principally  the 
weakness  of  the  unauthorized  accusers,  at  whose 
head  stands  Satan,  xaTtjyo()Oi;  (Origen),  who  opposes 
Christians  not  only  in  heathen  adversaries  (Photius, 
Theophylact,  Grotius),  but  also  in  Jewish  adversa- 
ries.  The  di^xanovv  has  evidently  here  also  a  forensic 
meaning.  Tholuck :  "  Luther  excellently  says,  in 
harmony  with  the  sense,  '  God  is  here.'  " 

Ver.  34.  Who  is  he  that  condemneth  ?  The 
6  xarax(jivo)v  declares,  that  in  an  authorized 
form  there  can  only  be  one,  the  Messiah,  but  it  is 
just  He  who  is  their  propitiator  and  intercessor. 

It  is  Christ,  &c.  [A'^ktto?  uno  0  av(i>v, 
x.rJ..'\  The  Apostle  expresses  complete  deliverance 
from  condemnation  in  four  essential  elements  of 
Christ's  redeeming  work.  In  the  two  elements  of 
His  death  and  resurrection  there  is  conipriscd  full 
deliverance  from  the  real  guilt  of  condemnation  (see 
chap.  iv.  25) ;  and  in  His  sitting  at  the  right  hand 
of  God,  and  in  His  intercession,  there  is  comprised 

*  [As  remarked  in  Textual  Note  i«,  this  view  is  doubly 
doubtful.  The  reading  is  quite  uncertain,  and  to  render 
XpiCTTOs  "Irjcroiis,  Christ  is  Jexus,  is  almot^t  fanciful. 
Dr.  Langv's  remark  that  the  article  (which  mipht  have 
been  expected  before  'Itjo-oDs,  were  this  the  meai.ing)  is 
found  ill  the  attributive  clause  (6  airodaviov),  will  not  meet 
the  grammatical  objection.  So  forced  a  construction  would 
be  admissible  only  in  the  absence  of  any  other  satisfactory 
explanation.  Certainly  the  thought  that  the  slain  yet  risen 
Christ  shall  judge  the  world,  that  our  Intercessor  is  really 
the  only  Condemner,  is  not  so  unscriptural  or  unpauline  aa 
to  create  a  ditlictilty  from  which  we  must  escape  by  this  sm* 
gular  exegesis. — B.] 


284 


THE   EPISTLE    OF   PAUL   TO   THE   ROMANS. 


Hia  protection  against  the  unauthorized  accusers 
from  without,  and  the  condemnatory  results  of  the 
injury  of  the  new  life  from  within. — Meyer:  "  fici/.- 
iov  di  Acti,*  a  higlier  degree  of  importance: 
imino  adeo.  The  oi;  y.al  has  a  somewhat  festive 
Bound." 

Vcr.  :{.').  Who  shaU  separate  us  from  the 
love  of  Christ ?  [  t  i  s  '} ,"  « ■=  /  i<n>  i  a n,  a  no 
T  f/ s  (ij'ct.Tz/s  ToT  A  o  tffTo  r  ;]  The  reading 
ro'i  Oh>v  is  hut  weakly  su[)purted.  Meyer,  with 
Tholnek,  De  Wette,  Pliilippi,  and  others,  properly 
Bays  in  favor  of  tlie  construction  AoKXTor,  tliat  it 
is  the  genitive  subjective  ;  and,  therelore,  that  it 
denotes  Cinist's  love  toward  His  followei-s  (see  vers. 
37,  39).  But  when  he  says  that  this  forbids  the 
interpretation  of  others  who  understand  it  to  be 
love  for  Christ  (Origen,  KiJlhier  [see  Forbes,  p.  332, 
on  this  vii'w],  and  others),  his  remark  is  only  cor- 
rect in  firm  ;  for,  in  reality,  confidence  in  love  on 
Christ's  |)art  for  llii  children  cannot  be  separated 
from  love  for  Him  (see  ver.  28).f  The  afliictiona 
which  now  follow  are  per.<onified  by  rti;  [instead  of 
T»,  which  we  might  expect]. 

But  how  is  the  possibility  of  this  separation  to 
be  regarded  ?  Meyer  :  A  i)ossible  sundering  of  men 
from  the  influx  of  Christ's  love  by  intervening  hin- 
drances. De  Wette  :  The  joyous  sense  of  being 
beloved  by  Christ.  Plulippi :  Artiictions  can  seem 
to  us  to  be  an  indication  of  Divine  wrath,  and  thus 
mislead  us  into  unbelief  in  Divine  love.  Tholuck  : 
The  firmness  of  the  consciousness  of  tiiis  Divine 
relation  of  love.  The  sense  of  the  question  is  this: 
Can  an  affliction  lead  us  to  fall  from  the  operation 
and  e.xperience  of  Ciu-ist's  love  ?  By  answering  in 
the  negative,  there  is  assumed  not  merely  the  Divine 
purpose  of  grace  according  to  the  predeslinarian  view, 
and  also  not  merely  the  purity  and  perseverance  of 
faith  according  to  the  Arminian  view,  but  the  con- 
nection between  the  two,  the  new  bond  which  is 
secured  by  the  recognition  of  tribulation,  distress, 
&c.,  as  powers  overcome  by  Christ,  and  made  ser- 
viceable to  His  love  il.<elf. 

ShaU  tribulation,  &c.  \^&).lxi'i,<;,  x.r.A.]  The 
forms  of  affliction  are  in  harmony  with  tiie  re- 
lations of  Cnristiaus  at  tiiat  time,  and  especially 
of  the  Apostle  ;  there  is  the  apparently  fearful  num. 
ber  seven,  but  the  seventh  leads  to  the  triumphant 
conclusion  in  martyrdom.  First  of  all,  believers  are 
pressed  into  aniiiety  by  the  world.  [On  0  /.lifiq 
and  (TTtv(t/f<}()ia,  see  ii.  9,  p.  99,  the  former  ex- 
ternal, the  latter  internal. — K.]  Then  there  ccmies 
persecution  itself,  which  drives  them  out  to  fam- 
ine and  nakedness ;  the  end  is  peril,  the  danger 
of  death,  and  sword,  death  itself. 

Ver.  36.  As  it  is  written  [  x  re  .O^ (ii ;;  yiyonn- 
Ta»    OTi.      "Oti    is    the    usual    quotation-mark.] 


•  [Sep  T'Xlva^  Nnlf  'T.  The  <cat  before  iari-v  is  .ilso 
omitted  ill  X'.  A.  C,  but  inserted  in  the  m.ijority  of  MSS. 
-K.l 

f  [Calvin  adds  a  third  meanini? :  our  sfiiKf  of  Chrinl's 
lov  In  im.  'Hii-i  is  implied  in  the  i-xr.elb'Ut  remarks  of  Dr. 
HodKo:  "The  ereat  difficulty  witli  m  my  ('liristiiins  is,  that 
they  cannot  nci>u:i(lu  themselves  that  Chri-it  (nr  (}iid)  lovi-s 
them;  and  the  reason  why  ihoy  ca  mot  f.ol  confldont  of  the 
love  of  Ood,  i«,  that  they  know  they  do  not  di-Korvo  Hi« 
love  ;  on  the  contrary,  that  tlioy  are  in  the  hiphesi  denreo 
nclovely.  Mut  it  is  the  vrry  thmi?  we  are  required  to  tic- 
liovo,  not  on'y  as  the  rondit'on  of  peace  and  hope,  but  oa 
the  or>nditlon  of  salvation.  If  our  hope  of  Ooil's  mercy 
anil  love  is  founded  on  our  own  coodnei-"  or  attraetiveiiess. 
It  is  a  false  hqpe.  We  must  b^-lievo  that  His  love  is  trratui- 
tous,  myftpri^ius.  without  any  known  or  ronei-ivahle  cause, 
ecrtainlV  wit  boat  the  cause  of  lovellncBS  iu  itH  object." 
-U.l 


Psalm  xliv.  22,  according  to  the  Septuagint.*  This 
Psalm  coiUiUns  a  description  of  the  suiferings  which 
God's  people  had  to  sutler  for  the  Lord's  sake,  and 
is  therefore  correctly  regarded  liy  Paul  as  a  ti^/iical 
and  pro[)hetical  prelude  to  the  .sutt'erings  of  the  New. 
Testament  people  of  God  for  God's  sake.  De  Wette 
does  not  regard  the  pas,<age  as  a  prophecy  (Tho- 
luck),! but  thinks  that  Paul  probably  cites  it  as 
prophecy.  But  even  Thohick's  expression,  "  a  real 
parallel  to  the  conflicts  of  God's  ancient  i)e(j[)le," 
is  by  no  means  sutlicient  for  the  idea  of  typical 
prophecv,  for  the  tvpe  is  much  more  than  a  par- 
allel. 

Ver.  37.  Nay,  in  all  these  things  we  are 
more  than  conquerors  [  ci  /.  /. '  i v  t o  i ■  r  o  t? 
TidfTiv,  z.T./.  Some  connect  this  with  ver.  35, 
and  hence  ver.  36  has  been  made  jiarenthetical ;  but 
there  is  no  necessity  for  this,  since  the  course  of 
thought  is  unbroken,  and  this  verse  is  antithetical  to 
both  vers.  35  and  36. — R.]  That  is,  far  beyond  the 
necessary  measure  {!<nf(>ri,xuv).  Recollection  of 
prayers  for  persecutors  (Stephen),  hymns  of  praise 
in  prison  (Paul  and  Silas),  and  the  joyous  spirit  of 
the  martyrs. 

Through    him  who    loved  us    [Jia    rou 
ciynTTt'icravTOi;    tjiicit;.       See    Ttxtual    Sole    '^] 
Meyer  refers  the  aorist  to  "  the  distinguished  act'of 
love  which  Christ  has  performed  by  the  ottering  of 
His  own  life."     Though  this  reference  is  undoubted- 
ly correct,  there   is   something   inadequate   in  the 
translation,  loved.     The  aorist  ininrnnav  does  not 
merely  affirm  that  they  believed,  but  that  they  be- 
came  believers  (.see  John  x.  42) ;  and  thus  the  act 
of  our  Lord's  only  revelation  of  love  also  involves 
here  the   continuation   of   that   relation :    who  haa 
proved  and  bestowed  His  love. — Throuijh  Jdm.    The 
reading  Atti    rov    (Semler,    Kop[)e :    propter)    is   a 
smoother  exegeticiil    iuter[)retation.f      Chrysostom, 
Theodoret,  Bengel,  and  Fritzsche,  refer  the  expres- 
sion ayant'iaai;  to  God  :   but  on  account  of  ver.  39, 
Riickert,  De  Wette,  Tholuck,  Meyer,  and  Philiiipi, 
on  the  contrary,  refer  it  to  Christ.     This  latter  view 
is  favored  by  the  relation  of  the  present  passage  to 
Tor  A'oKTror  in  ver.  35,  as  the  aorist  serves  as  an 
intimation  of  the  historical  fact  of  redemption.     The 
expression,  "  through  Him  that  loved  us,"  denotes 
not  only  Christ's  assistance  in  general,  but  the  [lower 
I  of  His  victory.      As  His  death  is  princijiialiy  our 
I  death,  and  His  resurrection  is  our  resurrection,  so  is 
'  His  victory  also  our  victory  through  faith  (1  John 
I  V.  4).     But  the  power  of  this  victory  is  divided  into 
I  the  subjective  jirinciple  of  victory  in  the  heart  of 
I  believers,  and  the  objective  victorious  principle  of 
I  Christ's    rule   at    the   right   hand    of  God.      Nevcr- 
i  theless,  the  Apostle   does   not  say,  "through    Him 
I  who  hath  cimqiiered  for  us,"  because  Christ's  love 
I  shall  he  manifested   as  the  permanent    motive   of 
j  the    free   and   ethical   loving   life  of  Christians  in 
their  faith. 

♦  [In  the  LXX.,  Ps.  xlill.  23.  The  only  variation  is 
ivtKtv  h"Te,  im  the  iiuthority  of  X.  A.  B.  f).  F.  I,.,  while 
{RiC.)(\  K.  have  ivtKO..  It  must  be  remarked,  however, 
that  the  reading  of  the  LXX.  itself  varic<j  in  the  same 
manner.— 11.1 

t  [Ski  Alton!  :  "'It  is  no  new  trials  to  which  wo  are 
su'ijeeted:    what  if  we  verify  the  ancient  description  t '" 

—It] 

:  (This  would  refer  to  Illm  as  the  efficient  cnu«e ;   buv 

since  the  context  clearly  upholils  the  refen'noo  to  Christ,  It 

scarcely    seems    a    ".smoother   execetic.al    interjiretatlon " 

than  that  which  presents  Him  as  the  instrumental  cause. 

I  It  represents  the  union  in  victory  as  more  iiitlma'e  to  fcW 

1  low  tno  better  supported  reudiui:,  i i i  tow  ay  —it.] 


CHAPTER  VIII.    18-39. 


285 


Thisd  Fabaobaph,  yebs.  38,  39. 

Tholuck :  ""EvS-foq  yfvoiuvoi;,  as  Chrysostom 
Bays,  embraces  the  whole  world — who  can  rob  him 
of  his  consciousness  of  the  love  of  God  ?  "  But  he 
has  here  passed  beyond  the  consciousness  of  oppo- 
sition whch  he  had  uttered  in  vers.  33-35.  He 
ather  proclaims  here  the  absolute  subjection  of  all 
the  powers  of  tiie  world  to  the  consciousness,  or 
rather  conscious  being,  of  God's  love  in  Christ. 

The  Apostle  declares  the  immovableness  of  his 
confidence,  first  of  all  by  the  decided  n:init.a/iai, 
I  am  persuaded.  He  follows  this  up  by  portray- 
ing the  powers  of  the  world  in  great  antitheses, 
which  not  only  describe  the  victorious  career  of  the 
individual  Apostle  through  tlie  world  and  through 
time,  but,  in  prophetic  sublimity,  comprise  the  whole 
victorious  career  of  God's  people  until  the  end  of 
the  world. 

Tholuck  distinguishes  the  antitheses  thus:  1.  Hu- 
man events  (death  and  life);  2.  Superhuman  spheres 
(angels,  principalities;  afterwards  dt'vdfffi,q);  3.  Time 
(things  present,  things  to  come),  in  which  he  thinks 
that  the  di'vcitifii;  belonging  here,  according  to  A. 
B.  jC.,  &c.,  disturbs  the  sense  ;  4.  Space  (height  and 
depth).  The  more  general  form  of  this  description 
in  relation  to  the  oppositions  represented  above,  ap- 
pears especially  in  the  fact  that  here  the  question  is 
evidently  not  merely  concerning  threatening  or  hos- 
tile powers,  but  also  such  as  can  exert  a  seductive, 
misleading,  and  relaxing  influence.  Accordingly, 
we  have  not  merely  to  regard  an  objective  influence 
of  these  forces,  but  also  the  possibility  of  the  sub- 
jective misconstruction  of  their  operations. 

[Neither  death,  nor  life,  oJ'Tf  &dvaro(;, 
0 1'Tj  to)  »7  ].  If  we  look  closely  at  the  possibilities 
above  referred  to,  we  shall  see  that,  first  of  all,  with 
death  there  is  connected  the  fear  of  death  and  the 
darkness  of  the  kingdom  of  death ;  and,  with  life, 
that  there  is  connected  the  charm  of  life  and  the 
love  of  life,  or  even  the  apparent  distance  from  the 
Lord  (Heb.  ii.  14 ;  John  xvi.  33  ;  2  Cor.  v.  5,  6). 
On  death  and  life,  see  chap,  xiv,  8.  Grotius :  metns 
mortis,  spes  vitce,  which  Meyer  objects  to ;  but  his 
objection  to  Koppe's  interpretation,  which  is  as  fol- 
lows, is  more  appropriate :  qtiidquid  est  in  rerum 
natura :  aut  vivat,  aut  vita  careat. 

Nor  angels,  nor  principaHties,  ovxt  dy- 
Yf).ot,  ovrt  ctQ/ai.  See  Textual  Note  '',  and 
below,]  As  far  as  the  second  catecjory  is  concerned, 
the  Apostle  could  not  think  that  God's  angels  should 
desire  to  separate  him  from  the  love  of  Christ,  but, 
according  to  Col.  ii.,  the  Gnostic  Jews  soon  opposed 
a  morbid  adoration  of  angels  to  a  pure  and  full 
resignation  to  Christ  as  their  head  ;  and  even  Phari- 
Baic  Jewish  Christians  would  have  been  quite  capa- 
ble of  adulterating  the  pure  gospel,  according  to 
Gal.  i.  8,  by  an  appeal  to  angelic  revelation.  But  it 
is  well  known  how  the  subsequent  worship  of  angels 
really  led  to  an  obscuring  of  the  sun  of  Christ's 
love. 

The  threat  of  the  powers  of  the  Gentile  world 
then  takes  Its  place  beside  the  Jewish  angelic  vis- 
ions. It  is  plain  enough  that  the  d^yai  named 
with  the  dyytkot,  cannot  again  mean  "angelic 
powers"  (Meyer).  The  Apostle  had  to  deal  more 
and  more  with  the  powers  of  the  Gentile  world 
y2  Tim.  iv.  17).  The  dyyfloi,  are  interpreted  by 
Chrysostom,  Theophylact,  Beza,  Meyer,  and  others, 
aa  good  angels,  "  because  the  evil  angels  are  never 


called  dyyfkoi  without  some  qualifying  expression." 
Meyer  opposes  the  objection  of  Reiche,  and  others, 
that  good  angels  could  not  make  such  an  attempt  to 
separate  Christians  from  God,  by  saying  that  Paul, 
in  Gal.  i.  8,  did  not  believe  this  possibility,  but  only 
presented  it  hypothetically.  According  to  Clement 
of  Alexandria,  Grotius  [Stuart],  and  others,  tha 
dyyf'ioi  denote  evil  angels ;  but  according  to  Bu- 
cer,  Bengel  [Hodge],  and  others,  good  and  evil  an. 
gels.  Melanchthon  has  interpreted  the  d(j/ai  as 
human  tyrants,  because  he  correctly  saw  that  they, 
being  placed  beside  wyy^Aot,  could  not  themselves 
be  angels. 

[The  difficulty  in  deciding  the  meaning  of  the 
word  aQ/ai  arises  from  the  fact  that  it  is  used  in 
the  New  Testament  in  all  the  senses  given  above. 
The  prevailing  reference  is  undoubtedly  to  super- 
human creatures  (Eph.  iii.  10  ;  "vi.  12  ;  Col.  i.  16  ; 
ii.  10,  15).  It  seems  more  natural  to  take  <)i'vd,iifi.q 
(in  its  separate  position)  as  "  earthly  powers,"  espe- 
cially as  that  meaning  here  gives  an  anti-climax, 
The  disposition  to  insert  dvvdftfui;  immediately  after, 
shows  that  a  classification  of  angels  was  assumed 
here  (comp.  Eph.  i.  21 ;  Col.  i.  16).  Whether  we 
should  understand  good  angels,  or  bad,  or  botli,  is 
more  difficult  to  determine.  To  take  "  angels  "  as 
referring  to  the  former,  and  "  principalities"  to  the 
latter,  gives  an  abrupt  antithesis ;  to  refer  both  to 
good  angels,  leaves  evil  spirits  out  of  view  in  this 
extended  catalogue,  unless  we  find  them  named  in 
di'vdfifvi; ;  to  refer  both  words  to  both  classes  (Ben- 
gel,  Hodge),  is  perhaps  least  objectionable,  yet  with 
this  view  the  absence  of  any  attribute  is  remarkable. 
Still,  we  infer  from-  other  passages  that  both  good 
and  bad  angels  were  classified  somewhat  in  this 
manner,  d()'/ai  denoting  a  superior  order.  Comp. 
Lange's  Comm.,  Colossians,  i.  16,  p.  22. — R.] 

The  rfi'i'n//.Hc,  which  Melanchthon  interprets  as 
the  warlike  hosts  of  tyrants,  do  not  belong  here,  and 
therefore  still  less  in  the  category  of  angels.  They 
belong  in  the  tfiird  category:  Nor  things  pres- 
ent, nor  things  to  come,  nor  powers  [  o  !'  t  * 
ivf  a T(~)r  a,  oi'/rf  ft  i X Xovra,*  o'i'ri  dvvd- 
/tftt;].  (See  1  Cor.  iii.  22.)  The  present  time  was 
so  grievous  to  Paul  and  the  believers  of  his  period, 
that  they  earnestly  longed  for  the  second  coming  of 
our  Lord  (1  Thess.) ;  but  even  the  fature  had  a 
gloomy  aspect,  for  our  Lord's  coming  was  to  be  pre- 
ceded by  the  apostasy,  and  by  the  appearance  of 
Antichrist  (2  Thess.  ii.).  But  with  this  appearance 
there  were  to  come  just  these  gloomy,  seductive, 
and  Satanic  forces  {(v  ndai]  fi(vdf.ni,  -/.al  a/jfuloiq 
y.ai  rii^aai,  ii'fvdoi'c).  We  thereby  hold  that  Tho- 
luck's  objection,  that  the  di'vd/ifi,^  f  would  here 
"  disturb  the  sense  in  a  three/old  way,"  is  removed 
(p.  463).  The  one  objection,  that  it  would  disturb 
the  bipartite  rhythm,  is  removed  by  Meyer's  obser- 
vation, that  the  Apostle  first  arranges  by  couples, 
and  then  combines  the  three  parts  twice  more.  Ac- 
cording  to   Tholuck,  the   Suvdnnq    would  be   first 

*  [Here  the  generic  idea  of  time  is  evidently  the  promi- 
nent one.  So  PhUippi,  and  most.  Alford  :"  no  vicissitudes 
of  timf."—'R.] 

t  [Meyer  takes  Swa^icis  in  its  widest  sense:  powers 
of  every  kind.  Undoubtedly,  If  the  order  of  Jier.  could  ba 
adopted,  a  difiBculty  would  be  avoided.  (Dr.  Hodge  takes 
no  notice  of  the  correct  reading.)  It  seems  strange  that 
the  evil  forces  should  be  introduced  here.  The  simplest 
solution,  to  my  mind,  is  that  which  refers  this  word  to 
earthly  powers,  since  it  is  connected  with  "  things  present, 
things  to  come."  This  is  still  more  probable,  if  "  angels  '* 
and  ''principalities"  be  taken  as  ircludmg  all  supcrhninaa 
created  beings.— R.] 


2SG 


THE  EPISTLE   OF   PAUL   TO   THE   ROMANS. 


introduced,  and  then  removed.  Meyer  urges  that 
ivfOT.  does  not  mean  things  present,  but  things 
staruUng  before — those  which  are  about  to  enter. 
Thus  things  present  are  distinguished  from  things  to 
come.  De  Wctte  opposes  to  Gliickler's  interpreta- 
tion of  (ii'>'fi/(fK  as  miracles,  that  of  powers. 

Fourth  category :  [Nor  heigrit,  nor  depth, 
o r T f  i' I/' u> ,ua,  oini  fJcifyoi;.]  Ti le  Apostle  looks 
down  from  the  height  of  an  inspired  sense  of  life, 
many  times  elevated  to  heaven  (2  Cor.  xii.  2),  which 
could  well  have  become  to  him  a  temptation  (2  Cor. 
xii.  7),  into  the  depth  of  the  demoniacal  kingdom, 
with  wliich  he  had  to  fight  a  spiritual  conflict  with 
his  contemporaries  (Eph.  vi.  12),  as  well  as  into  the 
depth  of  the  rcahn  of  the  dead  in  which  he  had,  at 
all  events,  to  pass  through  a  painful  unclothing  (2 
Cor.  V.  4) ;  but  he  saw  in  the  future  altogether  new 
forms  of  the  world  arise,  whose  strangeness  and 
splendor,  by  their  attractiveness,  could  be  regarded 
as  dissipating  liis  view  from  Christ,  the  centre. 

Tholuck  :  "  rxfofia,  pdO^o:;.  Explanations  : 
Heaven  and  hell  (Theodoret,  and  others ;  Bengel, 
Baumgarten-Crusius) ;  heaven  and  earth  (Theopliy- 
lact,  Fritzsche) ;  happiness  and  unhappiness  (Koppe) ; 
honor  and  shame  (Grotius) ;  lofty  and  lowly  (Olea- 
rius) ;  higher  and  lower  evil  spirits  (Origen).  Sa- 
piciUia  hwreticorum  et  communes  vidgi  furores  (Me- 
lanclitiion)."  [The  generic  idea  here  is  tliat  of 
space.  If  a  more  specific  definition  is  required, 
heanen  and  hell  is  the  simplest  explanation,  though 
this  cannot  be  insisted  on  as  the  precise  meaning. 
-R.] 

Nor  any  other  created  thing.  In  connec- 
tion with  the  great  antithesis  of  height  and  depth, 
the  xt/tk,-  trio  a  can  hardly  mean  merely  "any 
thing  else  created  "  (Meyer),  or  a  creature  in  gen- 
eral (Luther,  Tholuck). 

Shall  be  able  .  .  .  love  of  God  which  is 
in  Christ  Jesus  our  Lord.  The  love  of  God  in 
Christ,  or  Christ  himself,  is  now  perceived  by  be- 
lievers as  the  all-prevailing  principle,  and  is  there- 
fore spiritually  appropriated  by  them  (Eph.  i.). — 
The  absolute  ()i'i. •«,««,•  is  for  tiiem  also  in  the  ethical 
sense.  It  is  tiie  completed  revelation  of  the  love  of 
God  in  Ciirist,  overcoming  the  world  and  bringing 
it  into  their  service,  by  which  believers  are  em- 
braced, and  which  they  in  turn  have  embraced 
(chap.  V.  8). 

[Alford  :  "  God's  love  to  us  in  Christ ;  to  us,  as 
we  are  in  Christ ;  to  us,  manifested  in  and  by 
Christ."  Stuart  thus  sums  up  :  "  This  is  indeed  '  an 
anchor  sure  and  steadfiust,  entering  into  that  within 
the  vail;' — a  h/esse'/,  cheer inif,  glorious  hone,  which 
only  the  gospel  and  atoning  blood  can  inspire." — On 
the  parallelism  between  chaps,  v.  and  viii.,  see 
ForUes,  pp.  333  ff.— R.] 


DOCTRIXAL   AND   ETHICAL. 

FiBST  PA&AORAPa,   TKBg.    lS-27. 

A.    The  groaning  of  the  creature*  (vers.  18-22). 

1.  The  Scri[)tnres  ascribe  to  the  whole  universe, 
even  to  the  heavenly  regions,  the  necessity  of  the 
renewal  of  creati-d  being  by  transformatioTi  (I's.  cii. 
2tt-28  ;    Ua.  li.  G  ;    Rev.  xxi.  5) ;    but  they  distin- 

•  [This  sulije'it  ha'i  liocn  n  spp'-ial  study  with  Pr.  Linee. 
His  nolo.",  wlii''h  .nro  as  jirofounil  ns  they  nro  cxtiiiustivo, 
aro  left  without  additions,  niice  to  add  would  bo  to  mar  the 
unity.— U.) 


guish  between  the  regions  of  glory,  which  are  re- 
newed, and  the  present  form  of  the  world,  which 
nmst  Ije  renewed  by  passing  through  corruption  and 
the  destruction  of  the  world  (2  Peter  iii.  10,  23). 
The  throne  of  God,  the  ascension  of  Christ.  Even 
astronomy  recognizes  this  great  contrast  between 
the  regions  of  prevalent  growth  and  of  prevalent 
completed  existence  in  the  nature  of  light  (see  iny 
work,  Das  Land  der  Herrlichkeit,  pp.  42  ff.).  But 
also  in  reference  to  the  sphere  of  humanity,  which 
does  not  embrace  merely  the  earth  (also  Sheol),  we 
must  distinguish  between  the  pure  condition  of  na- 
ture in  its  antithesis  to  perfection  (1  Cor.  xv.  47  ff.), 
and  the  obscurity  which  nature  has  experienced  io 
consequence  of  sin ;  see  the  present  passage.  Ac- 
cording to  the  nature  of  the  avO^^MTTot;  /oixoi;,  his 
whole  sphere  stood  in  need  of  development — in 
need  of  a  metamorphosis  (2  Cor.  v.  1  ff. ;  1  Cor. 
XV.  50)  ;  but  this  development  has  become  abnormal 
through  sin ;  and  the  metamorphosis  has,  by  a  me- 
tastasis, become  death  in  the  pregnant  sen.se,  qd^o(jd, 
corruption.  But  from  this  correspondence  of  na- 
ture with  the  human  world  in  the  state  of  fall  and 
decay,  there  also  follows  an  expectation  of  their  cor- 
respondence in  the  delivering  restoration  which  will 
be  also  the  completion  of  the  normal  development. 

2.  The  Holy  Scriptures  everywhere  render  promi- 
nent  tiie  colierence  and  correspondence  between  the 
spiritual  and  natural  world.  There  must  be  a  heav- 
en, because  there  are  heavenly  objects — because 
there  is  a  God — because  there  are  angels  and  saints. 
There  must  be  a  hell,  because  there  are  devils. 
Thus  Paradise  corresponded  with  Adam  in  hie  state 
of  innocence  ;  the  cursed  ground,  with  fallen  man  ; 
the  Promised  Land,  as  the  type  of  the  future  Para- 
dise, with  the  typical  people  of  God  ;  a  darkening 
and  desolation  of  the  land  with  every  religious  and 
moral  decline  of  the  people  (Deut.  xxviii.  15  ff. ; 
Isa.  xxiv.  17 ;  Joel  ii. ;  Zeph.  i.  14,  &c.),  and  with 
every  spiritual  period  of  salvation  an  exaltation  of 
nature  (Deut.  xxviii.  8  ff. ;  Ps.  Ixxii. ;  Isa.  xxv.  C  ff. ; 
Isa.  XXXV.;  Ilosea  ii.  21,  &c.) ;  and  thus  the  sun 
was  darkened  at  the  death  of  Christ,  and  the  re- 
newal of  the  earth  was  announced  by  the  earth- 
quake at  His  death.  Now  this  parallelism  extends 
in  a  more  intense  degree  through  the  New  Testa- 
ment period,  both  as  to  the  overthrow  of  tiie  old 
form  of  the  world,  and  the  sufferings  preceding  it 
(Luke  xvi.  25  ;  2  Peter  iii.  10  ;  Rev.'  xvi.  1  ff.),  and 
as  to  the  renewal  succeeding  it  (Isa.  xi.  6 ;  Rev. 
xx.-xxii.). 

3.  It  corresponds  to  the  connection  of  the  im- 
personal creature-world  with  the  personal  life  of 
man,  that  the  former  participates  in  the  anxious  ex- 
pectation of  believing  humanity  for  perfection.  As 
nature  in  sptK-K  asjjired  beyond  itself,  in  so  far  as  it 
received  the  im[)ress  of  man's  nature,  so  also  does  it 
asjiirc,  even  in  time,  beyond  itself,  in  so  liir  as  it 
shares  with  man  iiis  progress  toward  the  change  or 
transformation  into  the  super-terrestrial  and  glorified 
form.  The  waiting  of  the  creature  for  tliat  perfec- 
tion, as  with  erect  head,  just  as  it  is  with  tlie  human 
outlook,  may  be  called  pro.sopopo'ia  ;  the  fundamen- 
til  ihoiijrht  itsi'ir,  namely,  its  suffering,  its  sen.se  of 
the  impulse  toward  developaent — an  impulse  eon- 
fined  and  distuibed  by  the  ai)normal  condition — is  n 
real  relation,  an  actual  course  of  conduct.  We  do 
not  include  herein  the  normal  forms  of  death  in  the 
iirute  world.  The  fundamental  idea  of  this  appear- 
ance of  death  is  no  selfish  strug^rle  for  existence, 
but  the  idea  of  sacrificing  love.     The  weaker  beast, 


CHAPTER  VIIL    18-39. 


287 


which  becomes  a  prey  to  the  stronger,  cannot  and 
should  not  voluntarily  oifer  itself  upon  the  altar  of 
life,  even  though  it  be  only  a  beast ;  but  when  the 
beast  in  a  torpid  state  pays  to  the  stronger,  as  though 
in  a  dream,  its  tribute  for  the  joy  of  its  existence, 
there  is  reflected  the  voluntary  deliverance  to  death 
in  a  higher  region.  The  most  apparent  phenomena 
of  the  sufferings  of  the  creature,  next  to  the  in- 
numerable sufferings  of  human  nature  in  subjec- 
tion to  diseases,  wars,  battles,  pestilences,  are  the 
Bufferings  of  the  brute  world  as  tliey  appear  to  be 
immersed  in  the  fate  of  the  human  world,  and  are 
represented  in  the  noblest  form  in  the  sacrifice  of 
the  brute,  and  in  the  grossest  form  in  the  pangs  of 
the  brute.  Yet  not  only  over  the  brute  world,  but 
also  over  the  whole  realm  of  vegetable  life,  there 
has  extended,  with  the  morbid  tendency  of  the 
human  centre  of  the  world,  a  morbid  development 
of  the  most  subordinate  forms,  such  as  we  find  in 
parasites  and  dwarfs,  together  with  the  rapid  increase 
of  the  common  and  lowest  forms  above  the  more 
noble,  and,  in  fact,  an  increase  of  degenerations  of 
all  kinds.  But  the  apostolical,  as  well  as  the  mod- 
ern Christian  and  humane  apprehension  of  nature, 
extends  still  beyond  the  perception  of  the  real  groan- 
ing of  brutes  and  the  degeneration  of  vegetable  life. 
The  sense  of  the  most  profound  life  perceives  a 
groaning  of  the  cre;iture  in  the  most  general  sense, 
first,  as  a  longing,  developing  impulse  of  the  crea- 
ture-world toward  perfection  and  to  the  second  high- 
er form  of  existence,  and  secondly,  as  a  painful  suf- 
fering under  the  law  of  an  abnormal  and  more  in- 
tense corruptibleuess,  and  thirdly,  as  a  mournful 
concert,  a  harmony  of  all  the  keynotes  of  the  y.ocraoi; 
in  its  homesickness  for  a  new  paradise.  These  key- 
notes were  heard  by  the  prophets  (see  No.  2,  above) ; 
Christ  has  definitely  characterized  them  in  His  escha- 
tological  discourse  (Matt.  xxv.  29,  and  the  parallels 
in  Mark  and  Luke) ;  and  Paul  sketches  them  here 
in  brief  outline,  while  the  Book  of  Revelation  speaks 
of  them  in  great  figures.  Through  all  the  periods 
of  the  Church  there  extends  a  profound  sense  of 
this  earnest  connection  between  the  moral  and  phys- 
ical decline  of  the  human  world,  and  we  notice  its 
reecho  in  the  voices  of  the  poets  (Shakespeare,  for 
example),  down  to  the  Romanticists  of  recent  date 
(Fr.  von  Schlegel,  Bettina).  But  in  the  department 
of  the  most  recent  literature,  in  which  the  sense  of 
this  anxious  expectation  and  sadness  is  blunted,  there 
has  arisen  on  the  side  of  the  degenerating  extreme 
a  fantastical  and  gloomy  view  of  the  "  battle  for  ex- 
istence," and  it  would  not  be  surprising  if  even  this 
materialism  should,  in  turn,  degenerate  into  dualism. 
Moreover,  the  expectation  of  the  last  catastrophe 
refers  back  to  the  catastrophes  underlying  the  crea- 
tion of  the  world,  and  whose  reflection  in  the  Del- 
uge is  still  proved  by  our  recollection  of  the  most 
remote  antiquity. 

4.  The  Apostle  has  described  the  doia  in  1  Cor. 
XV.  54  as  a(f,9a(j<Tia.  Peter  speaks  of  an  inherit- 
ance incorruptible,  undefiled,  and  that  fadeth  not 
away  (chap.  i.  4).  Here  the  dota  means,  on  the  one 
hand,  the  deliverance  of  the  body,  and,  on  the  other, 
the  freedom  of  God's  children.  The  body,  there- 
fore, in  its  new  form,  shall  be  exempted  from  the 
natural  necessity  of  physical  life ;  for,  as  the  real 
body,  it  has  put  off,  at  death,  the  old  bodily  form 
with  its  sinful  propensities.  In  this  life  it  has  be- 
come, in  many  ways,  a  source  of  temptation  and 
hindrance  to  the  inward  life  ;  but  in  its  higher  form 
it  shall  become  the  perfect  outward  expression  of 


the  inward  life.  To  be  wholly  adapted  to  the  spirit, 
and  therefore  not  only  exempt  from  the  corruption, 
but  also  the  constraint  of  nature,  and  to  be  wholly 
an  organ,  an  expression,  and  an  image  of  the  spirit 
— these  are  the  individual  characteristics  of  the  glo- 
rification in  which  nature  also  shall  participate,  since 
it  is  rendered  free  to  share  in  the  freedom  of  the 
glory  of  God's  children.  In  general,  the  conception 
of  real  ideality  is  the  object  to  which  they  shall  be 
raised  ;  that  is,  an  ideality  in  which  its  idea  shall  not 
only  be  delivered  from  all  deformity,  but  shall  even 
be  elevated  above  the  symbolism  of  the  beautiful 
splendor  in  which  poetry  invohmtarily  becomes 
prophecy,  into  tlie  real  nature  of  the  beautiful  ap- 
pearance.  We  shall  find  an  analogue  to  the  repre- 
sentation of  the  new  form  of  things,  if  we  compare 
the  present  form  of  the  earth  and  of  the  creature- 
world  with  the  rough  forms  of  the  earth  and  the 
gross  forms  of  the  creature,  which,  according  to  the 
testimony  of  paleontology,  have  preceded  the  pres- 
ent form  of  our  cosmos  (see  my  Zand  der  Hcrrlich' 
keit ;    Vermischte  Sell  rif  ten,  vol.  ii.). 

5,  The  different  eschatologies  of  antiquity  here 
come  m  for  consideration.  As  for  the  relation  of 
the  Persian  to  the  Jewish  eschatology,  it  seems,  after 
all,  demonstrable  that  the  originality  of  the  theo- 
cratic eschatology  is  reflected  in  Parsism  (Vendidad, 
Bundehesh),  just  as  the  Christian  eschatology  is  re- 
flected in  the  old  German  Edda.  On  the  develop, 
ment  of  the  Old  Testament  eschatology,  see  Tho- 
luck,  note  on  p.  422  ;  Ps.  Ixxii. ;  Isa.  xi.  6  ;  xxv.  8 ; 
Ixv.  66  ;  Hosea  ii.  21  ff. ;  Amos  ix.  13  ;  Zephaniah, 
&c. ;  and  on  the  Jewish-Eabbinical  eschatology,  see 
Tholuck  again,  p.  423.  It  is  notewoittiy  that  Rab- 
binical Judaism  lias  even  assimilated  itself  to  liea- 
thendom,  in  that  its  expectation  has  become  chiefly 
retrospective,  like  the  longing  of  the  heathen  for 
the  golden  age  (that  is,  an  expectation  of  the  gro- 
tesque restoration  of  sensuous  glory),  while  the  Old 
Testament  anticipation  of  Israel,  the  "  people  of  the 
future,"  has  been  consummated  in  the  eschatology 
of  the  New  Testament.  On  the  eschatology  of  the 
New  Testament,  we  must  refer  to  biblical  and  dog- 
matic theology  (see  Commentary  on  Matthew,  pp. 
418-434  ;  1  Cor.  xv. ;  2  Peter,  pp.  46  ff.).  For  re- 
marks on  ecclesiastical  eschatology,  especially  on 
Luther's  discourses  concerning  the  future  form  of 
the  world  ;  on  the  question  de  duratione  brvtoruni  ; 
on  the  distortion  of  the  end  of  the  world  into  the 
gross  representation  of  an  utter  destruction  of  the 
world  by  the  Lutheran  doctrinal  writers  of  the  sev- 
enteenth century ;  and  on  the  restriction  of  the 
Apostle's  entire  description  to  mere  human  rela- 
tions, &e.,  see  Tholuck,  pp.  425-428. — It  is  a  beau- 
tiful idea  of  Theodore  of  Mopsvestia,  that  "  things 
visible  and  invisible "  constitute  a  xoff/fog,  for  the 
comprehension  of  which  (consisting,  as  it  does,  of  all 
created  things  together),  in  one  pledge  of  love,  man 
(consisting,  as  he  does,  of  both  worlds)  was  created ; 
that,  after  liis  fall,  the  higher  spirits  alienated  them- 
selves from  him  ;  but  at  the  prospect  of  his  restora- 
tion, they  dedicated  themselves  to  his  service,  and 
now  rejoice  in  his  restoration,  &c.  This  idea  is 
more  in  place  in  the  passage  relating  to  the  original 
founding  of  tlie  new  world  in  the  absolute  atone- 
ment (Col.  ii.  20),  than  in  the  present  passage,  relat- 
ing to  the  glorification  of  the  present  world. — We 
can  avoid  all  fanciful  ideas  in  regard  to  the  question 
de  duratione  brvtoruni,  and  apply  Christian  principlea 
only,  by  treating  it  in  brief  allusions  : 

(1.)  The  morbid  sundering  of  types  analogous  to 


288 


THE   EPISTLE    OF   PAUL   TO   THE   ROMANS 


the  formation  of  human  heathendom.  The  opposite 
mu3t  therefore  be  a  return  of  nature  to  collective 
fundamental  types. 

('2.)  The  morbid  increase  of  individuals,  analo- 
gous to  the  extravagant  generation  of  the  human 
proletarian.  The  opposite  is  the  preponderance  of 
con.-stant  existence  over  an  excited  growth. 

(li.)  The  rise  of  a  preponderance,  of  the  most 
Bubordinate  forms,  of  parasites,  of  forms  doomed  to 
decay.  The  opposite  is  the  dynamical  dominion  of 
pure  forms,  the  negation  of  parasites. 

(4.)  The  reflexive  formation  of  the  morbid  form 
of  death  in  original,  ideal  forms. 

(5.)  The  absolute  connection  of  the  creature  thus 
idealized  with  man,  and  its  appropriation  by  man. 

Here,  as  well  a:?  to  the  following  paragraph,  be- 
long Ps.  Ixxii.  ;  Isa.  Ixv.  06  ;  Jolm  Wahher's  hymn, 
"  It  makes  one  heartily  rejoice ;  "  G.  Arnould's 
hymn,  "  0  Breaker  of  all  bonds ;  "  Schiller's  poem, 
"  Oh,  from  this  valley's  depths ; "  and  expressions  of 
Fr.  von  Sclilegcl,  Bettina,  and  others,  on  the  anxious 
expecfcition  of  nature. 

fj.  The  most  prominent  views  on  eschatology 
may  be  distinguished  thus :  (1.)  The  Gnostic-dual- 
jstic  view,  with  which  we  must  also  unite  the  recent 
theosophic  views  in  general ;  {'i.)  The  Positivist, 
wiiich  holds  to  an  absolute  catastrophe  without  in- 
terpositions ;  (3.)  The  Rationali:)tic,  which  does  not 
get  beyond  the  notion  of  a  gradual  idyllic  improve- 
ment  of  nature  arid  humanity,  (4.)  Tlie  cliristo- 
logico-dynamicnl,  which  defines  eschatology  from 
the  centre  (which  operates  as  a  principle),  of  the 
death,  the  resurrection,  and  the  glorification  of 
Christ.  This  is  also  essentially  the  patristic  view. 
To  modern  pliilosopliical  unbelief  the  beginning  of 
the  world,  as  well  a.s  its  end,  is  sunk  in  mist  and 
niglit,  because  to  it  the  centre  of  the  world — the 
historical  Christ — is  sunk  in  mist  and  night. 

The  christological  and  dj-namical  view  stands  in 
particular  need,  at  the  present  time,  of  a  vigorous 
development.  It  appears  everywhere  througliout  the 
Scriptures,  and  is  strongly  expressed  in  Epli.  i.  19, 
and  also  in  Phil.  iii.  21.  Tholuck :  "  It  is  note- 
worthy that  in  Pliil.  iii.  21  the  same  iTzoTuaanv, 
which  here  expresses  subjection  to  matter,  denotes 
the  operation  of  Divine  power  through  which  mat- 
ter shall  be  glorified." 

B.  The  groaning  of  believers  themaelvcs  (vers. 
23-25). 

1.  The  Apostle  speaks  of  a  twofold  testimony 
of  the  language  of  groans,  wiiich  is  further  divided 
into  a  threefold  one.  The  Creature  groans  in  its 
painful  struggle  for  perfection  ;  the  life  of  believers 
groans.  But  as  believers  groan  in  their  conscious- 
n(;ss  and  conscious  sense  of  life,  so  also  does  the 
spirit,  in  its  ctliical  struggle,  groan  in  the  ground  of 
its  life. 

2.  The  groaninfj  is  related  to  tearx,  as  labor  is 
to  rest.  Tears  relieve  the  passive  resignation  of  the 
soul  to  God's  coun.sel  amid  its  conflict  with  the  hin- 
drances of  life  ;  tlie  groaner  labors  in  his  recourse 
to  God's  act  in  heaven  against  the  power  of  hin- 
drances. Tears  flow  from  tliis  opposition,  since  they 
come  from  God ;  the  groaner  protests  against  the 
opposition  by  appealing  to  God.  Both  are  twin  chil- 
dren of  the  imoKoi'i'i,  which  now  proves  itself  as 
patience  and  now  as  steadfastness.  Compare  the 
history  of  the  groans  and  tears  of  Christ.  On  the 
great  power  and  importance  which  tears  and  groans 
have  as  signals  of  the  most  extreme  distress  of  tiie 
invisible  world  in  conflict  with  the  visible,  and  of 


the  higher  in  conflict  with  the  lower,  compare  the 
evidences  of  the  Holy  Scriptures  by  tlie  aid  of  a 
concordance.  Herder :  "  The  smoke  from  the  burn- 
ing forest  does  not  rise  so  high  heavenward  as  does 
the  burdened  man's  groan  "  (see  James  v.  [)). 

3.  The  idea  of  the  anaiiyrj  denotes  not  merely 
the  first  beginning — harvest,  for  example — and  not 
only  the  most  excellent,  but  also  the  pledge  and  rep 
resentation  of  the  future  totality  which  is  assured  in 
the  successful  beginning.  But  so  is  God's  Spirit  the 
pledge  of  glory.     See  the  Exeg.  JSote. 

4.  Witliout  a  comprehension  (which  is  often 
very  defective)  of  the  relation  between  the  principial 
Christian  life  and  the  same  life  in  its  broadest  com- 
pletiou — whicli  is  suggested  even  Ijy  the  development 
of  every  grain  of  wiieat — it  must  appear  a  wonder- 
ful tiling  that  the  believer  already  possesses  adop- 
tion,  according  to  ver.  16,  and  that,  according  to 
ver.  23,  he  first  expects  the  ado{)tion  witli  groaning; 
that  he  has  righteousness,  and  yet  must  strive  after 
righteousness  (2  Tim.  iv.  8) ;  that  he  is  truly  deliv- 
ered and  saved,  and  yet  is  only  delivered  and  saved 
in  hope.  The  grand  and  mysterious  elaboration  of 
tliis  develo[)meiit  renders  its  comprehension  more 
difficult,  and  therefore  many  speak  of  an  ideal  pos- 
session, and  the  like.  The  principial  possession  is, 
indeed,  also  an  ideal  one,  in  so  far  as  the  idea  of 
perfection  is  contained  in  the  principle,  and  always 
appears  more  grand  from  it,  but  the  realization  of 
the  idea  is  only  begun  in  it ;  it  perfectly  exists  as  a 
foundation  in  the  germ.  On  the  variety  of  such  an- 
titheses as  pctau.iia,  adnr^ijia,  and  anolvriiuKTi^ 
see  Tholuck,  p.  436.  Theotloret  has  even  perverted 
the  antithesis  into  that  of  ovotta  and  THiayiia;  the 
Socinians  distinguished  tenere  Jkle  and  j'riii ;  Tho- 
luck speaks,  with  De  Wette,  of  a  "  partial  definition 
of  the  idea  of  viof}faia;"  and  Luther  tran.«lated 
thus  :  "  We  patiently  wait  for  the  adojilion,  and  ex- 
pect," &e.  The  Codd.  D.  F.  G.,  in  surprise  at  the 
expectation  of  the  adoption,  leave  out  the  v'toiyi- 
aiav. 

5.  No  grander  and  more  glorious  thing  can  be 
said  of  the  original  state  of  tlie  human  body,  than 
that  its  full  deliverance  (from  sinfulness,  misery, 
death,  decay,  and  i)erishablencss)  sliall  be  its  trans- 
formation to  the  glorious  freedom  of  the  children 
of  God.  That  the  resurrection  of  the  flesh  is  also 
declared  with  the  glorification  of  the  body,  comp. 
my  Vermixchte  Schrlften,  vol.  ii.  pp.  232  ft'. 

C.  77te  groaning  of  the  Spirit  imparted  to  bC' 
lievers  (vers.  26,  27). 

1.  On  the  contradictions  arising  from  the  identi- 
fication of  the  groaning  spirit  with  the  Holy  Spirit 
itself,  coiiij>.  the  L'jreg.  Xotes.  We  are  led  here  to 
the  antithesis  which  tlic  Apostle  brings  out  in  1  Cor. 
xiv.  15.  It  is  the  Christian,  religious-ethical  forma- 
tion of  an  antithesis,  whose  physical  foundation  is 
the  twofold  form  of  consciousness  originally  peculiar 
to  the  present  human  life.*  Compare,  on  this  point, 
Deutsche  ZvitM-hrift  fiir  christliche  Wissenschaft, 
&c.,  1851,  p.  242." 

2.  According'  to  Tholuck's  view  (p.  438),  when 
the  believer  is  in  the  greatest  distress,  he  knows 
least  of  all  how  to  find  a  verbal  expression  of  his 
prayer.  But,  according  to  the  Psalms,  necessity 
teaches  how  to  pray  ;  the  greatest  distress  becomes 


•  [This  view  of  Dr.  Langc  is  one  to  which  exception  has 
boen  tikcii  Ihr.mtrhout  the  Exrff.  AWf.«.  from  chiip.  vii.  H 
to  the  clo'ff  of  chiij).  viii  ;  it  is  not  necessary,  then,  tc  eDt«l 
upon  a  new  didcuaiiioD  of  it  hero.— B.J 


CHAPTER   VIII.    18-39. 


289 


prophetical  when  recourse  is  had  to  God.  But  it  is 
just  in  the  caloest  states  that  the  believer  needs 
most  of  all  the  interceding  Spirit.  Indeed,  distress 
gives  to  prayer  a  strong  expression  of  human  feel- 
ing, and  in  so  far  Tholuck's  view  is  applicable  to  the 
prayer  of  distress  in  a  more  special  sense.  The  in- 
tercession of  the  Spirit  denotes  the  more  direct  ac- 
Cf»s  which  God's  children,  in  their  inmost  heart, 
have  gained  to  the  Father  through  Christ,  according 
to  John  xvi.  26.  For  the  real  Advocate  with  the 
Father  is  Christ  (1  John  ii.  1) ;  the  Holy  Spirit,  as 
euch,  is  the  present  Comforter  of  believers,  in  oppo- 
sition to  the  world  (John  xiv.  16).* 

3.  The  real  n;iture  of  true  prayer  is  the  union  of 
the  human  and  divine  Spirit,  prompted  by  God's 
Spirit.  Hence  the  prophetical  confidence  of  the 
Amen.  This  union,  according  to  which  God  is  not 
only  the  author  and  finisher,  but  also  the  disj)0ser 
of  prayer,  is  ropresented  most  of  all  in  the  mystical 
adoration  of  a  spirit  absorbed  in  communion  with 
God.  On  this  point,  see  the  expression  of  Jelaled- 
din,  in  Tholuck,  p.  443. 

4.  On  the  groaning  of  the  creature,  see  Bucer's 
beautiful  expression,  in  Tholuck,  p.  440. 

Second  Pahagraph,  vers.  28-37. 

A.  Tlie  certainty  of  salvation  m  the  saving  pur- 
pose of  Divine  grace,  as  the  causa  primarla  {f^fficiens) 
of  salvation  (vers.  28-30). 

1.  The  certainty  of  salvation  is  divided  into  two 
lines,  one  of  inward  and  individual  life,  and  the 
other  of  external  relations.  Both  have  three  start- 
ing-points in  common  :  a.  Tiie  caiisa  primaria,  the 
purpose  of  God  (ver.  29) ;  b.  The  cauaa  meritoria, 
the  gift  of  His  Son  (ver.  32) ;  c.  The  causa  apprc- 
hendens,  or  organica,  faith  in  its  development  into 
the  hfe  of  love  (ver.  28).  Believers  are  here  called 
those  who  love  God,  because,  in  their  love  for  God, 
tlie  reflection  of  God's  love  has  become  manifested 
in  them.  The  progress  of  the  expectation  and  joy. 
fulness  of  personal  life  toward  the  dark  and  con- 
cealed ground  of  life,  as  to  the  absolute  and  S[)irit- 
ually  clear  personality,  which  is  one  with  love  itself, 
is  not  the  ground,  but  the  sign  and  evidence  that 
our  personal  life  has  been  appointed  and  called  into 
being  by  God's  eternal  counsel  of  love  and  grace. 
In  our  love  for  God  there  is  revealed  His  love  for 
us,  and  in  our  personality  there  shines  the  reflection 
of  His  personality.  But  with  this  there  appears  the 
dynamical  central  line  of  life — that  of  the  Divine 
determinations  of  the  persons  allied  to  God — to 
which  the  whole  succession  and  course  of  things  is 
made  suliservient. 

2.  The  divine  ;r^6i^f(ni,-  denotes  the  eternal  re- 
lation of  God  to  the  course  of  the  world  called  into 
being  by  Him,  but  also  called  to  free  self-develop- 
ment under  His  authority  ;  just  as  is  the  case  with 
the  two  terms  fior/.j  and  tviioxla.  All  these  defi- 
nitions denote  God's  eternal  thought  and  plan  of  the 
world ;  but  they  denote  it  in  different  relations. 
The  ni^oxia  designates  the  central  point  of  the 
Divine  purpose,  its  anticipating  love,  the  ideal  per- 
ception and  contemplation  of  the  personal  kingdom. 
Beside  it  there  stands,  on  the  one  hand,  the  povli], 
God's  going  to  himself  for  counsel,  the  look  of  His 
inteiligence  at  the  necessities  of  the  free  develop- 


*  [This  distinction  presents  no  valid  objection  to  fh- 
Intercession  of  the  Holy  Spirit.  For  it  is  one  made  in  and 
through  us,  as  that  of  Christ  is  for  us. — R.] 

19 


ment  of  the  world ;  and,  on  the  other  hand,  there 
stands  the  71q60kji.c,  as  the  establishment  of  ilia 
government  over  the  beginning,  the  middle,  and  the 
ultimate  object  of  His  institution  of  love.  The 
ivdoxia  settles  the  children  of  salvation;  the  floiO.i^ 
perceives  the  conditions  of  salvation  ;  and  the  ttijo- 
i9f(TK;  determines  the  stages  of  salvation.  But  that 
this  is  not  the  decree  of  fate,  but  rather  quahfied 
and  communicated  according  to  the  stages  of  the 
free  spiritual  kingdom,  is  plain  from  the  very  term 
used  to  describe  Christians :  that  they  are  called 
according  to  the  purpose — called,  not  compelled. 
Tholuck:  "  Tr^dflfffK,-.  The  7i(>6  is  not  the  tem- 
poral before,  as  in  nQotyvin,  which  Beza  and  Pareus 
hold,  but  as  the  prefix  in  ntJotiOifjOai..  Yet  they 
are  not  merely  nudr,  called  according  to  a  Divine 
decree,  but  according  to  one  whose  stages  to  the 
ultimate  object  of  the  tWJacrf  are  laid  down."  But 
the  idea  of  the  y./.Tjav^;  appears  here  in  a  narrower 
sense  as  a  definition  of  God's  children,  characterized 
by  penitence  and  fiiith,  baptism  and  confession  ;  the 
more  general  idea,  on  the  contrary,  appears  in  ver. 
28. 

3.  All  things  and  events  must  be  subordinate 
and  subservient  to,  and  promotive  of,  the  liighest 
purposes  of  God — the  realization  of  His  kingdom  of 
love,  and  therefore  the  salvation  of  His  elect.  Au- 
gustine :  Deus  est  adeo  bonus,  quod  nihil  viali  esse 
permii.teret,  nisi  adeo  cs-^et  jiotevs,  td  ex  quoUhet  malo 
possit  elicere  aUquod  bununi  (Tholuck,  p.  444). 

4.  And  we  know  (ver.  28).  We  know  not  whiit 
we  should  pray  for  as  we  ought;  but  God  knows  the 
meaning  of  the  groaning  of  our  spirit,  and  we  know, 
too,  that  all  things  Avork  together  for  good  to  them 
that  love  God.  This  knowledge  is  not  merely  a 
direct  confidence  of  the  spirit,  but  is  based  upon  the 
most  certain  argument :  a.  In  our  love  for  God,  Hia 
love  for  us  appears  ;  h.  But  God  reigns  omnipotent- 
ly, and  disposes  all  things  according  to  the  counsel 
of  His  love ;  c.  Consequently,  all  things  must  be- 
come providences  ot  the  loving  God. 

5.  We  hold  that  the  passage  in  vers.  29  and  30 
contains  the  whole  Divine  plan  of  salvation,  from 
the  first  foundation  to  the  ultimate  object,  and  we 
have  repeatedly  treated  it  from  this  point  of  view 
(see  my  Positive  Dogmatik,  p.  956).  We  remark 
first  of  all,  exegetically,  that  the  passage  in  Eph.  i. 
4-14  is  an  explanatory  parallel  to  the  present  pas- 
sage. As  the  foreknowing  here  precedes  the  pre- 
destinating, so  there  the  choosing  (ver.  4)  precedes 
the  predestinating  (ver.  5) ;  from  which  it  follows 
that  both  the  foreknowing  and  the  electing  mean 
essentially  the  same  thing — an  act  preceding  the 
predestination.  To  y.ahiv  or  y./.^ffi.^  in  the  present 
passage  there  corresponds  in  that  passage  l/a(jirw- 
(Tiv,  accepting,  &c.,  in  ver.  6,  which  the  Apostle  re- 
sumes in  ver.  11,  and  specially  elaborates.  To  the 
justifying  here,  there  then  corresponds  there  the 
following  :  "  in  whom  we  have  redemption,"  &c.,  in 
ver.  7.  But  finally,  the  glorifying  here  is  reflected 
in  the  "  wherein  he  hath  abounded  toward  us  in  all 
wisdom,"  &c.  But  Paul  also  there  refers  all  these 
individual  parts  to  the  "  good  pleasure  wh*ch  he 
hath  purposed  in  liiniself "  (in  ver.  9).  So  that  it 
plainly  follows  there  that  the  "predestinating"  re- 
lates specifically  to  the  "  purpose,"  while  the  "pur 
pose  "  appears  to  be  qualified  by  the  ponh],  "  coun 
sel,"  as  this  latter  is  qualified  by  the  "  good  pleas, 
ure."  But  we  learn,  in  reference  to  the  first  act,  th« 
"  choosing  "  in  the  Epistle  to  the  Ephesians,  that 
election  t  jok  place  in  Christ  before  the  fouudation 


290 


THE   EPISTLE    OF   PAUL   TO    THE   ROMANS. 


of  the  world  (sec  Julin  xvii.),  just  as  we  learn  that 
the  glorifying  or  guidance  of  believers  to  "  glory  " 
will  be  ideiitieal  with  being  led  "  to  the  praise  of  his 
glory,"  according  to  the  idea  tiiat  the  beholding  of 
the  glory  of  God  will  constitute  the  glory  of  believ- 
ers, and  tliat  tiie  former  will  be  revealed  in  the  lat- 
ter (1  .John  iii.  2). — We  may  further  oljserve,  that  a 
real  diHeronce  exists  between  election  and  foreordi- 
nution,  or  predestination,  and  that  the  nonyivo'iaxnv 
;annot  |)ossibly  mean  foreknowledge,  in  God's  idea, 
3f  subjects  already  present  (for  whence  would  they 
have  come  into  God's  ideaV),  but  that  it  can  only 
mean  the  loving  and  creative  sight,  in  God's  intui- 
tive vision,  of  human  personalities  for  a  preliminary 
ideal  existence.  The  doctrine  of  predestination  of 
Augustine,  of  the  Middle  Ages,  and  of  tlie  Reform- 
ers, could  not  reach  this  idea  of  election  intcl/ectu- 
alhj  (Christian  faith  has  always  reached  it  in  spirit), 
because  the  tlistinction  between  the  idea  of  the  in- 
dividual personality  of  man  and  the  idea  of  the 
"  specimen  of  every  kind  "  had  not  yet  been  defi- 
nitely attained.  It  is  now  clear  that  such  a  "  fore- 
knowing "  of  God  in  relation  to  all  human  individu- 
als must  be  accepted,  because  man  is  an  individual 
thought  of  God  ;  and  that  the  same  must  hold  good 
of  "electing,"  in  so  far  as  each  individual  is  distinct 
in  his  solitary  separation  from  all  other  individuals, 
and  has  a  solitary  call  (see  Rev.  ii.  17).  But  it  fol- 
lows from  this  that  the  foreknowing  of  the  "  elect," 
when  it  has  become  manifest,  nmst  be  accepted  in 
the  most  emphatic  sense,  analogously  to  the  fact 
that  Abraham  is,  in  God's  typical  kingdom,  the  elect 
xa-^  tSn/t'iv,  and  that  Christ  is  the  elect  in  God's 
real  kingdom  in  the  absolute  sense,  so  that  all  His 
followers  are  chosen  together  with  Him  as  organic 
members,  according  to  their  organic  relations  (Eph. 
i.).  From  both  propositions  it  follows,  further,  that 
electiim  does  not  constitute  an  infinite  opposition 
between  such  as  are  ordained  to  sj^lvation  and  such 
as  are  ordained  to  condenmation,  but  an  infinite 
difference  of  destinations  for  glory ;  which  differ- 
ence, ho.wever,  can  be  the  basis  of  an  actual  oppo- 
sition (see  Matt.  xxv.  24),  and  therefore  is  also  com- 
bined with  this.  As  the  foreknowing  expresses  the 
collective  foundation,  the  godlike  spiritual  nature  of 
the  elect  as  the  product  and  object  of  Divine  love, 
there  is  coniprised  in  the  electing  not   only  their 


election  from  the  mass  of  the  world,  but  also  the 
distinguishing  feature  of  their  yn(jia/iaTu  and  eliar- 
acters.  In  additicm  to  the  earlier  perversions  of  this 
doctrine  of  the  eternal  foundation  of  personal  es- 
sence— a  doctrine  of  the  highest  importance  to  our 
times — we  may  add  the  recent  assertion  of  Hof- 
mann  {Sc)n-iftbiwrix^  vol.  i.  p.  227),  tiiat  the  tx/.i- 
yKTOcu  relates  not  merely  to  individuals,  but  to 
the  entire  body,  and,  accordingly,  to  individuals  as 
members  of  the  body.  The  Apostle  says  u'l's  four 
times,  and  toi'tois  tliree  times.  After  tiie  ideal  de- 
terminations of  personalities  themselves,  there  can 
now  follow  the  predestination  of  their  oooc;  in  time 
and  space,  their  whole  lot  (including  the  previously 
determined  permission  and  control  of  the  fall).  For 
the  foundation  of  the  world  corresponds  to  the  his- 
tory of  the  world.  But  the  fate  of  each  individual 
is  designed  to  mature  him,  under  gratia  prcevenieru, 
for  conversion,  and  when  this  object  is  reached,  it  ia 
his  turn;  he  is  TfTaj.K tVos  (Acts  xiii.  4S).  From 
this  it  now  follows  that  the  "  calling,"  in  a  special 
sense,  first  makes  its  appearance  with  the  theocrati- 
cal  and  evangelical  revelation  and  its  preaching  of 
salvation.  Tliose  in  whom  the  outward  call  of  God 
has  become  an  inward  one,  are  "  called  "  in  the  spe- 
cific sense  ;  yet  the  typical  "  call "  first  becomes 
perfectly  real  in  the  New  Testament.  As  the  life- 
sphere  of  election  is  the  spiritual  kingdom,  and  the 
life-sphere  of  foreordination  is  the  history  of  the 
world,  so  is  the  Churcii  the  life-sphere  of  the  call. 
But  if  godly  sorrow  leadcth  to  salvation,  and  germi- 
nating faith  to  saving  faith,  the  justifying  will  be 
realized.  This  becomes  decided  by  the  Spirit  of 
"  adoption,"  which  spirit,  however,  now  begins  to 
operate  also  as  nvu'/ia  rrji;  ry6S»/i,-,  and  in  reciprocal 
acti(m  with  it  even  the  whole  historical  experience 
of  God's  children  becomes  a  ()niaSffTf)cu,  a  guidance 
to  glory.  On  the  modes  of  this  guidance,  which 
have  been  but  little  developed  doctrinally,  see  my 
Positive  Docfrna'.ik,  p.  1064. 

As  far  as  the  five  divine  saving  acts  are  con- 
cerned, five  human  elements  must  correspond  with 
them,  according  to  the  sphere  of  love  and  freedom. 
According  to  the  ehristological  idea,  the  Divine  acta 
and  human  elements  should  come  together  in  five 
points  of  uidon,  somewhat  as  follows  : 


Election. 

Religious  Foundation. 
Determination  to 
salvation. 


Ordination. 

Destiny. 
Pilgrimage,  or 
striving. 


Call  (as  awakening 

and  ilhnnination). 
Conversion. 
Life  of  Prayer. 


Justification. 

Faith. 

Peace,  Adoption. 


Glorification. 

Holiness. 

Godlv  life  of  Love. 


If  we  reduce  the  five  elements  to  three :  founda- 
tion, execution,  end  ('io///,  too/Tov,  TtV.o,-),  the  two 
elements  of  execution — cult  and  justijiration — de- 
note tlje  incipient  and  decided  new  birth  (from  water 
and  the  Spirit).  The  (Vdjct  denotes  regeneration  in 
the  sense  of  completion  (.Matt.  xix.  28).  The  sum 
of  all  the  Divine  opin-ations  taken  together  is  (/race  ; 
the  sum  of  all  the  human  elements  is  the  growhiff 
frenhnt  of  (rod's  children ;  and  the  sum  of  all 
points  of  union  is  etrrnal  lif''. 

It  is  only  from  the  standpoint  of  the  call  and  of 
justificiition  that  m:in  can  look  retrospectively  at  his 
ordination  and  election  in  the  light  of  God's  love, 
anil  prospectively  at  his  object,  tlie  Aojot.  But  if, 
on  the  other  hand,  he  would  infer  his  own  justifica- 
tion from  his  assumed  election,  this  would  be  a 
standpoint  of  self-deception,  and  he  woidd  make  his 


own  justification  out  of  the  fragmentary  work  of 
holiness,  and  this  would  become  self-ti>rment  or  self- 
righteousness.  The  believing  sinking  into  the  image 
and  righteousness  of  Christ,  is  a  sinking  into  the 
fountain  of  eternal  life,  which  then  sinks  thereby,  aa 
though  unobserved,  into  the  heart.* 

•  (These  Notes  of  Dr.  Lnnge  arc  very  just,  in  their 
oppoitition  to  such  a  sundcrinij  of  the  nets  of  Ood  in  our 
salviiHoii  (here  roprofonttvl,  us  thoy  nocpssiiHly  must  be  to 
our  flnito  minds,  as  sui'cpssivc),  ns  will  make  of  elootioa 
iiiid  i)redcstiiiatii)n  somethinf;  arhitniry  on  the  part  of  God. 
The  (;uard  he  nets  al)out  tlie  docttinc  of  humMii  porsonality 
is  voiy  necossiiiy,  cspocinlly  for  minds  trained  in  the  school 
of  hyper-(;:ilvini<m.  Still  ho  has  not  solveil  the  probh-m. 
The  Apostle  liimsaif  does  not  do  it.  He  Ian  presents,  tow 
the  soiurity  of  hrli-vei:i,  the  olijeetivo  ground  of  their  con- 
lideiiee.  Those  rljfhtly  read,  wlio  read  to  leani  for  their 
comfort  wliat  Ood  has  done  for  them  in  otoniity.  //kio  He, 
to  whom  all  time  Is  present,  whusc  eternity  entura  into 


CHAPTER  VIII.   18-39. 


2&\ 


B.  The  certainty  of  salvation  in  its  historical 
gift  and  e>^tabli,ihmeiit  in  Christ,  in  opposition  to 
historical  contradiction  in  per-ecutions  (vers.  31-37). 

1.  The  thesis  of  the  perfect  historical  securities 
of  the  salvation  of  Christians.  Ver.  31  says:  If 
God  be  fur  us,  all  the  hindrances  and  restrictions  to 
our  salvation  are  nullified  as  such.  Nothing  can 
harm  us.  Ver.  32  :  Since  God  did  not  spare  His 
own  Son  for  us,  He  has  given  us  already  every  thing 
in  principle,  in  order  to  give  it  to  us  in  His  own 
time  in  reality ;  all  the  aids  for  our  salvation  are 
given  to  us ;  every  thing  contributes  to  our  good. 

2.  The  Apostle  represents,  in  four  distinct  ele- 
ments, the  complete  security  of  our  perfect  salva- 
tion in  Cluist.  His  death  removes  our  deserved 
cundemnation.  His  resurrection  raises  us  above  the 
sense  of  condemnation  into  the  confidence  and  spirit- 
ual life  of  adoption.  His  sitting  at  the  right  iiand 
of  God  protects  us  against  all  condemning  powers, 
and  is  tlie  pledge  of  our  acquittal  at  the  judgment. 
His  intercession  abolishes  the  last  remains  of  con- 
demnation in  our  life,  and  secures  us  against  relapse. 
On  the  dissenxus  between  the  Reformed  and  Luther- 
nn  theology  in  reference  to  Christ's  sitting  at  the 
right  hand  of  God,  see  Tholuck,  p.  458.  Tholuck 
decides  in  favor  of  the  view  that  the  right  hand  of 
God  is  ubi(jue,  and  the  sitting  at  the  right  hand  of 
God  indicates  the  Saviour's  entrance  into  absolute 
freedom  from  all  restraint.  But  if  we  will  not  re- 
gard the  "  absolute  freedom  from  all  restraint"  in  a 
purely  negative  sense,  we  are  driven  with  this  free- 
douj  itself  to  the  positiveness  of  an  absolute  situa- 
tion and  standpoint  in  glory.  On  the  views  relating 
to  the  i7ifercessio,  see  Tiioluck,  p.  459.  According 
to  Tholuck,  the  intercesdo  must  be  strictly  regarded 
only  with  reference  to  Heb.  vii.  25  ;  ix.  24  ;  1  John 
ii.  1 ;  according  to  Meyer,  it  is  vocalis  et  oralis. 
But  it  may  be  asked.  Is  it  analytical,  or  synthetical  ? 
The  glorified  Christ,  in  His  eternal  purpose  of  love, 
is  himself,  as  the  personal  and  complete  Word,  the 
personified  intercession  He  appears  in  the  pres- 
ence of  tlie  Father  for  us  (Heb.  ix.  24).  For  state- 
ments relating  to  this  subject,  see  Tholuck,  p.  461. 

C.      Conclusion. 

1.  The  Apostle  has  enumerated  seven  opposi- 
tions that  can  operate  against  us  as  teni|)tations  to 
relapse.  There  are  seven,  from  the  beginning  of 
labor  to  rest.  He  hero  enumerates  the  forces  which 
can  oppose  us  in  our  fellowship  of  love  with  the 
Lord  ;  these  are  ten  in  number.  But  this  is  the 
number  of  the  finished  course  of  the  world.  By 
hiiglit  we  mlglit  have  in  mind  the  i't/'w/ict,  in  the 
sense  of  2  Cur.  x.  5  ;  and  by  depth,  Rev.  ii.  24. 
Yet  both  terms  are  essentially  the  same,  and  we  pre- 
fer the  explanation  given  in  the  Execi.  Notes. 

2.  The  assumption  that  different  classes  of  angels 
are  spoken  of  in  this  passage,  has  resulted  in  various 
changes  of  the  text.  Also  in  Eph.  i.  21,  the  Apos- 
tle has  chosen  expressions  which  comprise  as  well 
present  powers  of  the  world  as  future  spiritual  pow- 
ers.    Tiie  same  holds  good  in  reference  to  Col.  i.  16. 


tbcst  T.^ry  lets,  ^Hd  these  ^aciows  acta,  is  beyond  our  com- 
prebtn.sio>  .  Wlnj  Hf.  did  ihem,  is  answered,  so  far  as  it  cnn 
be  a'rswered  here,  only  by  the  responsive  love  of  a  be- 
liever's heart.  We  need  only  hold  fast  to  the  fact;  that  it 
is  a  fact  in  general,  the  .\postle  makes  abundantly  clear ; 
that  it  is  a  fact  in  our  case,  c.in  only  be  clear  according  to 
the  measure  of  our  consciciusness  of  being  in  Christ,  "in 
i^hom  he  hath  chosen  us,  before  the  foundation  of  the 
world,  that  we  should  be  holy,  and  without  blame  before 
him  in  love"  (Eph.  i.  4).  Comp.  chap.  ix.  on  the  more 
difficult  phases  of  this  subject, — R.l 


Paul  has  given  no  ground  for  a  definite  hierarchj 
of  angels ;  neither  has  Peter  done  so  in  1  Peter  iii, 
-22.  On  Tholuck's  discussion  concerning  angelic 
classes,  see  pp.  461  ff. 

3.  There  is  a  special  need,  in  our  day,  of  bring 
ing  forward  the  absolutely  dynamical  view  of  tha 
world  in  opposition  to  a  groundless  and  illiniifatble 
atomistic  one.  But  the  vital  way  to  bring  about  thii 
view,  is  the  experience  and  developed  perception  of 
the  absolute  operation  of  tlie  love  of  God  in  Christ 
Jesus  our  Lord. 

4.  Thus  chap.  viii.  advances  from  the  certainty 
of  freedom  from  condenmation,  in  ver.  1,  to  the  cer- 
tainty of  eternal  salvation,  in  ver.  39. 


HOMILETICAL  AND  PRACTICAL. 

Vers.    18-23.      The  groaning  of  the   creature. 

1.  What  are  we  to  understand  by  "creature"  here? 

2.  Why  does  it  groan  ?  3.  For  what  does  it  groan? 
(vers.  18-23.) — The  magnitude  of  the  future  glory 
of  God's  children.  1.  It  makes  us  forget  all  the 
sufferings  of  this  present  time  ;  2.  It  satisfies  not 
only  our  expectation,  but  also  the  anxious  expecta- 
tion of  the  whole  creation  (vers.  18-23). — Why  are 
the  sufferings  of  this  present  time  not  worthy  to  be 
compared  to  the  future  glory?  1.  Because  our  suf- 
ferings, however  great,  come  to  an  end  with  this 
present  time ;  2.  The  glory,  on  the  contrary,  will 
continue  forever  (ver.  18). — Comparison  of  the  suf- 
ferings of  this  present  time  witli  the  glory  which 
shall  be  revealed  in  us :  1.  The  former  bring  pain, 
cares,  and  tears  ;  2.  The  latter  brings  eternal  health, 
peace,  and  joy  (ver.  18). — The  revelation  of  God's 
children  is  a  revelation  of  their  life  ^concealed  with 
Christ  in  God)  of  courageous  faith,  fervent  love,  and 
calui  hope ;  Col.  iii.  3  (ver.  19). — The  creature  in 
the  service  of  corruption  (ver.  21). — The  creature 
transformed  to  glory  (ver.  21). — Believers  in  the 
possession  of  not  only  the  first-fruits  of  the  Spirit 
(faith,  knowledge,  love,  patience,  chastity,  &c.),  but 
also  in  the  possession  of  God's  ifuU  adoption,  since 
the  body  also  will  be  delivered  from  the  bondage  of 
corruption  (ver.  23). 

Li  TiiEK  :  God  will  not  only  make  the  earth,  but 
also  heaven,  more  beautiful.  This  present  time  is 
His  working  garb;  afterward  He  will  put  on  an 
Easter  coat  and  a  Pentecostal  robe  (vers.  18-23). 

Starke  ;  Wonder  and  rejoice,  ye  cross-bearers, 
for  your  heavy  and  wearisome  sufferings  are  only  a 
drop  compared  with  the  bouiidle.'is  sea  of  joys,  and 
as  a  grain  of  sand  in  the  balance  against  hundreds 
of  thousands  of  pounds  (2  Cor.  iv.  17).  "  JVon  sunt 
condir/7ice  passiones  hvjics  sceculi  ad  prceieritam  cul- 
pam,  quoi  reuiittitur  ;  ad  proesentem  consolationis 
p-aiiam,  qum  im?mf.(itur  ;  ad  futuram  gloriam  qitce 
promitdtur  ;"  Bkrnh.,  De  Convers.  ad  cleric,  c.  30 
(ver.  18).  The  creature  will  not  be  utterly  annihi- 
lated, but  renewed,  and  placed  in  a  more  glorious 
state  (ver.  21). — Hedinger  :  Woe  to  those  wJio  re- 
vile, torment,  and  abuse  God's  creatures  !  (ver.  19.) 

Spenkr:  What  would  not  a  soldier  suf!'er,  if  he 
knew  that  he  should  become  a  General  ?  But  here 
is  a  glory  succeeding  suffering,  beside  which  all  the 
glory  of  the  greatest  emperors  and  kings  is  only  a 
shadow  (ver.  18).  —  Roos :  The  sufferings  of  thia 
present  time  are  infinitely  small  compared  with  this 
infinite  weight  of  glory  (ver.  18). — The  glory  is  con- 
trasted with  the  corruption,  and  freedom  with  bond- 
age.    That  which  is  glorious  will  last  eternally ;  .and 


202 


THE    EPISTLE    OF   PAUL   TO   THE   ROMANS. 


that  which  is  free  may  indeed  be  used  and  enjoyed 
by  others,  hut  is  not  in  a  state  of  bondage  or  shivery 
(vers.  20,  21). — Wliat  is  spiritual,  will  become  com- 
pletely spiritual,  and,  consequently,  will  be  revealed 
in  great  glory.  Paul  calls  this  state  ot  glory  the 
state  of  adoption,  bi'cause  God's  children  will  then 
completely  show  their  iionor  in  themselves,  fully 
enjoy  their  J"ather's  love — in  a  word,  will  be  heirs 
of  Hod  and  joiiit-lieirs  with  Christ  (vers.  '22,  23). 

Gkklach  :  As  the  mother  in  travail  delivers  the 
living  clhld,  as  it  were,  from  death,  so  does  nature, 
groaning  under  the  power  of  death,  struggle  to  bring 
forth  from  itself  a  new  and  incorrujjtible  creation. 
"  Not  you  alone,  but  what  is  much  lower  than  you 
are,  and  without  reason  and  conscience,  shall  share 
with  you  your  blessings.  The  creation  will  be  free 
from  the  bondage  of  corruption  ;  that  is,  it  will  no 
more  be  corruptible,  Ijut  will  keep  pace  with  the 
glorification  of  your  body.  Por  as  it  became  cor- 
ruptiblc  when  you  did,  so  will  it  again  follow  you 
when  you  Ijecome  immortal.  As  a  nurse  who  fos- 
tered a  king's  son  will  herself  enjoy  his  possessions 
as  soon  Jis  he  attains  his  father's  throne,  so  will  it  be 
with  creation.  Do  you  see  how  man  everywhere 
goes  ahead,  and  every  thing  happens  for  his  sake  ? 
Do  you  see  how  the  Apostle  comforts  the  struggling 
one,  and  points  him  to  the  unutterable  love  of  God  ? 
But  he  does  not  merely  comfort  ;  lie  also  shows  the 
certainty  of  what  he  says.  For  if  the  creature  which 
was  created  for  your  sake  has  hope,  how  much  more 
do  you  have  hojjc  for  whose  sake  the  creature  shall 
enjoy  all  these  blessings !  Thus,  when  the  son  ap- 
pears in  his  glory,  shall  men  clothe  their  servants  in 
more  glorious  robes  to  the  honor  of  the  son ; " 
Chrysostom  (vers.  18-23). 

Lisco  :  The  magnitude  and  universality  of  the 
future  perfection  (vers.  18-23). — All  the  suffcrwgs 
of  this  present  time,  both  physical  and  spiritual, 
which  we  must  endure  on  the  way  to  our  future 
glorification,  bear  no  comparison  to  this  perfection. 
The  proof  of  this  is,  that  the  creature,  the  whole 
creation,  both  irrational  creation  and  every  tiling 
which  is  still  outsitle  of  fellowship  with  Christ,  is 
anxiously  waiting  for  the  revelation  of  the  still  con- 
cealed glory  of  God's  children,  the  truly  new-born  ; 
in  whicli  glorification  the  wliole  creation  will  partici- 
pate, for  it  is  universal  and  great.  The  firuund  of 
this  anxious  expectation  of  the  whole  creation  is 
partially  owing  to  the  subjection  of  the  latter  to 
vanitii,  and  in  part  to  the  hope  that  it  shall  be  deliv- 
ereil  from  that  state  which  is  subject  to  vanity,  and 
shall  participate  in  the  glorious  freedom  of  God's 
children  (vers.  18-21). 

HKi:nsKR:  "Temporal  sufTcrings  area  differen- 
tial of  the  future  glory  which  .shall  be  revealed  ; 
that  is,  they  are  so  infinitely  small  that  they  have  no 
value  compared  with  the  future  glory"  (Sii.nKii- 
8CHLAO,  /Jreieiniffkeit,  vol.  iv.  p.  13S). — The  sufTcr- 
ings  of  this  present  time  are  not  worthy  to  be  com- 
pared with  the  glory  which  shall  b(>  revealed  in  us  : 
1.  In  respect  to  duration  ;  2.  Quantity ;  and  3. 
Quality. — The  sufferings  are  a  mote,  the  glory  is  a 
hundred-weight ;  the  former  are  but  a  drop,  the  lat- 
ter a  .sea  (ver.  18). — Paul  designs  to  show  :  1.  The 
certainty  of  this  future  in  opposition  to  doubters,  as 
in  2  Peter  iii.  4,  who  say  that  all  things  continue  as 
they  were;  he  answers,  l)y  saying:  No;  nature  does 
not  nmiain  unchang(;al)le  ;  nature  itself  has  a  ten- 
dency to  transformation  and  completion ;  2.  The 
magnitude  of  salvation,  for  it  is  the  object  and  limit 
of  tlie  whole  creation  ;  it  must  tbcrcfbrc  be  exceed- 


ingly abundant.  —  Revelation  of  the  children  of 
God.  W/inl  will  then  be  revealed  ?  1.  The  inmost 
and  deepest  nature  of  their  hearts ;  2.  The  distin- 
guished  grace  of  God  toward  them,  which  is  the  glo- 
rious destination  to  which  God  elevates  them.  7'o 
wh^m  will  the  revelation  l)e  made  ?  To  theuiselves, 
to  the  angels,  to  the  believing  children  of  God,  to 
the  world,  and  to  all  devils  (ver.  19). — The  vanity 
to  which  the  creature  is  subject  is  manifested  spe^ 
cifically  as  follows :  1.  The  creation  has  lost  its 
original  charm,  its  beauty,  its  durableness,  and  its 
uniformity  ;  2.  It  has  become  corrupted  by  much 
that  is  injurious  or  useless  ;  3.  It  is  now  given  over 
to  abuse  (vers.  2t>,  21). — How  is  the  self-anxiety  of 
nature  to  be  regarded  ?  We  nnist  suppose  nature 
to  have  a  con.sciousness,  a  feeling,  and  that  it  would 
say:  "What  must  I  sutler  !  how  must  I  be  al^used  !" 
Supposing  particular  oi)jects  to  speak,  the  sun  would 
say  :  "  How  nmst  I  shine  upon  the  wicked  works  of 
men  !  how  am  I  comi)elled  to  see  every  thing !  " 
The  earth  :  "  What  must  I  bear  !  what  blood  must  I 
absorb  !  "  The  gardens  and  fields :  "  How  are  we 
wasted  in  excess  !  "  Gold  and  silver :  "  How  are  we 
perverted  into  idols  !  "  Beasts  :  "  How  are  we  tor- 
mented and  abused  ! "  If  the  Almighty  were  to 
open  the  mouths  of  many  beasts  of  btnden,  how 
would  the  irrational  brutes  complain  against  rational 
man  !  (ver.  22.)— The  Christian  is  Vhomme  de  disir 
(St.  Martin),  a  man  of  longings. 

Bkssek  :  The  martyrdom  of  the  creature  is  two- 
fold, and  its  coronaticni  will  also  be  twofold  :  1.  It 
suffers  death,  i;nder  whose  pains  the  elephant  gro.ans 
and  the  worm  writhes ;  2.  It  suffers  violence  and 
injustice  from  the  ungrateful  and  malicious;  audit 
suffers  involuntarily,  for  it  is  sulyoct  to  these  through 
God's  authority  (ver.  10).  The  glory  of  God's  chiU 
dren  is  freedom — freedom  from  sin  and  death — free- 
dom from  the  tyranny  of  the  devil  and  the  world 
(ver.  21). — The  Apostle  says:  We  art  wHitiiiff  for 
the  adoption.  It  is  the  mystery  of  Christianity,  that 
we  vait  for  what  we  already  have,  or  that  we  are 
and  at  the  same  time  are  not  what  we  shall  be.  We 
are  righteous  and  sinful;  we  are  holy  and  impure; 
we  are  kings  and  slaves  ;  we  are  tree  an<l  bond  ;  we 
are  living  and  dead  ;  we  are  saved  and  condemned  ; 
— wc  are  all  the  former,  apart  from  ourselves,  in 
Christ ;  we  are  all  of  the  latter  in  ourselves,  apart 
from  Christ  (ver.  23). 

Vers.  24-28.  The  salvation  of  Christians  in  the 
present  life  is  a  salvation:  1.  In  hope;  2.  In  pa- 
tience ;  3.  In  prayer  (vers.  24-28). — The  ov  Cliris- 
tian  hope  in  distinction  from  the  manji  worldly  hopes. 
1.  It  has  a  good  ground — Christ,  on  whom  we  can 
build  ;  2.  A  certain  object — eternal  salvation  (ver. 
24). — What  a  n)an  seeth  he  cannot  hoj)e  for;  if  we 
therefore  hope,  the  object  of  om-  hope  must  be  in- 
visii)le  (vers.  24,  2.")). — Christian  patience :  1.  In 
what  does  it  consist?  2.  In  whom  is  it  found? 
(ver.  2r)). — Interi'cssion  for  us  by  the  Spirit  of  God. 
1.  How  does  it  take  place  ?  2.  With  what  results  ? 
(vers.  2t*i,  27). — It  is  only  when  we  i)erceive  our  in- 
firmities that  God's  Spirit  intercedi's  for  us  with  un- 
utterable groans  (ver.  26). — A  glance  at  the  inmost 
life  of  prayer  of  God's  saints.  We  here  perceive : 
1.  Our  great  weakness ;  2.  The  comforting  inter- 1 
cession  by  the  Spirit  of  God ;  3.  God's  friemlly ' 
hearkening  to  our  prayer  (v<>i-s.  26-28). — Praise  God ' 
for  His  compassion  shown  in  the  S])irit's  helping  us 
in  our  infirmities  (ver.  26). — The  miutterahle  groan- 
ings  of  the  Spirit  (ver.  26). — God  knoweth  the  heart 
(ver.  27). — Are  we  also  soinU?    Doea  God's  Spirit 


CHAPTER  VIII.    18-39. 


293 


also  intercede  for  us  ?  Can  we  also  hope  that  our 
prayer  will  be  answered  ?  (vers.  2(i,  27). — Under 
what  circumstanci'S  do  we,  too,  linow  tliat  all  things 
work  togetlier  for  our  good  ?  1.  When  we  love 
God ;  2,  When  we  are  conscious  of  our  call  (ver. 
28). — The  Christian  view  of  Iiuniaa  destiny  (ver.  28). 
— How  many  men  are  still  very  far  from  knowing 
that  all  things  must  work  together  for  good  to  them 
that  love  God  !  1.  Proof  that  such  is  the  case  ; 
2.  Statement  of  the  grounds  of  this  phenomenon. 

Stakke  :  liupatience  in  distress  arises  from  want 
of  hope ;  2  Kings  vi.  29,  31  (ver.  25). — Spexeu: 
W^e  do  not  know  what  would  always  be  useful  to  us, 
and,  if  left  completely  to  our  own  choice,  would 
often  pray  for  things  which  might  be  injurious,  rath- 
er than  useful.  We  also  do  not  understand  how 
prayer  should  be  best  formed,  and  in  such  a  way  as 
most  likely  to  be  heard,  especially  in  seasons  when 
ne(;essity  is  great,  and  the  heart  is  perplexed  ;  but 
the  Spirit  intercedes  for  us  in  the  best  way,  with  un- 
utterable groanings  (ver.  26). — We,  in  whom  there 
are  such  i^roans,  often  do  not  ourselves  understand 
what  we  pray  for,  for  the  anxiety  of  the  heart  is  so 
great  that  it  can  express  nothing  more  than  a  mr- 
rovful.  but  confident  deaire  for  the  grace  of  God ; 
but  the  remaining  prayer  is  shaped  by  the  Holy 
Spirit,  and  brought  before  God's  throne  (ver.  27). — 
Roos  :  Here  (ver.  27)  the  Holy  Spirit  intercedes  for 
us  as  a  wise  father  intercedes  for  his  child,  who  does 
not  know  how  to  address  a  great  nobleman  as  he 
should,  when  he  puts  into  his  mouth  refined  lan- 
guage and  a  fitting  compliment. 

Besgel  :  In  this  purpose  of  God  lie  concealed 
the  very  first  roots  of  the  justification  and  glorifica- 
tion of  believers  (ver.  28). 

Geri.ach  :  The  personality  of  man  is  no  passing 
Bhow,  and  does  not  pass  away  into  universal  life  ; 
bat  it  only  lives  truly  a  life  of  the  spirit  when  the 
personal  Spirit  of  God  is  the  soul  of  its  life — when 
God  is  in  it — when  the  Spirit  of  the  eternal  fellow- 
ship of  the  Father  and  of  the  Son,  of  God  and  of 
His  creation,  is  in  it  (ver.  26).  By  this  means  the 
prayer  of  the  believing  Christian  first  receives  a 
strong  and  sure  ground  that  the  Spirit  prays  out  of 
him  ;  and  by  this  means  it  becomes  clear  how  such 
great  petitions  as  the  first  three  of  the  Lord's  Prayer 
are  placed  by  the  Lord  in  the  mouth  of  the  weakest 
believer  (ver.  27). — It  is  God  who  worketh  all  in  all 
for  our  salvation  (Phil.  ii.  13);  therefore  all  things, 
His  creatures  who  live,  move,  and  have  their  being 
in  Him,  cooperate  for  the  same  end  ;  not  with  Him, 
or  beyond  Him,  but  in  Him  and  through  Him.  Even 
all  the  evil  that  takes  place  on  the  earth  cooperates 
for  good  ;  for  tlie  will  of  the  creature,  which  tears 
itself  asunder  from  its  Creator,  is  evil,  and  the  evil 
continues  to  exist  in  this  will ;  but  the  evil  that  re- 
sults as  the  work  of  this  will  is,  in  so  far  as  it  inter- 
feres with  God's  order  of  the  world,  God's  own  work, 
is  overruled  by  Him  for  good.  If  a  child  or  friend 
of  ours  is  struck  by  lightning,  or  killed  by  a  mur- 
derer, it  is  God's  work  in  both  cases,  so  far  as  the 
matter  concerns  us ;  even  God's  own  retributive 
judgments,  which  requite  the  evil  deed  with  evil, 
become  a  blessing  to  him  who  learns  to  love  Him 
tnder  the  blows  of  His  rod,  so  that  then  His  penal 
justice  is  no  more  revealed  therein,  but  purifying 
love  and  grace  (ver.  28). 

Li  SCO  :  FcUience  waits  ;  it  is  established  on  hope^ 
which  is  the  direction  of  the  spirit  toward  a  future 
good.  Hope  is  established  on  faith,  which  is  the 
grasping  of  the  promise  that  holds  out  the  blessing ; 


this  promise,  which  is  contained  in  God's  word,  ia 
the  ground  of  faith ;  God's  word  is  therefore  the 
ground  of  all  (ver,  25). 

Heubnei!  :  Hope  is  advanced  faith  (ver.  24).— 
To  hope,  and  to  act  in  hope,  are  the  strength  of  the 
soul  (ver.  25).  —  The  heart  of  the  Christian  is  a 
sanctuary,  a  dwelling-place  of  the  Holy  Spirit  (ver. 
26). — Divine  omniscience  has  a  very  comforting  side. 
God  knows  the  inmost  faithfulness  of  the  Christian'a 
heart.  The  true  Christian  desires  to  be  seai'ched, 
and  to  have  his  heart  seen  ;  the  false  Christian  feara 
this  (ver.  27). — ^^  Deus  nihil  mali  sinit  accidc-e,  ex 
qno  non  aliyuid  boni  fossit  et  velit  elicere  ;  "  Au« 
GUSTiNE  (ver.  28). 

Vers,  29-39.  Summary  of  the  Christian  order 
of  salvation.  1.  Election  ;  2.  Ordination  ;  3.  Call ; 
4.  Justification;  5.  Glorification  (vers.  29,  30). — 
The  Only-begotten  of  the  Father  is  at  tlie  same  lime 
the  first-born  among  njany  brethren  (ver.  29). — Let 
us  never  forget  that  we  should  be  brethren  of  our 
Lord  Jesus  Christ  (ver.  29). — The  call,  justification, 
and  glorification  correspond  to  the  threefold  office 
of  Christ  (vers.  29,  30). — Why  do  we,  as  Christians, 
not  need  to  fear?  1.  Because  God,  who  delivered 
His  only  Son  for  us,  and  with  Him  will  also  freely 
give  us  all  things,  is  for  us  ;  2.  Because  Christ  ia 
here,  who  has  finished  His  work  for  us  ;  3.  Because 
we  ourselves,  for  the  sake  of  Him  who  hath  loved  us, 
are  able  to  endure  every  danger,  and  to  allow  noth- 
ing to  separate  us  from  the  love  of  God  which  is  in 
Christ  Jesus  our  Lord  (vers.  31-39).— If  God  be  for 
us,  who  can  be  against  us?  Or,  God's  protection 
bids  defiance  to  our  enemies  (in  times  of  war)  (ver. 
31). — If  God  be  for  us,  who  can  be  against  us? 
1.  Ask  whether  God  is  for  us  ;  2.  Look  at  the  ene- 
mies (ver.  31). — The  gracious  gift  of  God's  Son  (ver. 
32). — Four  believing  and  joyous  questions  of  tlie 
Apostle,  with  the  same  number  of  answers  evincing 
certainty  of  triumph  (vers.  31-39). 

Starke:  The  precious  chain  of  the  blessings  of 
salvation,  which  far  excels  all  golden  chains  and 
jewels  (1  John  iii.  1,  2)  (ver.  30). — Even  the  small- 
est child  of  God  can  defy  the  whole  world ;  there- 
fore, what  a  great  privilege  all  the  ehildreti  of  God 
have  !  0  man,  be  converted,  and  this  dav  become  a 
child  of  God  !  (ver.  31.)— Though  the  whole  world 
condemn  you,  and  cry  out  against  you :  "  Crucify 
him  !  crucify  him  !  away  with  him  !  "  smile  at  it ; 
for  if  God  justifies  you,  nothing  can  condemn  you 
(ver.  33). — "  Hoc  habet  proprinm  ecclexia:  dum  per- 
secutionem  patitur,fioref  ;  dum  opp^'imilur,  crescii ; 
dum  contetnnitur,  proficit ;  duin  Ueditnr,  viniit ; 
dum  arguiiur,  inte'ligit ;  tunc  siat,  cum  supcrari 
videttcr  ; "  Hilarius,  i.  8,  De  Trinit.  (ver.  37). — 
Strong  heroic  faith,  which  will  allow  nothing  to  sep- 
arate from  the  love  of  God  in  Christ.  Oh,  Almighty 
God,  arm  us  with  the  same  sense,  in  order  that  we 
may  remain  true  to  death  1  2  Tini.  iv.  8  (ver.  39). — 
Laxge  :  What  will  it  help  you,  poor  man,  if  you 
have  many  great,  rich,  and  mighty  men  in  the  world, 
and  even  a  partial  judge  at  the  judgment?  If  God 
and  your  own  conscience  be  against  you,  how  sootx 
will  the  table  be  turned  against  you  ?  Job  ix.  4  (ver. 
31). — Osiander:  Even  though  Satan  should  make  a 
row  against  our  sins  before  God's  judgment-seat,  he 
will  not  be  able  to  accomplish  any  thing,  but  will  be 
compelled  to  pack  off  to  hellish  fire  with  his  charge 
(ver.  33). 

Spener  :  It  is  the  order  of  Divine  beneficence 
that  foreknowledge  and  foreordination  take  place  in 
eternity,  but  the  call,  justification,  and  glorification 


294 


THE   EPISTLE   OF   PAUL   TO   THE   ROMANS. 


occur  in  time  (ver.  30). — He  wlio  lias  not  hesitated 
to  give  tlie  jrivatest  blessing,  will  also  not  be  sparing 
of  smaller  ones  (ver.  32). 

lloos  :  Many  would  be  against  us,  but  they  are 
nothing  against  God  (ver.  32). — Paul  had  previously 
spoken  (vers.  ;;2-34)  of  judicial  charge-,  but  now  he 
speaks  of  hostile  powers  that  would  violently  snateh 
us  away,  and  separate  us  from  the  love  of  Christ, 
which  he  afterward  calls  the  love  of  God  iu  Christ 
Jesus  our  Lord  (vers.  35-39). 

Gkklai  u  :  The  Apostle  hsis  now,  in  spirit,  reached 
the  top  of  the  mount  of  glorification,  and  looks  back 
once  more  at  the  transitory  hindrances,  and  the  vic- 
tory of  believers,  in  the  midst  of  their  unfinished 
conflicts.  That  which  here  distmbs  the  peace  of 
believers,  and  threatens  to  deprive  tiicm  of  their 
comfort,  is  of  a  twofold  character  :  it  is  inward  and 
outward.  Ininnrdlii  it  is  sin,  ouUcardl  it  is  tribula- 
tion  ;  in  part  it  is  the  necessity  of  life  in  general, 
and  in  part  it  is  the  temptations  specially  appointed 
for  the  Christian  (vers.  81-39). 

Lisco :  The  blessed  cei-tainty  of  the  grace  of 
their  God  strengthens  believers  to  conquer  all  temp- 
tations and  embarrassments  (vers.  31-34).  —  As 
Abraham's  love  of  God  strengthened  him  for  the 
greatest  and  sorest  sacrifice,  so  is  the  greatest  ex- 
pression of  God's  love  for  us  the  gift  of  His  Son  ;  it 
is  an  act  of  love  which  infinitely  exceeds  all  else 
that  God  has  done  for  us  as  Creator,  Preserver,  and 
Ruler  (ver.  32). — With  the  strongly  established  con- 
vietiou  of  God's  grace  toward  us  Christians,  tem- 
poral sufferings,  still  less  than  those  temptations 
(vers.  33,  34),  cannot  lead  us  astray  in  our  certainty 
of  .salvation  and  glorification  (vers.  35-39). 

Hei.bser  :  Christ  is  the  true  and  real  Ideal  of 
human  virtue,  to  whom  we  should  be  conformed, 
and  to  whom  we  are  ajipointed  as  Christians  to  be 
conformed.  The  higher  we  think  of  Chri.st,  the 
higher  must  we  think  of  ourselves  (ver.  29). — The 
Christian  is  a  brother  of  Jesus  Christ  (ver.  29). — 
'*  Faith,"  says  Luther,  "  puts  such  courage  into  a 
niiiii,  tliat  he  can  say,  '  Thougli  all  devils  should 
pounce  upon  me,  and  all  kings,  emperors,  heaven, 
and  earth,  were  against  me,  I  nevertheless  know  that 
I  shall  be  sustained.'  He  who  hius  faith  is  in  the 
Lord,  and  although  he  dies  innnediately,  he  must 
live  again"  (ver.  31).— Comjiare  also  Paul  Gkk- 
ii.vr.n's  excellent  hymn,  "  IF  (!od  be  for  me,  I  tread 
on  all  against  me"  (ver.  31). — The  power  of  tlie 
Christian  reaches  further  than  his  trials;  his  strength 
will  never  be  wholly  exhausted.  And  this  strength 
is  called  love  through  Him  who  hath  loved  us ;  He, 
whose  love  rai-ses  us  above  all  sufferings,  strengthens 
us  (1  Cor.  XV.  67;  2  Cor.  ii.  14;  1  John  iv.  4  ; 
V.  4). 

Hksskr  :  The  triumph  of  faith  (vers.  31-30). 
llip  Pericope  for  the  Mk  Sunday  after  Trirut;/, 
vers.  18-23. 

Hkiu.ner:  How  the  Chri.stian  regards  the  evils 
and  imperfections  of  this  world — the  future  rejuve- 
nation of  the  earth.  —  The  history  of  the  earth. 
1.  What  was  the  earth  ?  A  scene  of  (J.xi's  glory. 
S.  What  has  it  become  ?  A  .scene  of  .sin  and  death. 
3.  What  shall  it  become?  Renewed,  glurilied,  and 
a  part  of  heaven.  4.  Who  will  live  on  itV  Matt. 
v.  r>. — The  comfort  which  the  gospel  gives  the  suf- 
fering Christian. — Ari'i  nx  :  The  eonnection  of  the 
creation  with  man  :  1.  The  creature  ha.s  fallen  with 
man  ;  2.  It  serves  him  against  its  will ;  3.  It  bears 
his  image  in  itsi-lf:  as  men  eontenil  and  fight  to- 
gether, so  is  it  among  the  lower  orders  of  creation  ; 


4.  It  anxiously  expects  deliverance  with  man.— 
Gkszken  :  The  token  of  future  glory:  1.  The  anx- 
ious expectation  of  the  creature  ;  2.  The  expeeta- 
tion  of  believers. — K.\pkf  :  The  deliverance  of  the 
groaning  creature :  1.  In  nature ;  2.  In  humanity 
in  general;  3.  In  believers.  —  Rankk  :  The  hope 
which  Christians  have  of  their  future  glory :  1. 
What  is  implied  in  this  hope ;  2.  Its  connection 
with  the  life  of  the  Christian  ;    3.  Its  bles.*ings. 

The  JS'cw  lihiiihh  J'ericopes :  1.  Veis.  24-30, 
for  New-Year's  Day.  Deichert  :  The  great  privi- 
lege  of  God's  children,  to  be  able  constantly  to  hope 
for  the  best.  1.  It  is  only  God's  children  who  know 
what  is  best ;  2.  It  is  only  they  who  hope  for  it  in 
a  proper  way  ;  3.  Their  hope  rests  upon  the  strong, 
est  grounds. 

2.  Vers.  31-39,  for  the  13/A  Sunday  after  Triti- 
ily.  DEicnERT:  The  blessedness  of  God's  child, 
who  lies  in  His  bosom  in  full  faith  of  eternal  love. 
1.  Such  a  child  of  God  has  every  thing  whieh  can 
truly  benefit  him  ;  2.  He  is  no  more  afraid  that  any 
thing  can  harm  him ;  3.  He  continues  unseparated 
from  eternal  love. 

On  chap.  viii.  28.  Schleiermaciier  :  On  im- 
proving occasions  of  public  calamity.  1.  They  ap- 
peal to  us  to  know  ourselves  ;  2.  Tliry  greatly  bene- 
fit us  by  makuig  us  better  accpiainted  with  God  him- 
self. (Delivered  in  Halle  soon  after  the  French 
occupation.) 

Lange  :  Christians,  as  God's  children,  are  heirs 
of  future  glory.  1.  The  right  of  inheritance  estab- 
lished on  the  New  Testament ;  2.  Anxious  waiting 
for  the  decision  ;  3.  Its  eternal  institution  ;  4.  The 
opponents  of  the  right  of  irdieritanee  ;  5.  Its  assur- 
ance ;  6.  The  infinite  value  of  the  inheritance.^ 
The  anxious  expectation  of  the  creature,  as  contrast- 
ed with  man  withoiit  this  expectation  in  our  day,  is 
the  same  picture  on  a  large  scale  whieh  Balaam's  ass 
presents  on  a  small  one.  The  Spirit  in  nature  in 
opposition  to  the  worhlly-mituledness  of  skeptical 
natural  philosophy. — Unsi)irituality  in  the  garb  of 
pretended  natural  philosophy,  judged  by  its  declara- 
tions :  1.  Nature  was  not  called  into  being  by  the 
Si)irit  of  the  Lord  ;  2.  It  does  not  testify  to  the  do- 
minion of  the  Spirit ;  3.  It  does  not  strive  for  the 
revelation  of  the  glory  of  the  Spirit.  —  The  true 
meaning  of  the  groans  :  1.  Of  the  ereature  ;  2.  Of 
believers  ;  3.  Of  the  Divine  Sjjirit  in  their  new  life. 
— How  does  the  case  stand  in  referenee  to  the  battle 
of  your  life?  1.  If  (Jod  ia  not  for  you,  every  thing 
is  against  you,  though  every  thing  seems  to  be  for 
you.  2.  If  God  be  for  you,  nothing  is  against  you, 
though  every  thing  seems  to  be  against  you.  Noth- 
ing can  harm  us,  lor  nothing  can  separate  ns. — Our 
fortress  of  rock  :  God's  love  iu  Jesus  Christ  our 
Lord. 

[Ik'RKiTT :  How  will  God's  adopted  children  bo 
made  manifest?  1.  In  tlu-ir  per-ons ;  2.  In  their 
actions  ;  3.  In  their  condition. — The  Holy  Spirit  in. 
tercedes  for  us  :  1.  Hy  a.ssi.-<tuig  us  in  duly  ;  2.  By 
quickening  our  affections  ;  3.  By  enlarging  our  de- 
siri'S  ;  4.  By  setting  us  to  groaning  aller  the  Lord, 
— (iroaning  denotes  the  strength  and  ardency  of 
desire,  which,  through  its  ferveney,  jmts  the  soul  to 
piiin  and  to  a  holy  impatience  till  it  is  heard.  If  we 
want  words,  let  us  not  want,  groans  ;  Lord,  let  Thy 
Spirit  help  us  to  groan  out  a  prayer  when  we  want 
ability  to  utter  it ;  for  silent  groans,  jiroceciling  from 
Thy  Spirit,  shall  be  heard  in  Thiiu'  ears  when  the 
loudest  cries  shall  not  In-  lieanl  without  it. 

[Hksry  :  Though  the  soul  be  the  prineipal  pari 


CHAPTER  VIII.    18-39. 


295 


of  man,  yet  the  Lord  has  declared  himself  for  the 
body  also,  and  has  provided  for  it  a  great  deal  of 
honor  and  happiness.  The  future  adoption  of  God's 
children  is  :  1.  The  adoption  manifested  before  the 
world,  angels,  and  men.  Their  lionor  is  now  cloud- 
ed, but  God  will  then  publicly  own  all  His  children. 
The  deed  of  adoption  is  now  written,  signed,  and 
sealed ;  then  it  will  be  recognized,  proclaimed,  and 
published.  2.  It  is  the  adoption  perfected  and  com- 
pleted. The  children  of  God  have  bodies  as  well  as 
souls,  and  the  adoption  is  not  perfect  until  those 
bodies  are  brought  into  the  glorious  liberty  promised 
the  children  of  God. — Difi'erence  between  faith  and 
hope :  1.  Faith  has  regard  to  the  promise ;  hope, 
the  thing  promised.  2.  Faith  is  the  evidence  of 
things  not  seen ;  hope  is  the  expectation  of  them. 
3.  Faith  is  the  mother ;  hope  is  the  daughter. — 
Scott  :  All  that  we  owe  to  the  flesh  is  a  holy  re- 
venge for  the  injui'ies  already  done,  and  the  hin- 
drances continually  given  us ;  and  instead  oC  ren- 
dering our  state  doubtful,  by  living  after  it  in  any 
degree,  we  should,  by  the  Spirit,  continually  endeav- 
or more  and  more  to  mortify  it,  and  repress  all  its 
actions. — Sin  has  filled  the  world  with  suffering,  yea, 
with  unspeakable  disorder  and  misery  ;  all  creatures 
seem  to  proclaim  man's  fatal  apostasy,  and  to  recom- 
mend the  inestimably  precious  salvation  of  Christ. 
But  the  gospel  opens  a  brighter  prospect;  a  glorious 
crisis  approaches,  of  which  all  things  seem  in  anx- 
ious expectation. — Clarke  :  Fluency  in  prayer  is 
not  essential  to  praying ;  a  man  may  pray  most  pow- 
erfully in  the  estimation  of  God,  who  is  not  able  to 
utter  even  one  word.  The  unutterable  groan  is  big 
with  meaning,  and  God  understands  it,  because  it 
contains  the  language  of  His  own  Spirit.  Some  de- 
sires are  too  mighty  to  be  expressed ;  there  is  no 
language  expressive  enough  to  give  them  proper 
form  and  distinct  vocal  sound.  Such  desires  show 
that  they  came  from  God ;  and  as  they  came  from 
Him,  so  they  express  what  God  is  disposed  to  do, 
and  what  He  has  purposed  to  do  (ver.  27). 

[Hodge  :  Observe,  1.  As  there  is  a  dreadful 
pressure  of  sin  and  misery  on  the  whole  creation, 
we  should  not  regard  the  world  as  our  home  ;  2.  It 
is  a  characteristic  of  genuine  piety  to  have  exalted 
conceptions  of  future  blessedness,  and  earnest  long- 
ings after  it ;  3.  The  reason  why  all  tilings  work  to- 
gether for  the  good  of  God's  children  is,  that  all 
things  are  under  His  control ;  4.  The  plan  of  re- 
demption, while  it  leaves  no  room  for  despondency, 
affords  no  pretence  for  assumption  ;  5.  As  there  is 
a  beautiful  harmony  and  necessary  connection  be- 
tween the  several  doctrines  of  grace,  so  must  there 
be  a  like  harmony  in  the  character  of  the  Christian. 
— The  gospel  is  :  1.  Wonderful ;  2.  Glorious  ;  3. 
Secure. — Barnes:  Reasons  why  we  are  .  continued 
here  in  this  state  of  vanity :  1.  Christians  are  sub- 
jected to  this  state  to  do  good  to  others ;  2.  Their 
remaining  here  shows  the  power  of  the  gospel  in 
overcoming  sin,  and  in  thus  furnishing  living  evi- 
dence to  the  world  of  the  power  and  excellence  of 
that  gospel ;  3.  It  furnishes  occasion  for  interesting 
exhibitions  of  character,  and  for  increasing  and  pro- 
gressive excellence ;  4.  It  is  a  proper  training  for 
heaven. — Reasons  why  Christians  do  not  know  what 
to  pray  for :  1.  They  do  not  know  what  would  be 
real'j  best  for  them  ;  2.  They  do  not  know  what 
God  might  be  willing  to  grant  them  ;  3.  They  are, 
to  a  great  extent,  ignorant  of  the  character  of  God, 
the  reason  of  His  dealings,  the  principles  of  His 
government,  and  their  own  actual  wants ;    4.  They 


are  often  in  real  and  deep  perplexity ;  and,  if  left 
alone,  would  neither  be  able  to  bear  their  own  trials, 
nor  know  what  to  ask  at  the  hand  of  God. — J.  F.  H.] 
[IIoMiLETicAi.  Literature  ON  THE  Wholk  Chap- 
ter.— The  homiletical  literature  on  this  chapter  ia 
very  voluminous  ;  we  select  the  following,  as  being 
most  important. — Bishop  Cowper,  Heaven  Opened, 
&c.,  Workx,  11  (1619);  E.  Philips,  C'eriaine  Gouly 
Sermons,  243  ;  Edw.  Elion,  Iriumph  of  a  True 
C/iristian  Described  {Three  Excellent  and  Pious 
Treatises,  1653);  H.  Binning,  27ie  Si7iner^s  ISanctu- 
ari/,  &c. ;  being  Forty-eight  Sermons  on  the  8th 
Chapter  of  Eomans,  Worls,  1,  257  ;  T.  Jacomb, 
Sermons  Preached  on  the  Whole  8lh  Chapter  of  the 
b'pistle  to  the  Romans  (only  the  sermons  on  the  first 
four  verses  have  been  published,  16V2) ;  T.  Horton, 
Fortji-six  Sermons  upon  the  Whole  8th  Chapter  of 
the  Epistle  of  the  Apostle  Paul  to  the  liomans 
(1674);  T.  Manto.n,  Forty-seven  Sermons,  Worls, 
2  ;  J.  Mestrezat,  Sermojis  sur  la  8e  chap,  de  VFpitre 
auz  Romains  (1702);  T.  Brtson, -4  Compreliensive 
Vieiv  of  the  Real  Christianas  Character,  Privileges, 
and  Obligations  (1794);  A.  Short,  The  Wdness  of 
the  Spirit  with  our  spirit,  lUustraieel  from  the  8th 
Chapter  of  St.  PaiWs  Fpistle  to  tlie  Romans 
{Bampton  Latures,  1846);  0.  Winslow,  ]!io  Con- 
demnatioit  in  Christ  Jesus,  as  unfolded  in  the  8th 
Chapter  of  the  Epistle  to  the  Romctns  (new  ed.,  1857). 

—  HOMILKTK'AL    LITERATURE    ON    THE    CaRNAL    MiND 

j\ND  Man's  Enmity  to  God. — 0.  Simeon,  Works,  15, 
195;  Bishop  Stillingi-leet,  Serm.,  3,  294;  B. 
Ibbot,  Disc,  1,  365;  J.  Evans,  Disc,  1,  93;  J. 
Dryspale,  iSerui.,  1,  213  ;  R.  Grates,  Works,  4, 
159  ;  2'he  Carnal  and  the  Spiritual,  Village  Preach- 
er, 1,  181 ;  C.  Simeon,  Works,  15,  199;  G.  T.  Noel, 
Serm.,  2,  452;  S.  Charnock,  Works,  9,  175;  Arch- 
bishop Leighton,  Serm.,  Woi-ks,  3,  195  ;  J.  Jamie- 
son,  Serm.  (4)  on  the  Heart,  2,  263,  381,  439,  465  ; 
G.  Burder,  Village  Serm..  5  ;  J.  Venn,  Serm.,  3, 
56  ;  T.  Dwight,  Theology,  4,  441 ;  C.  Scroll,  Serm., 
158 ;  E.  Cooper,  P>-act.  Serm.,  5,  17 ;  T.  Chal- 
MER.S,  Works,  9,  66  ;  H.  Cauleield,  Irish  Pnljiit, 
2,263;  J.  Cooper,  Se?-/?!.,  28  ;  C.Simeon,  Works, 
15,  202  ;  E.  Blencowe,  Plain  Sermons,  2,  362  ;  J. 
Fenn,  Serm.,  52. 

[Homiletical  Literatuez  on  Life  after  the 
Spirit  (vers.  13,  14),  anh  on  the  Spirit  of  Bond- 
AGK  AND  Adoption.  —  S.  Clarke,  Serm.,  8,  23; 
Bishop  Hall,  Serm.,  M'orks,  5,  527  ;  T.  Jacomb, 
Morning  Fscerc.,  3,  585  ;  R.  South,  Serm.,  5,  293, 
326  ;  t!  Wilson,  Serm.,  1,  389  ;  L.  Atterbury,  S. 
Clapham,  Serm.,  selected,  2,  173  ;  M.  Hole,  On  the 
Church  Cat.,  1,  55 ;  N.  Carter,  Serm..^  155 ;  I. 
Pearse,  Serm.,  219;  D.  Waterland,  Serm.,  Works, 
9,325;  R.Robinson,  Village  Serm.,  ^i)"} ;  T.Bel 
shum.  Disc.,  1,  72  ;  T.  Biddulph,  Plain  Serm.,  3, 
168  ;  H.  Draper,  On  the  Collects,  2,  275  ;  C.  Sime- 
on, Works,  15,  270  ;  Bishop  Hkbkr,  Parish  Serm  , 
1,  443  ;  S.  F.  Surtees,  Ser7n.  ;  T.  Knowles,  Disc., 
3,  267  ;  A.  W.  Hare,  Serm.,  1,  77  ;  W.  G.  G. 
CooKESLEY,  Serm.,  2,  254  ;  C.  Neat,  Disc,  223  ;  A. 
B.  Evans,  Serm.,  230  ;  H.  E.  Manning,  Serm  4, 
27;  A.  Watson,  Serm.  (1843),  134;  N.  Meeres, 
Serm.,  329  ;  Bishop  Wilberfcrce,  Sern.,  39  ;  W. 
HowoRTH,  Serm.,  32 ;  Bishop  J.  Jackson,  Witness 
of  the  Spirit,  145  ;  I.  Williams,  Serm.,  2,  145  ;  C. 
J.  Vaughan,  Serm.  (1847),  77;  C.  Bullen,  Serm., 
43  ;  H.  Alford,  Serm.,  3,  309  ;  J.  J.  Blunt,  Plain 
Serm.,  56  ;  W.  Gresley,  Parochial  Serm.,  365  ;  C. 
E.  Kennaway,  Sevm.  at  Prig/don,  1,  222;  Bishop 
W.  Nicholson,  On  the  Apostles^  Creed,  99 ;  J.  Cam- 


296 


THE   EPISTLE   OF   PAUL   TO   THE   ROMANS. 


KROX,  Opera,  636 ;  J.  Wallis,  Serrn.,  153 ;  E. 
Bkestox,  -S'trw.,  375;  J.  Evas?,  JJisc,  1,  350;  J. 
Wesley,  Senn.,  Works,  5,  98  ;  B.  Beddomk,  Short 
Jjisc,  8,  151;  S.  E.  PiEuci;,  Essai/,  &c.,  149;  C. 
Simeon,  Works,  15,  276;  J.  H.  Stewart,  Smn., 
189  ;  G.  T.  Noel,  Sertii.,  2,  471 ;  W.  Muia,  O71  the 
Holt,  S/Arit,  144 ;  T.  AiNGEK,  Parochial  Serm., 
134  ,  t'.  Nkat,  JJisc,  239. 

[HoMILETlCAL    LlTEUATUUE    ON    THE   WiTXESS    OP 

T7IE  Spikit. — J.  DoxxE,  Wor/is,  2,  42;  I.  Watts, 
Evaiiff.  Dis,:,  Works,  2,  292,  302  ;  P.  Dodduidge, 
Serm.,  2,  378 ;  3,  1 ;  Auciibishop  J.  Sharp,  W^rku, 
6,  1 ;  W.  Stephens,  Herui.,  1,  287  ;  Bishop  Sher- 
lock, Dkc,  Works,  1,  153  ;  Archbishop  Secker, 
Serm.,  7,  221  ;  T.  Randolph,  The  Wilne&s  of  the 
SdrU  (1708);  A  View,  &c.,  2,  223;  J.  Wesley, 
Sen/i.,  Works,  5,  111  ;  J.  Dickinson,  Sermons  and 
Tracts;  W.  Hey,  Tiacs,-iS'i;  C.  Simeox,  HWA-.v, 
15,  283  ;  W.  L.  Bowles,  I'au'us,  &c.,  103  ;  Bishop 
Philpotts,  Orig.  Fam.  Serm.,  2,  237  ;  E.  Cooper, 
Pract.  Serm.,  7,  380  ;  C.  W.  Le  Bas,  Sertn.,  3,  89  ; 
S.  Clarke,  Semi.,  2,  73  ;   Forty  Ser7nons,  206  ;    J. 


Pexn,  Senn.,  2,  126. — Homiletical  Literatchc  oj 
THE  Groaning  and  Tratail  of  Creation.  —  N, 
Homes,  Resurrection  Revealed,  Raised  above  Doubts 
C.  E.  Kexnaway,  Serm.  at  Brighton,  2,  34  ;  J.  K 
Glrney,  Serm.,  173;  J.  H.  B.  Mountain,  Serm., 
95  ;  A.  Leger,  Nouveaux  Serm.,  2,  168;  U.  Grove, 
Fo-^th.  Works,  2,  109;  J.Wesley,  Serm.,  Works^ 
C,  241;  R.  Balmkr,  Lect.,  2,  507;  U.  Siowkll, 
Serm.  (1845);  J.  Cumming,  Voices  0/  the  Ni  :}U, 
131  ;  J.  C.  Dannhawerls,  CriX.  Sac.  'Jlieo.,  2,  5u3  ; 
E.  W.  Goui.uuRN,  Bampton  Led.,  209  ;  A.  Horneck, 
Serm.  (1677);  A.  Towxson,  Disc,  224;  P.  H. 
HCTTOX,  Serm.,  306  ;  W.  Vickers,  Serm.,  233  ;  J. 
Slade,  I'laln  Serm.,  7,  76 ;  H.  Hi  GiiES,  Serin., 
107  ;  W.  Cadman,  Bloomsbur;i  Lect.,  10,  31 ;  W. 
Fknner,  Works,  1,  295  ;  T.  Boston,  Works,  9,  263, 
286;  W.  Cruden,  Sirm.  ;  J.  Martin,  Remains; 
J.  Garbett,  Serm.,  2,  187  ;  Bishop  Wilberforce, 
•-e)v«.  on  Sev.  Occ,  1  ;  W.  Richardson,  Serm.,  2, 
146 ;  T.  Arnold,  Serm.,  1,  139 ;  C.  Marriott, 
Serm.,  1,  179 ;  R.  Montgomery,  God  and  Man, 
311 ;  E.  B.  Pdsey,  Senn.,  2,  304.— J.  F.  H."] 


THIRD     DIVISION. 

SIN  AND  GRACE  IN  THEIR  THIRD  ANTITHESIS  (IN  THEIR  THIRD  POTENCY) :  HARDEN- 
ING, AND  THE  ECONOMIC  JUDGMENT  OF  HARDENING  (THE  HISTORICAL  CURSE  OF 
SIN),  AND  THE  CHANGE  OF  JUD(JMENT  TO  DELIVERANCE  BY  THE  EXERCISE  OF 
DIVINE  COMPASSION  ON  THE  COURSE  OF  THE  WORLD'S  HISTORY.  THE  HISTORICAL 
DEVELOPMENT  OF  SIN  TO  THE  EXECUTION  OF  JUDGMENT,  AND  OF  THE  REVELA- 
TION OF  SALVATION  TO  THE  EXHIBITION  OF  COMPASSION,  THE  INWARD  CON- 
JUNCTION OF  GOD'S  JUDICIAL  AND  SAVING  ACTS,  AND  THE  EFFECTING  OF  THE 
SECOND  BY  THE  FORMER. 

Chapters  IX.-XI. 
First  Section. — TJic  dark  problem  of  God^s  judgment  on  Israel,  and  Us  solution. 

Chap.  IX.   1-33. 


1  I  p:iy  the  truth  in  Christ,  I  lie  not,  my  conscience  also  bearinf;  me  witness  in 

2  the  Holy  Ghost,  Tliat  I  liave  great  lieavincss  [grief]  and  continual  sorrow  in 

3  my  heart.      For  I  could  wish'  that  [I]  myself^  were  accursed  from  Christ.for 

4  my  brethren,  my  kinsmen  according  to  the  flesii :  Who  are  Israelites  ;  to  whom 
pcrtaineth  [whose  is\  the  adoption,  and  the  glory,  and  the  covenants,'  and  the 
giving  of  the  law,  and  the  service  of  God  \of  the  sd/ictuari/],  and  the  promises  ; 

5  Whose  are  the  fathers,  and  of  whom  as  concerning  [as  to]  the  flesh  Christ  came 
[is  Christ],  who  is  over  all,  God  blessed  for  ever.     Amen.* 


6         Not  as  though   [it  is  not  however  so,  that]  *  the  word   of   God   hath   taken   none 

effect  [come  to  nought].     For  they  are  not  all  I-^rael,  which  are  of  Israel  [For 

^   not  all  who  are  of  Isr.iel,  are  Israel]  : '    Neither,  because  they  are  the  seed  of 

8  Abraham,  are  they  all  children  :  but,  In  Isaac  shall  thy  seed  be  called.'     That  is, 

They   which   are  the  children   of  the  flesh,  these  are  not  the  children  of  God 

[Not  tiiose  who  are  the  children  of  the  flesh,  are  children  of  God]  :    but  the 


CHAPTER  IX.    1-33.  297 


9  children  of  the  promise  are  counted  for  the  seed  [reckoned  as  seed].     For  this 
is  the  word  of  promise  [this  word  was  of  promise],  At  this  time  [season]  *  will 

10  I  come,  and  Sarah  shall  have  a  son.      And  not  only  this /'    but  when  Rebecca 

11  also  had  conceived  by  one,  even  by  [omit  even  by]  our  father  Isaac,  (For  the 
children  being  not  yet  born,  neither  having  [Without  their '°  having  as  yet  been 
born,  or]  done  any  [any  thing]  good  or  evil,"  that  the  purpose  of  God  according 

12  to  election  migiit  stand,  not  of  works,  but  of  him  that  [who]  calleth  ;)    It  was 

13  said  unto  her,  The  elder  shall  serve  the  younger.'*     As  it  is  writt*in, 

Jacob  have  [nmu  have]  I  loved. 
But  Esau  have  [nmu  have]  I  hated." 

14  What  shall  we  say  then  ?     Is  there  unrighteousness  with  God  ?     God  forbid. 

15  For  he  saith  to  Moses,  I  will  have  mercy  on  whom  I  will  [omit  will]  have  mercy, 

16  and  I  will  have  compassion  on  whom  I  will  [omit  will]  have  compassion.'*  So 
then  it  is  not  of  him  that  [who]  willeth,  nor  of  him  that  [who]  runneth,  but  of 

17  God  that  [who]  sheweth  mercy."  For  the  Scripture  saith  unto  Pharaoh,  Even 
for  this  same  [very]  purpose  have  I  raised  [did  I  raise]  thee  up,"  that  I  might 
shew  my  power  in  thee  [in  thee  my  power],"  and  that  my  name  might  be  de- 

18  clared  throughout  all  the  earth.  Therefore  hath  he  mercy  on  whom  he  will 
have  mercy  [Therefore  on  whom  he  will  he  hath  mercy],  and  whom  he  will  he 
hardeneth. 

19  Thou  wilt  say  then  unto  me,  Why  [then]"  doth  he  yet  find  fault?      For 

20  who  hath  resisted  [resisteth]  his  will  ?  Nay  but,  O  man,  who  art  thou  that 
repliest  against  God  ?     Shall  the  thing  formed  [or,  moulded,  nluafiu]  say  to  him 

21  that  formed  it,  Why  hast  thou  made  [didst  thou  make]  me  thus  ?  Hath  not  the 
potter  power  over  the  clay,  of  the  same  lump  to  make  one  vessel  lanto  honour 

22  and  another  imto  dishonour  ?  What  [But  whctt]  if  God,  [although]  '"  willing 
to  shew  his  wrath,  and  to  make  his  power  known  [make  known  his  power],  en- 
dured with  much  long-sufiering  the  [omit  the]  vessels  of  wrath  fitted  to  [for] 

23  destruction  :  And  [Also,  i.  e.,  he  endured  for  this  purpose  also]  ""  that  he  might  make 
known  the  riches  of  his  glory  on  the  [omit  the]  vessels  of  mercy,  which  he  had 

24  afore  prepared  unto  [before  prepared  for]  glory.  Even  us,  whom  he  hath  called 

[As  such,  V.  c,  vessels  of  mercy,  he    also,  besides  preparing,  Called   Us]    not  of   [from  amODg] 

the  Jews  only,  but  also  of  [from  among]  the  Gentiles  ? 

25  As  he  saith  also  in  Osee  [Hosea],*' 

I  will  call  them  my  people,  which  [who]  were  not  my  people ; 
And  her  beloved,  which  [who]  was  not  beloved.  [;] 

26  And  it  shall  come  to  pass,"  that  in  the  place  where  it  was  said  unto  them, 
Ye  are  not  my  people  ;  there  shall  they  be  called  the  children  [called  sons]  of 

27  the  living  God.     Esaias  also  [And  Isaiah]  also  crieth  concerning  Israel, 

Though  the  number  of  the  children  of  Israel  be  as  the  sand  of  the  sea, 
A  [The]  remnant  *^  shall  be  saved  : 

28  For  "  he  will  finish  the  work  [is  finishing  the  word],"  and  cut  [cutting] 

it  short  in  righteousness  : 
Because  a  short  work  [word] "°  will  the  Lord  make  upon  the  earth. 

29  And  as  Esaias  said  before  [And,  as  Isaiah  hath  said], 

Excejjt "  the  Lord  of  Sabaoth  had  left  us  a  seed, 
We  had  been  [become]  as  Sodoma  [Sodom], 
And  been  made  like  unto  Gomorrah. 

30  What  shall  we  say  then  ?  That  the  Gentiles,  which  followed  not  [who  were 
not    following]    after  righteousness,  have  [omit  have]  attained  to  righteousness, 

31  even  the  righteousness  which  is  of  faith.  But  Israel,  which  followed  [follow- 
ing] after  the  law  of  righteousness,  hath  not  attained  [attained  not]  to  the  law 

32  of  righteousness  [omit  of  righteousness]. "^  Wherefore  ?  Because  they  sought  it 
not  by  faith,  but  as  it  were  by  the  works  of  the  law  [or,  as  by  works]. ^'      For  ^ 

83  they  stumbled  at  that  stumbling-stone  [stone  of  stumbling]  ;  As  it  is  written. 
Behold,^'  I  lay  in  Sion  a  stumbling-stone  [Zion  a  stone  of  stumblmg]  and  [a] 
rock  of  offence  :  and  whosoever  believeth  [he  who  believeth]  '*  on  him  shall  not 
be  ashamed  [put  to  shame]. 


298  THE    EPISTLE    OF   PAUL   TO   THE   ROMANS. 


'  Tor.  3. — [Lanpo  renders  :  D-nn  ich  that  ja  (fins()  d'ls  Gduhde,  for  Innce  imlfd  made  the  vow  ta  ht,  Sto.  For  th« 
ftlll  discussion  of  this  interpretation,  see  Ex'-g.  ^,,tes.  The  English  text  has  not  been  altered  to  corrpspond,  sitco  the 
common  view  ofijix^MI*'   >^  upheld  in  the  additions. — D.  K.  L.  read  evxonriv.  which  is  generally  rejected, 

'^  Ver.  3. — [The  Ji'C.  has  thi:s  order:  aitro?  iyit  avdStna  tlvai  (C.  K.  L.)  ;  but  the  preponderant  authority 
(N.  A.  15.  D.  E.  F.  U.)  favors  :  avdStiia  tlv  ai.  aiiTos  eyio  (X.,  however,  puts  c  I  f  a  i  first).  So  Griesbach,  I^ch- 
mann,  Tischendorf,  Meyer,  Alford,  Trejjelles,  Lanue.  This  order,  if  it  has  any  special  force,  probably  enipliasizcs  the 
feet,  that  he  could  wish  hims-lf  accursed,  rather  than  that  ho  hims'lj  could  wish  it.  Hence  me  Amer.  liible  Uuion  is 
nnfortunate  in  placing  myiii(/'  after  the  first  I.     Xoyes  :  I  could  wi.ih  In  he  myself  accursed. 

'  Ver.  i.—[h.  1).  E.  F.  G.,  Vuljratc,  and  must  fathers,  read:  ^  SiaOrjicri.  X.  A.  C.  K.  :  oi  Sia6fiKai,  now 
adopted  by  most  editors.  The  alteration  to  the  singtUar  probably  arose  from  a  misunderstanding  of  the  mean  ng.  The 
plural  was  releiTcd  to  the  Old  and  New  Testaments;  and  as  the  latter  was  no  advantage  of  the  Jews,  the  singular  waa 
substituted  (so  Meyer). 

*  Vi-r.  5.— [Laiige  considers  God  bhssed  forever,  Amen,  a  synagogical  form,  to  be  put  in  quotation  marks.  Hia 
exegesis  accords  better  with  the  K.  V.  than  with  Luther's  dir  da  Ut  GoU  uher  Altes,  gdohtt  in  Ewigkeit,  Amen.  On  the 
disputed  puuciiwtion,  see  Exrg.  i^'oles.    Noyes,  naturally,  puts  a  period  after  Christ. 

*  \'er.  6.— [See  Eieg.  iXoles. 

'  Vei\  6. — I  The  antitheties  in  vers.  6-8  cannot  bo  preserved  in  the  exact  form  of  the  Greek,  except  at  the  sacrifice  of 
elegance  and  smoothness.  Literally,  the  whole  passage  would  be  :  For  not  all  those  of  Israel,  thene  (are)  Israel :  tnilhcr 
because  they  are  the  s>:>:d  of  AliraJiam,  (are)  ((//  children,  bu'.  In  Isaac  shall  Ihy  seed  he  called.  That  is,  not  the  children  of 
the  flesh,  (are)  Ihe-ie  the  children  of  God,  but  the  children  of  the  promise  are  reckowid  as  seed. 

'  Ver  7.— [For  convenient  reference,  the  Hebrew  test  is  appended.  Gen.  xxi.  12  :  J^T  Tjb  S<"'P7  P'?^"^  • 
The  LXX.  is  quoted  litenilly  here  by  Paul,  and  it  is  an  exact  translation.  The  only  question  Of  accuracy  which  can 
arise,  is  respecting  the  force  of  3  ,  whether  it  means  through  or  in.  S«e  Exeg.  Notes.  Koyes  :  "  Thy  ot&pring  shall 
be  reckoned  from  Isaac." 

*  Ver.  9. — [This  is  freely  quoted  from  the  LXX.,  Gen.  xviii.  10,  14.  The  LXX.  reads  inavaarpi^uiv  ^|u)  wpos  ai 
Kara  rov  Kdip'ov  tovtov  eis  otpa^,  (cot  ffet  uibi'  Sappa  17  yvviq  cov  (ver.  10)  ;  but  ver.  14  closes,  koi  «<TTai  t^  ^dppa  uios. 
The  choice  of  this  latter  clause  was  probably  for  reasons  of  emphasis,  to  indicate  that  the  promise  was  to  Harah  (Alford), 
which  is  the  main  thought  here.  The  Hebrew  phrase  riTI  PSS  ,  when  the  time  (.shall  be)  reviviscent,  occurring  in 
both  versos  clearly  implies  what  the  LXX.  expresses  :  at  this  season  of  the  year.  Comp.  Gesenius,  Thesaurus,  i  p.  470, 
Knobel  on  Gen.  xvili.  10. 

»  Ver.  10.— [Ou  fiovov  Se.  The  passage  is  elliptical.  On  what  should  bo  supplied,  see  JBxe^.  iVo^ts.  As  the  case 
to  be  intioduced  is  not  strictly  of  the  same  kind  as  that  of  Sarah,  but  stronger,  this  is  preferable  to  so  (Alford,  Amer. 
Bible  Union)  ;  the  former  s^ecms  to  imply  the  difference  more  clearly  than  the  latter. 

10  Ver.  11. — [The  subject  of  the  participles  yfvvr)0€VTo>v  .  .  .  n pafavrmv  (genitives  absolute)  is  not  ex- 
pres.sed,  "according  to  well-known  classical  usage"  (Meyer).  It  is  readily  supplied,  for  allusion  has  been  made  to  the 
twins,  and  the  liist.iry  was  w<dl  known.  The  rendering  given  above  seems  more  satisfactory  than  that  of  the  E.  V.  It 
is,  in  the  main,  that  of  Alford. 

"  Ver.  11. — [Instead  of  Kaxov  (/fee,  D.  F.  K.  L.,  Wordsworth),  cfraOAov  is  found  in  N.  A.  B.  and  cursives; 
adopted  by  I.achmann,  Tischendorf,  Meyer,  Alford,  Trepelles,  Lange.  Tlie  foi-mcr  is  the  more  usual  word,  in  contrast 
with  ayaOov,  hence,  likely  to  be  inserted.  Eoil  and  ill  best  express  the  slight  difference,  since  <f)av\oi,  like  ill,  does 
does  not  always  imply  something  immoral,  and  yet  has  the  same  wide  range  of  meaning.  It  must  have  a  moral  signifi- 
cation here,  however.     (See  Alford  in  loco.) 

"  Ver.  12.— [Quoted  literally  fiom  the  LXX.,  Gfn.  xxv.  23,  except  that  on  (recitative,  sign  of  quotation)  takea 
tho  place  of  Kou.     Instead  of  eppijerj  (iZ-c),  n»o>t  MSS.  have  eppe 6 tj. 

"  Ver.  13.— [From  the  LXX.,  Mai.  i  2,  3  ;  the  only  variation  is,  the  inversion  of  the  fii-st  clause.  It  reads  in  the 
I.JLX. :  ijyaTnjo-a  Toy  'IaKu/3.     The  Hebrew  text  is  : 

:  3'pr"'-rx   :ni<1  I  loved  Jacob, 

■'nX3(B   "iUr-PNI  But  Esau  I  hated. 

"  Ver.  15.— [An  exact  quotation  from  the  LXX'.,  Exod.  xxxiii.  19.  The  Ilebrow  of  the  original  passage  Is  o. 
importance  in  the  exegesis.  It  reads:  CH-^S  -nrx"rs  Tn^mf  ■,^^<  ■':;!<."J^i<  T-H"'.  •  Alford  thinks  av, 
inserted  in  LXX.,  refer«  to  pure  mercy;  Meyer,  ;ind  many  others,  join  it  n-ith  ov.  "  whan  soever,  in  whatever  state;" 
thus  describing  i.ot  merely  the  mercy,  but  the  choiee  of  its  individual  objects,  as  thi-  fri'O  act  of  God  ;  for  the  enijdiasia 
In  the  relative  clause  rewt's  on  the  repealed  bv  av,  since  av  generally  has  its  position  after  the  cmpbalie  word  (ICfiliner, 
ii.  §457).  We  are  certainly  justified  in  making  the  relative  claui^es  )>iesent  instead  of  future;  lor  the  future  force  01 
the  Iloiirew  verbs  is  doubtful,  while  the  Greek  V(Mbs  (both  in  LXX.  and  the  text)  are  present.     See  Ex(j.  .\otit. 

'*  Ver.  16.— [The  He-.,  B-.  K.,  road  e\eouvTOi  (from  eAeeu)  ;  N.  \.  B'.  T>.  K.  L.  tAcwt'TOs  (from  iXtdm).  The 
latter  is  adopted  by  Lathmann,  Tischendorf,  Alford,  Tregolles ;  the  former  by  Meyer  and  Wordsworth.  Mover  urges 
that  Paul  would  not  use  two  fonns,  one  here,  and  the  other  in  ver.  IS  (where  the  reading  «A«ei  is  well  established,  only 
D'.  F.  G.  having  i\ta),  .and  concludes  that  u  wa.s  substituted  for  ou  through  a  mistake  of  the  transcriber,  and  thus 
readily  preserved,  since  it  corresponded  with  a  form  in  actual  use. 

ic  Ver.  17.— (Very  freely  quoted,  especially  this  clause,  from  LXX.,  Exod.  ix.  16:  ivtKtv  tovtou  SierTjp^^?,  on  Ihit 
account  Ihou  wert  preserved.  Ei?  outo  toDto  is  merely  a  strengthening  of  the  LXX.  ;  but  «fqy«ipd  vt  seems  to 
be  a  purposed  deviation.  The  form  of  the  Hebrew  r|'n"1^yn  (Hiphil  of  TCS  ,  In  stand),  I  have  caused  Utee  to  stand, 
is  better  preserved  by  Paul's  quotation.     See  Exig.  iVo."««,  for  diiscuosion  of  the  meaning  of  oil  three  passages. 

>'  Ver.  17. — [Here  Paul  deviates  from  LXX.,  writing  iwi'ani  !<  in>fead  of  iirxiic. 

'*  Ver.  19. — [There  is  some  confusion  about  ovv.  B.  1).  F.  insert  it  in  both  clause-i ;  Rrr.,  v.  A.  K.  L.  omit  it  tho 
second  time.  All  have  it  In  tho  first  clause,  but  tho  position  varies.  Jicc,  D.  F.  K.  L.  put  it  before  »i04 ;  N.  A.  U., 
Tregelles,  after.     The  above  rendering  adopts  it  in  both  clauses. 

'•  Ver.  22.— [The  participle  9i\u>v  is  interpreted  :  siwf,  beraut'  he  was  willing  (1.  <.,  purposp<l)  or:  nlliough  ht 
wi*  willing  (iMt  yet  purposing)  The  latter  is  adopted  by  Lange:  ohsrhon  (l>ereils)  dfs  WiVemt ;  Meyer,  and  others. — 
After  what,  supply  :  wilt  Ihou  reply ^  or  something  to  that  etfect.     See  the  Ei  g.  y-ites  on  both  points. 

">  Ver.  i;3.— [It  wius  necessary  to  supply  this  much  in  tho  text,  in  order  to  vindicate  the  view  taken  of  this  difficult 
passjige.     See  Exg.  JVo'it. 

»'  Ver.  .'.'5.— [This  is  a  free  quotation  from  Hosea  ii.  2.5  (23,  LXX.  E.  V.).  Tho  Hebrew  text  is  followed  more  elosely 
than  tho  LXX. ;  tho  clauRos  are  transposed.  Ace.  It  in  not  neces-ary  to  insert  tho  LXX.  text  here,  us  it  ditfeis  in  abnost 
ovcrj' word,  though  contjiining  tho  Bame  general  thought :  nnX—'aS  ''Ei-xbb  ■'n";^:!*;  "^""^  i^^'^^*  "'HSrin^ 
In  rcndi'ring  l.o-rulinmoh,  Paul  follows  the  LXX. 

»»  Ver.  20.— (From  the  LXX.,  Hosea  i.  10  (ii.  1,  llobrew),  closely  coniiei-led  with  tho  preceding,  ns  if  from  the  same 
place,  ai-cording  to  tho  u.sage  of  the  Uubbins,  who  thus  joined  citations  even  fnini  ditl'erenl  authors.  The  only  varia- 
tion from  the  LXX.  is  the  strengthening  of  <cAi)9i)(rokTai  Koi  Into  <«ei  « Ai)9^(roi'Tai.  Tho  E.  V.,  Ucsoa  L  Vi, 
supplies  there. 


CHAPTER  IX.    .-33. 


299 


•*  Ver.  27.— [Isa.  x.  22.  Paul  follows  the  LXX.,  which  reads  :  koX  iav  yivrfrai  b  Aabs  'lo-paJjA  cos  {)  afx/uto;  Tiji 
taX.a<r(n)i,  to  KaroAci^/xa  avriov  o-ud^a-crai.  The  variation  from  the  Hebrew  is  slight ;  !l!l\2Ji  ,  s?iaU  return,  is  strength" 
ened  by  the  LXX.  into  (rioOtjcreTai,  which,  of  course,  means  still  more  as  Paul  uses  it.  X^  A.  B.,  Lachmann,  Tia« 
chendorf,  Meyer,  Alford,  Tregelles,  LaDge,  read  v;rdAei^fxa;  the  more  probable  reading,  as  the  LXX.  differs.  It  is  a 
stronger  word,  apparently. 

**  Ver.  28.— [The  variations  from  the  Hebrew  are  so  extensive,  that  it  will  be  best  to  give  the  text  entiro 

:  ni^ns  ciuid  ■j^nn  -,-ii'23 
7-!xn-ii3  3-i;?3 

"The  consumption  is  decided,  overflowing  with  righteousness  ; 
Per  a  consumption  and  a  decree  shall  the  Lord  of  Hosts  makei 
In  the  midst  of  all  the  land." 

8eo  Exrg.  ^otes  for  other  renderings,  and  also  for  text  of  the  LXX.,  which  Paul  quotes  closely ;  inserting  yap  at  tha 
beginning,  however,  as  better  continuini;  tin-  proof,  and  substituting  eirX  t^s  y^s  for  iv  rij  oiKoufievj)  oAjj. 

^^  Ver.  28.— [The  E.  V.  is  unfortunate  in  rendering  \6yov,  work.  (So  Amer.  Bil)Ie  Union.)  The  word  has  a  wida 
range  of  meaning,  but  this  is  not  included.     Langc  :  Abrcchnunffsspriich,  word  of  reckiming.    See  Exeg.  Notes. 

^^  Ver.  28. — [The  words:  ev  StKaio<rvvji  •  on  Aoyov  crvvTfT fjurnxevov ,  are  wanting  in  N'.  A.  B.,  rejected 
by  Lachmann,  Tregelles ;  bracketted  by  Alford,  but  retained  by  most  editors  on  the  authority  of  N'^.  D.  F.  K.  L.  Tha 
suspicion  of  an  addition  from  the  text  of  the  LXX.  is  outweighed  by  the  probability  of  the  transcriber's  confusing 
cvvTfTfi.  with  the  crvvTe [ivuv . 

2'  Ver.  29 — [A  verbatim  citation  from  the  LXX.,  Isa.  i.  9,  wliere  the  Hebrew   T^'^iU   is  rendered   <Tnepij.a. 

28  Ver.  31.— [The  iJeo.  (followed  by  the  E.  V.)  repeats  8t(cato<7v»T)s  (N^.  p.  k.  L).  'Dc  Wette,  Tholuck,  and  Meyei 
contend  ihat  the  omission  would  be  senseless  ;  see,  to  the  contrary,  Exeg.  JVotes.  The  omission  is  sustained  by  N'.  A.'  B 
1).  G.,  Lachmann,  Alford,  Wordsworth,  Lange,  Tregelles.  Dr.  Hodge  does  not  notice  any  of  the  variations  in  thes* 
verse-. 

29  Ver.  32. — [The  authorities  for  vo/xov  (Rec.)  are  N'.  D-  K.  L.,  a  number  of  versions.  It  is  omitted,  however,  in  N'. 
A.  B.  P.,  by  Lachmann,  Tischendorf,  Meyer,  Lange,  Tregelles,  Wordsworth.  Alford  prefers  to  omit,  but  does  not  deem 
the  evidence  sufhciently  strong  to  decide.     The  word  would  readily  be  inserted  as  an  explanation. 

30  Ver.  32.— [Lange  prefers  to  retain  yap  (A'ec),  mainly  cm  the  ground  tiiat  it  must  be  supplied  in  thought,  even  if 
rejected.  It  is  lound  in  N^.  D'.  K.  L.,  many  versions  and  lathers  ;  retained  by  Tischendorf,  Word.sworth,  Lange.  It  is 
omitted  in  x'.  A.  B.  I)'.  F.,  some  cursives,  &c.  Lachmann,  Meyer  (with  decision),  Alford,  Tregelles,  reject  it.  II 
omitted,  the  period  also  must  be  omitted,  and  the  verse  be  rendered,  as  by  Alford :  "  Because  (ptirsuing  it)  7wt  by  faith, 
hilt  as  by  wnlcs,  they  SMmbled,  &Q. 

^1  Ver.  33.— [Paul  hero  combines  Isa.  xxviii.  16  and  viii.  14  in  one,  varying,  to  suit  his  purpose,  both  from  tho 
Hebrew  text  and  the  LXX  There  is  no  variation  in  thought,  except  that  the  Apos^tle  gives  it  as  his  exegesis,  that  the 
"  stone  of  stumbling  "  of  the  one  passage  is  the  "  corner-stone  elect,"  &c.,  of  the  other.     Comp.  1  Peter  ii.  6-S. 

32  Ver.  33.— [The  A'ec.  inserts  ttos,  on  the  authority  of  K.  L.,  versions  and  fathers.  It  is  omitted  in  N.  A.  B.  D.  P., 
by  Lachmann,  Tischendorf,  Meyer  (4th  ed. ;  Lange  quotes  him  as  retaining  it),  Alford,  Wordsworth,  Lange,  Tregelles. 
It  does  not  occur  in  the  LXX.,  but,  in  chap.  x.  II,  no  MS.  omits  it.  The  probability  is,  that  it  was  inserted  here  to 
conform  to  that  passage.  Lange  suggests  that  the  emphasis  upon  Tras,  were  it  retained,  would  weaken  that  upou 
irt  cTe  vtt)  V . — R.] 


[Preliminary  Note  on  the  whole  chapter,  and 
its  connection  with  the  rest  of  the  Epistle. — In  order 
to  understand  this  chapter,  which  is  in  many  respects 
the  most  difficult  section  of  the  whole  Epistle,  its 
connection  with  the  preceding  context,  but  especially 
with  chaps,  x.  and  xi.,  must  not  be  overlooked.  Be- 
fore passing  from  the  doctrinal  part,  which  reaciied 
its  culmination  in  the  song  of  triumph  at  the  close 
of  chap,  viii.,  to  the  practical  exhortations  (chaps, 
sii.  ff.),  the  Apostle  institutes  (in  chaps,  ix.-xi.)  a 
profound  inquiry  into  the  historical  course  of  devel- 
opment of  the  kingdom  of  God,  seeking  especially 
to  enlighten  and  satisfy  his  readers  respecting  the 
enigmatical  phenomenon,  that  the  greater  part  of  the 
people  of  Israel  rejected  salvation  in  Christ.*  The 
thought  might  readily  arise,  that  the  promises  given 
to  the  covenant-people  had  to  come  to  nought,  or 
that  Jesus  was  not  the  Messiah,  who  had  been  prom- 
ised principally  to  the  Jews.  After  expressing  his 
sorrow  at  the  exclusion  of  so  many  of  his  people 
from  the  Christian  salvation,  he  shows ; 

1.  That  God's  promise  was  not  thereby  rendered 
void ;  for  {n.)  it  refers,  not  to  all  of  Abraham's  de- 
scendants, but  to  those  chosen  by  God  of  free  grace, 
as  Isaac  and  Jacob  (vers.  6-13).  (6.)  God  is  not 
unjust  in  this  election,  for  He  is  the  Sovereign  over 


♦  [His  theme,  as  announced  in  chap.  i.  16, 17,  necessa- 
rily led  him  to  such  an  inquiry.  It  concludes:  "to  the 
J  10  ^rsl,  ;„nd  also  to  the  Greek."  Having  discussed  the  great 
truth  of  ''the  righfodusness  of  faith,"  he  must  justifv  this 
addition.il  clause,  which  ^eems  to  he  incorrect,  in  view  of 
the  present  exclusion  of  the  Jews.  So  Philippi,  and  others, 
-B.] 


His  creatures,  who  can  make  no  rightful  demands  of 
Him  (vers.  14-29). 

2.  The  ground  of  the  exclusion  lies  in  the  unbe- 
lief of  the  Jews  themselves,  who  despised  'the  true 
way  of  salvation  through  the  righteousness  of  faith, 
and  substituted  their  own  righteousness ;  while  the 
gospel  announced  to  them,  as  indeed  the  Old  Testa- 
ment frequently  indicated,  that  salvation  could  be 
attained  only  through  faith  (chap.  ix.  30-x.  21). 

3.  God  had  not,  however,  cast  off  His  people ; 
for  (a.)  there  is  a  remnant  elected  of  grace,  though 
most  are  hardened  (chap.  xi.  1-10) ;  (h.)  the  unbe- 
lief and  fall  of  Israel,  in  the  wisdom  and  mercy  of 
God,  turns  out  for  the  salvation  and  reviving  of  the 
Gentiles,  who  should  not,  however,  boast  themselves 
(chap.  xi.  11-24);  (c.)  finally,  the  rejection  is  only 
temporary,  since,  after  the  conversion  of  all  the 
Gentiles,  grace  will  come  to  the  whole  of  Israel 
(chap.  xi.  25-32).  In  conclusion,  the  Apostle  breaks 
forth  into  a  doxology  to  the  grace  and  wisdom  of 
God,  who  in  such  a  manner  will  solve  the  er.igma  of 
the  world's  history,  and  lead  all  things  to  the  glory 
of  His  name  and  the  best  interest  of  His  kingdom 
(chap.  xi.  33-36).— P.  S.] 

De  Wette  on  chaps,  ix.-xi. :  A  supplement  (! 
to  the  foregoing  discussion :  lament,  explanation 
and  comfort  concerning  the  exclusion  of  the  greater 
portion  of  the  Jews  from  Christian  salvation.  Mey- 
er, likewise  :  A  supplement  on  the  foregoing  non. 
participation  of  the  greater  part  of  the  Jews  in  the 
Christian  institution  of  salvation,  containing :  a.  Th« 
lament  on  it  (chap.  ix.  1-5).  h.  The  theodicy  ao^ 
counting  for  it  (chap.  ix.  6-29).     c.  The  guilt  of  it, 


300 


THE    EPISTLE    OF   PAUL   TO    THE   ROMANS. 


which  rests  upon  the  Jews  themselves  (chap.  ix. 
30-33,  and  chap.  x.  1-21).  d.  The  coiiS(.>laUon  aris- 
ing from  it  (cliap.  xi.  1-32),  with  praise  ottered  to 
God  (ehap.  ix.  o3-3C).  While  De  Wette  regards  the 
Beetiou  ol"  chaps,  ix.-xi.  as  only  a  su|)pleiiient,  Baur 
considers  it  the  real  centre  and  kernel  of  the  Epis- 
tle. If  this  be  so,  the  keruel  would  indeed  have  a 
very  massive  shell. 

[Forbes  (following  Olshausen)  finds  a  parallel  be- 
tween chap.  i.  18-iii.  20,  and  these  three  chapters, 
"  We  have  here  an  instmee  of  the  Epaiiodos,  the 
object  of  whieli  is  to  bring  the  main  subject  into 
prominence  by  placing  it  first  and  last.  In  both 
sections  the  suljjeet  is  the  relation  of  Israel,  and  of 
till'  Gentiles,  to  the  new  wai/  of  salvation.  But  in 
chnp.  i.  18-iii.  20  it,  is  regarded  more  on  the  side  of 
the  Law — as  condemning  Israel  equally  with  the 
Gentiles,  and  necessitating  them  equally  to  have  re- 
course to  the  gospel.  In  chaps,  ix.-xi.  it  is  regard- 
ed more  on  the  side  of  Grace  (on  the  part  of  God, 
as  possessing  a  right  to  prescribe  ills  own  terms  of 
ac:ceptance),  and  of  Faith  (on  the  part  of  man,  as 
the  one  only  condition  for  attaining  salvation,  and 
which  is  demanded  equally  of  Israel  as  of  the  Gen- 
tiles). Another  point  of  resemblance  between  the 
two  sections  consists  in  the  striking  parallelism  be- 
tween tiie  three  objections  of  the  Jew  in  chap.  iii. 
1-8,  and  those  in  chap.  ix.  1-23." — Jow^ett :  "  The 
Apostle  himself  seems  for  a  time  in  doubt  between 
contending  feelings,  in  w-liieh  he  first  prays  for  the 
restoration  of  Israel,  and  then  reasons  tor  their  re- 
jection, and  then  finally  shows  tiiat,  in  a  more  ex- 
tended view  of  the  purposes  of  God,  their  salvation 
is  included.  He  hears  the  echo  of  many  voices  in 
the  Old  Testament,  by  which  the  Spicit  spoke  to  the 
Fathers,  and  in  all  of  them  there  is  a  kind  of  unity, 
though  but  liatf  expressed,  which  is  not  less  the 
unity  of"  his  own  inmost  feelings  toward  his  kinsmen 
acconling  to  the  flesh.  As  himself  an  Israelite  and 
a  believer  in  Christ,  he  is  full  of  sorrow  first,  after- 
wards of  hope,  both  finally  giving  way  to  a  clearer 
insight  hito  the  purposes  of  God  toward  His  people." 
As  respects  the  relation  of  these  chapters  to  the  pre- 
ceding part  of  the  Epistle,  in  an  experimental  view, 
Luther  well  says:  "Who  hath  not  known  pjission, 
cross,  and  tiavail  of  death,  cannot  treat  of  fore- 
knowledge (election  of  grace),  without  injury  and 
inward  enmity  toward  God.  Wherefore  take  heed 
that  thou  drink  not  wine,  while  thou  art  yet  a  suck- 
ing babe.  Each  several  doctrine  hath  its  own  sea- 
son, and  mesusure,  and  age." — R.] 

Tlioluek  gives,  on  pp.  466,  4(57,  a  copious  cata- 
logue of  the  literature  on  Romans  ix.  See  also 
Meyer,  p.  347.  We  may  here  call  attention  to  a 
more  recent  monograph  :  Beck,  Versuc/i  eiiicr  pncti- 
matisvh-hermennilisch''n  Erkldrunq  den  9<e  /Cap., 
&c.,  1838.  To  this  we  add  the  following:  C.  W. 
Krummachcr,  Dai  Dogma  von  der  Gnadentva/il, 
vehst  Aitsler/uncf  des  9te,  \Ote,  utid  \lte  Kap.  im 
Jiriefe  an  d"'  Nomcr,  Duislturg,  IS.It)  ;  Lamping, 
Panli  Apoitoli  de  jiralestina'i'iiie  decrcia,  Lenwar- 
den,  18.)8  ;  Delitzseh,  Zur  Einl.  hi  den  Brief  an  die 
liomiT.  Zi'ilxchrift  far  die  In'h.  Thxihijie  vnd 
Kirche,  1849,  Xo.  4  ;  Van  Hengel  mentions  (2,  323) 
V.'y.«uis,  I.eerredcmn  over  Rotneincn,  ix.,  x.,  xi.,  torn, 
I.  [Philij)  Scliaff,  Dna  venule  Kapitel  den  h'dmrr- 
briefs  iihersetzt  und  erktdrl,  in  the  author's  Kirrhen- 
frc'und,  M.-rcersburgh,  Pa.,  1852,  pp.  378-389,  414- 
422,  largely  used  in  the  exposition  of  this  chapter  in 
*,he  pre.s(Mit  volume. — R.] 

Summary, — A.      77<e  painful   contrast  between 


the  misery  of  the  Jews  and  the  described  stalvation  of 
the  Christians,  most  of  whom  had  been  Gentiles. 
The  Ajiostle's  sorrw  ovtr  the  apparently  frustrated 
destiny  of  his  ]xople  (vers.  1-5). 

B.  The  extdtalion  of  the  Apostle  in  the  thought 
thai  God's  promise  to  Israel  would  nevertheUss  re' 
maiii  in  force  (vers.  0-33).  Proof:  1.  Ditfereucea 
in  the  election  :  they  are  not  all  Israel  which  are  of 
Israel  (vers.  G-13).  2.  Antitheses  iu  the  ordimtion 
(predestination) :  God  is  not  unrighteous  in  showing 
mercy  and  in  hardening,  and  in  His  manner  of  con- 
necting judgment  and  compassion  (vers.  14-18). 
3.  God's  freedom  in  the  actual  call  of  salvation 
(vers.  19-29) :  a.  Proof  from  the  existing  fact  (vers, 
19-24) ;  6,  Proof  from  the  witnesses  of  the  Old 
Testament  (vers.  25-29).  4.  The  correspondence 
of  God's  freedom  in  His  administration,  and  the 
freedom  of  men  in  their  faith  or  unbelief.  The 
firmness  of  the  fact  that  the  (xentiles  believe,  and 
the  greater  part  of  Israel  do  not  believe  (vers. 
30-33). 

EXEGETICAL  AIS'D   CEITICAI,. 

A.  T/ie  ApostWs  sorrow  over  the  apparently 
frustrated  destiny  of  his  people  (vers.  1-5).  Wiu- 
zer,  Frogrnmm  in  Koni.  ix.  1-5,  Lips.,  1832. 

After  the  Apostle  has  portrayed  the  glory  of  be- 
lievers in  the  New  Testament,  he  nmst  return  to  the 
.surprising  phenomenon,  that  it  is  just  the  majority 
of  the  peo[)le  of  the  Old  Testament  who  are  absent 
from  this  feast  of  salvation — from  the  Supper  of  the 
Lord  in  the  New  Testament.  The  Jews,  however, 
have  already  come  into  view  (chap.  viii.  33)  as  among 
the  accuseis  and  persecutors,  and  thus  the  way  had 
been  prepared  for  this  transition.  In  a  systematic 
reference,  the  Apostle  turns  from  the  consiiiei-ation 
of  the  consummated  salvation,  to  the  most  extreme 
contrast — sin  iu  its  third  potency,  the  judgment  of 
hardening.     . 

Ver.  1.  I  say  the  truth  in  Christ  [aAiJ- 
&n,av  Xiyoi  tv  X()iar<Ji.  Dr.  Lange  retains 
the  article,  as  is  done  in  the  E.  V.,  and  in  most  re- 
visions (except  Noyes').  It  seems  required  by  the 
genius  of  both  the  German  and  English  languages. 
— R.]  The  Apostle  strengthens  his  subsequent 
declaration  in  a  threefold  way :  I  say  the  truth  in 
Christ ;  I  lie  not ;  my  con.science  bears  me  witness. 
The  energetic  b.attle  which  the  -\postle  waged  against 
the  Jew.s'  righteousness  of  their  works,  ami  their 
claim  to  prerogatives  in  God's  kingdom,  made  him 
odious  to  the  Jews  and  an  object  of  opposition  and 
suspicion  to  many  prejudiced  ones  among  the  Jewish 
Christians  ;  while  biased  (ientih;  Christians  ought  l>e 
tempted  to  regard  him  as  one  of  their  jiartisans. 
He  meets  all  this  by  the  solenni  asseveration  of  his 
pain. 

[Alford  :  "  The  subject  on  which  lie  is  about  to 
enter,  so  unwelcome  to  Jews  in  general,  coupled 
with  their  hostility  to  himself,  causes  him  to  begin 
witii  a  de])reeation,  bespeaking  credit  for  simplicity 
and  earnestness  in  the  assertion  which  is  to  follow. 
This  deprecation  and  a.ssertion  of  sympathy  he  put!« 
in  t!ie  forefront  of  the  section,  to  take  at  once  the 
ground  from  those  who  might  charge  him,  in  the 
conduct  of  his  argument,  with  hostility  to  his  own 
alicTiaied  people." — R.] 

But  the  Apostle  treats  also  of  a  further  great 
progress  in  the  glorification  of  Divine  grace,  which, 
in  its  third  |)otency,  glorifii-s  as  eomjiii-ssion  that 
gloomy  judgment  of  hardening  which  the  Apostle 


CHAPTER  IX.    1-33. 


301 


can  only  disclose  by  an  expression  of  the  greatest 
pain.  The  Apostle  is  doubly  assured  of  the  sincer- 
ity of  his  declaration.  First,  he  expresses  his  feel- 
inj;  in  the  consciousness  of  the  fellowship  of  Christ* 
(Eph.  iv.  17  ;  1  Thess.  iv.  1),  while  he,  so  to  speak, 
transfers  himself  into  tlie  feeling  of  Clirist  (Luke 
xix.  41).  Second,  he  proves  and  tests  tiie  truth  of 
his  feeling  by  his  conscience,  and  by  the  strong  and 
clear  light  of  the  Holy  Spirit.  Now,  is  this  declara- 
tion an  oath,  according  to  most  of  the  earlier  and 
many  of  the  later  expositors  (Rciche,  Kollner,  and 
others);  or  is  it  not,  according  to  the  exposition  of 
Tholnck,  De  Wette,  and  Meyer?  This  much  is 
clear,  that  the  Apostle's  asseveration  is  not  a  formal 
taking  of  an  oath,  and  not  in  the  form  of  an  oath. 
[The  form  of  an  oath  would  be  7T(>6(;  with  the  accu- 
sative.— R.]  It  will  be  remembered,  in  favor  of  this 
view,  that  the  onvvfvv  (Matt.  v.  34)  is  here  wanting ; 
and  that  the  Apostle  does  not  swear  by  Christ,  nor 
by  the  Holy  Ghost.  Neither  does  he  swear  in  a 
legal  sense  in  general ;  we  may  only  ask,  whether  he 
does  not  here  give  a  solemn  assurance  in  God's  pres- 
ence, and  whether  such  an  assurance  is  not  an  ideal 
oath  ? 

I  lie  not  [oi'i  i/'f  ll^o/«a^].  (1  Tim.  ii.  V.) 
White  lies  being  very  much  in  vogue  at  the  time, 
this  addition  surely  meant  that  he  was  perfectly  con- 
scious of  his  responsibility  for  his  declarations,  since 
he  called  on  Christ  as  a  witness. 

My  conscience  also  bearing  me  witness 
[<r  vu  fia^T  v^Qva  tji;  ftoi,  rTjq  av  v  tu  d  >'j  ff  e  d)  (; 
/<oi'].  Meyer;  Since  my  coiiHcience  bears  me  wit- 
ness. But  Paul's  conscience  could  not  bear  witness 
to  the  Romans  apart  from  Paul  himself.  The  dis- 
tinction between  his  own  declaration  and  that  of  his 
conscience,  means  that  he  has  proved  his  feelings  in 
regard  to  his  people  by  the  light  of  conscience  and 
of  the  Spirit  of  God.  [Alford  :  The  avv  in  com- 
position, denoting  accordance  with  the  fact,  not  joint 
testimony. — R.] 

In  the  Holy  Ghost  [Iv  nvfVfiari,  aylotX 
This  is  not  an  addition  to  a w fid t] (71,1;  itself  (a 
conscience  governed  by  the  Holy  Ghost ;  Grotius), 
and  still  less  to  01'  %pfV()oaav  (although  this  is 
favored  by  many:  wq  Iv  nrfv/iaru  ayim  wr),  but  to 
avfiua(jT.  HOI  (Tholuck,  Meyer,  and  others). 
[Meyer  :  "  Paul  knows  that  the  witness  of  his  con- 
science is  not  outside  the  Spirit  which  fills  him,  but 
spirifo  sancfo  dnce  et  moderatore  (Beza)  in  it." — R.] 

Ver.  2.  That  I  have  great  grief  and  con- 
tinual sorrow  in  my  heart  [oti.  Ivnt}  noi 
iarov  Kfyd}.}]  xal  aSt.dXfi'TtTot;  ofivvri  ttj 
y.aQdia  fiov.  The  position  of  the  words  is  sol- 
emnly emphatic. — R.]  The  Apostle  does  not  imme- 
diately and  directly  mention  the  subject  or  occasion 
of  his  grief  Why  not  ?  Meyer :  "  From  tender 
compassion."  Tholuck  :  "  In  lively  emotion."  But 
the  object  is  indicated  by  the  {tneg  r.  dS.  /lov  (ver. 
8),  and  it  is  the  d7Td)?.fi,a  threatened  them  (ver.  22). 
But  the  great  pain  relates  not  only  to  the  great  full 
of  his  glorious  people,  which  had  already  occurred, 
but  to  the  Apostle's  tragical  position  toward  his 
brethren  according  to  the  flesh,  and  to  the  hard  pro- 
phetic call  now  to  disclose  publicly  the  whole  judg- 
ment of  hardening  pronounced  on  Israel,  with  its 
incalculably  sad  consequences.     Christ  also  wept  as 


♦  ["In  Christ,"  ?.  e.,  in  fellowship  with  Christ,  who  is 
Truth  itself,  and  transfers  His  members,  at  all  events,  into 
the  element  of  truth  and  sincerity  (comp.  2  Cor.  xii.  19). 
-  P.  S.1 


He  prophesied  Jerusalem's  fate.  Comp.  Isa.  vi, 
[How  noble  the  Apostle  appears  here,  with  this  holj 
patriotism  and  hearty  love  to  those  who,  from  the 
day  of  his  conversion,  had  persecuted  him  with  re- 
lentless hatred  ;  who,  soon  after  the  composition  of 
this  Epistle,  occasioned  him  a  long  imprisonment, 
and  who  were  the  immediate  cause  of  his  martyr, 
dom  !— P.  S.] 

Ver.  3.  For  I  could  wish.  [Lange :  Denn 
ich  that  ja  das  Geliibde,  for  I  made  the  vow]. 
See  the  discussions  on  this  difficult  passage,  quoted 
by  Tholuck.  For  an  elaborate  account  of  the  ear 
lier  expositions,  see  Wolf's  Curce,  iii.  p.  164.  Ex 
planations  of  the  7jv/6fO]v: 

1,  I  have  wisJied,  namely,  formerly  (Vulgate : 
optabam  ;  Luther :  I  have  wished).  This  explana. 
tion  divides,  again,  into  two  : 

a.  When  I  was  a  Jew,  I  wished  to  keep  the 
Jews  far  from  Christ ;  yea,  to  be  myself  the  per. 
sonal  medium  of  the  alienation;  arci  5-f/it  a  = 
X(n(Ji,(Jn6q  (Pelagius,  Abelard,  and  others).  In  this 
case  he  appeals  to  his  former  blind  zeal  for  Israel 
against  Christ,  in  order  to  pi'ove  that  he  loves  his 
people,  and,  in  his  love,  that  he  now  sorrows  for 
their  fate. 

b.  In  my  pain  I  have  gone  so  far,  as  a  Christian, 
that  I  wished,  &c.  {Siffnijicat,  se  aliquaiido  hoe 
orasse,  nimirum  cum  dolor  iste  singulariter  invaht- 
issei)  Bucer.  Meyer,  and  others,  suggest,  to  the 
contrary,  that  thei-e  is  here  no  nori,  or  any  other 
word  of  similar  import.  Philippi  adds :  it  must 
then  mean  7ji'td/iijv  norL* 

2.  I  wished,  namely,  even  now. 

a.  Tholuck  :  Dmn  modo  fieri  posset,  si  liccret. 

b.  Meyer :  I  would  wish,  if  the  import  of  my 
wish  could  contribute  to  the  good  of  the  Israelites. 

c.  Philippi:  But  tjv/6f(rjv  is  also  not  identical 
with  f]vx6,iiijv  dv  ;  that  is,  J  woidd  wish,  if  the  wish 
were  possible  ;  but  since  it  is  not  possible,  I  do  not 
wish.  But  it  is  =  i  wished,  namely,  if  the  wish 
could  be  realized,  and  therefore  really  wish  on  this 
supposition. 

The  difference  between  the  explanations  is  this  : 
a.  If  the  wish  were  possible  (Tholuck) ;  b.  If  the 
thing  wished  for  were  possible  (Philippi) ;  c.  If  the 
thing  wished  for,  and  also  the  wish  itself,  were  pos- 
sible (Meyer).  There  has,  perhaps,  not  been  enough 
regard  to  analogies  in  Paul's  method  of  expression. 
Paul  says  ^fvialfir^v  dv  (Acts  xxvi.  29),  for  I  w  shed, 
in  the  sense  of  I  ivould  wish,  and  why  not  here, 
too  ?  Luke  relates,  on  the  contrary.  Acts  xxvii.  29, 
in  the  imperfect :  T/i'/orro,  they  wished  (at  that 
time) ;  and  why  should  not  the  imperfect  be  used 
here  in  the  same  sense  ?  If,  indeed,  the  word  should 
mean  here,  I  have  wished,  or  even,  I  have  prayed 
(Theodoret,  and  others),  the  presence  of  nori  might 
be  insisted  upon.  But  if  the  Apostle  wishes  to 
say,  /  7nade  a  vow — i.  e.,  if  he  speaks  of  a  definite 
f\xct — the  TTori  lies  already  in  the  emphasis  of  the 
Tj  v'/  uitrjv  itself,  especially  as  joined  with  the  added 


♦  [Under  (1)  belongs  an  interpretation,  suggested  by 
the  vi-nerable  S.  H.  Cox,  D.  D.,  taking  the  verse  as  a  parer- 
thetical  explanation  of  Paul's  sorrow,  in  this  sense  :  "  for 
I  myself  once  gloried  as  a  persecutor  to  be  banished  from 
Christ."  Besides  the  objections  against  the  past  sense  a.^ 
given  above,  it  may  be  added,  that  this  puts  myself  in  the 
wrong  place  (see  Tixlual  Note  ^) ;  that,  while  €uxo/i*at  hai 
this  meaning  :  to  boas/,  to  glory,  in  Homer,  yet  even  ther* 
it  is  often  little  more  than  to  profesx,  mainlain,  while  in  the 
New  Testament  it  does  not  occur  in  this  sense.  The  prob* 
abilities,  both  lexical  and  grammatical,  are  very  strong, 
therefore,  against  such  a  meaning  here.— K.] 


502 


TnE    EPISTLE   or   PAUL   TO   THE   ROMANS. 


aT'TOi,'  iyv).  It  is  very  probable  that  he  made 
some  pledge,  wlien  he  (according  to  Acts  ix.  2)  re- 
ceived I'loiii  the  liigh  priest  authority  to  persecute 
the  Christiiins ;  for  a  hierarch  of  exalted  station 
does  not  coiitide  in  a  young  man  without  some  such 
pledges.  His  present  perception  of  the  fearful  im- 
port of  that  engagement  is  immediately  expressed 
iu    aval}  fit  a,  x.r.k. 

If  we  disregard  such  an  acceptation,  the  exeget- 
ical  dilliculty  will  really  begin  with  avd&t fia. 
[Dr.  Lange  prefers,  yet  does  not  commit  himself  to, 
this  view  of  the  imperfect.  It  is  far-fetched ;  and 
were  there  no  other  grounds  to  influence  the  inter- 
pretation than  those  of  grannnar,  as  Alford  hints, 
any  school-boy  could  tell  that  the  imperfect  does 
not  refer  to  a  definite  past  act,  but  represents  "  the 
act  unfinished,  an  obstacle  intervening."  In  sup- 
port of  tiie  grammatical  correctness  of  this  view, 
see  Buttnian,  iV.  T.  Gramm.,  p.  187;  Kiihner,  ii., 
§  438,  3 ;  Bernhardy,  Si/7itax,  p.  373  ;  Kruger,  §  54, 
10 ;  Winer,  p.  2t)6.  It  seems  perilous  to  give  up 
the  obvious  meaning,  I  could  wix/i,  for  one  barely 
allowable.  The  aorist  was  at  hand,  if  Paul  wished 
to  refer  to  a  past  vow.  If  tlicre  be  a  difficulty  in 
the  i)assage,  it  is  met  most  fniriy  by  Meyer's  view, 
that  the  verb  implies  an  impossibility,  or  at  least  an 
insurmountable  obstacle,  botli  as  to  the  wish  and 
the  tiling  wished  for.  We  can  then  take  ava- 
&f/ia  in  its  obvious  sense,  without  putting  it  also 
on  the  rack  to  extort  another  meaning.  See  the 
final  Exi'f/.  Note  on  this  verse. — R.] 

That  I  myself  were  accursed  from  Christ 
[av  a  (}  t  II  a  1 1  r  a  i.  a  r  t  o  ?  iy  o>  an  o  r  o  u 
X(ti(rToT'].  'yivdOf/ict,  Attic  dvdOtjua,  dedi- 
cated to  God  ;  hence,  also,  dedicated  to  the  Divine 
judgment,  and  consequently  to  ruin  ;  in  the  latter 
sense  =  C-;n  (Gal.  i.  8,  9 ;  1  Cor.  xii.  3  ;  xvi.  22). 
Though  the  later  sense  of  D~n  "  must  not  be  con- 
strued as  the  Jewish  curse  of  excommunication " 
(Meyer),  yet  the  theocratic  idea:  to  excommunicate 
from  the  Church  of  God,  and  to  dedicate  to  ruin, 
cannot  be  separated.  In  the  Christian  .sphere  the 
dvdf>fi'(x  is,  indeed,  in  the  ecclesiastical  form,  a 
temporally  qualified  exclusion  :  "  for  the  destruc- 
tion  of  the  flesh,  that  the  spirit  may  be  saved  "  (1 
Cor.  V.  5). 

[ExccKSPs  ON  Anathema. — The  proper  under- 
Btantling  of  this  pa.ssage  may  be  furtliered  by  dis- 
cussing at  this  point  the  precise  meaning  of  the 
word  dvdOfua.  The  following  dissertation  is  fn)m 
Wieseler,  (,'ommen/nri/  on  Ga/aCians  (i.  8,  9,  pp.  39 
ff.).  The  fact  that  it  is  founded  upcm  another  pas- 
sage, adils  to  its  weight  in  determining  the  meaning 
here,  since  tiic  discussion  of  Gal.  i.  8  is  not  beset 
with  the  prejudices  which  arise  here. 

" '--/vaO^f/i «  *  is  the  Hellenistic  form  for  the 
Attic  drdHtjiia  (comp.  fratjiia  and  t\\niiu,  nooa- 
Orjiiu,  and  7i(>6(J,7f/ia,  Lobeek,  Ad  J'/iri/nich,  p. 
219,  and  Paralip,  pp.  391  ff.),  and,  like  the  latter 
form,  denotes  in  general  '  sometliing  dedicated  to 
(iod,  u  votive  offering  ; '  but  in  the  Bible  it  is  usu- 
ally the  translation  of  the  Hebrew  D^n ,  as  dvafyt- 

*  ("  Reopctintt  pxcomrminication  nmoti);  tho  .lews,  cnmp. 
«>«pc<Mally  ScMon,  />••  jiir-'  nut.  rl  i/'iU.,  4,  8,  Dr  Si/iiflr.,  i. 
•  und  8  ;  QiliUm<ixUr,  ninnlionke  ilm  vtilfiiirm  iiiilinnal- 
1smu.<  zur  lifsiilif/Hiip  </»■»  paulinitilim  Ann:lifni<i,  IHIl,  mid 
B'iirdf)-'  txini  liiemifclf  a  M'fitixine,  1812;  Kwnid,  Al'en- 
IhUmr.f  dm  Vo'K-t  Unif.l,  S.  HI  IT.  ;  rcsjioctinpr  tlie  (Jrook 
avaScfxa,  t'lltr-fctic  on  Horn.  ix.  3;  nlnn  Tliolitrk  on  Uciin. 
U  :* ;  iiri'l  on  tho  i(cuorai  subject,  Winer,  Rcnlworlerbuch 
miiicr  liunn." — li.J 


ftariZn,v  is  of  O^inn  ,  and  then  denotes  something 
dedicated  to  God  in  a  bad  sense,  as  we  sliall  pre* 
ently  see  more  particularly  ;  comp.  the  Latin  aacer. 
When  any  thing  consecrated  in  a  general  sense  is 
to  be  denoted,  however,  the  form  avdOr/jua,  in  the 
Scriptures  and  their  dependent  literature,  is  wont 
to  prevail ;  in  the  other  case,  the  form  dvd&tfiu, 
although  the  genuine  reading,  on  account  of  the 
divergence  of  manuscripts,  is  often  very  difficult  to 
determine.  \-1vdOrifta  as  translation  of  ^"in  ia 
found,  e.  p.,  in  the  LXX.,  Levit.  xxvii.  28,  29,  where, 
however,  the  reading  dvdfytfia  also  appears.  At 
all  events,  this  use  of  dvdf)rj/ia  is  the  exception 
throughout,  as  appears  also  from  the  fact  that  ccvct- 
0  >i  fiuri^n-v  is  nowhere  used,  but  dvaO  t  fiaxiZnv. 
We  iire  more  apt  to  find  drd'h/m  also  in  the  sense 
of  a  customary  votive  offering  ;  e.  (/.,  2  Mace.  ii.  13, 
and  Judith  xvi.  19,  Codx  Al'x.  Luke  uses  dvd- 
Orjiia,  Luke  xxi.  6  (yet  Cod.  A.  and  D.  [so  k.],  and 
also  Lachmann,  read  drdO f/ia)  of  a  customary  vo- 
tive ottering,  and  Acts  xxiii.  14,  a»'ai>f/(a,  of  a 
consecration  in  a  bad  sense.  Suiilas  therefore  says, 
with  essential  correctness :  dvdQ-ffio,  x«t  to  dvuTi- 
Oifitvov  lii)  Q-kJ)  xal  to  ?«'<,■  duaviunbv  iffoutvov 
dinfOTf(ja  ar^naivn'  /.iyftav  t)i  xal  avd>9rj  n  a 
ri)  7<~)  x}(iT>  dvaTf&ftfnt'ov.  [cirt<flf«a  signifies 
both  that  which  is  hung  up  as  an  ottering  to  God, 
and  that  which  is  destined  to  destruction  ;  but  that 
which  is  hung  up  as  an  ottering  to  God  is  called  also 
dvdOti/ia.]  So  Theodoret,  respecting  the  usage  of 
his  time  on  Rom.  ix.  3:  to  dvdf>ffia  (Iltt/Jjv 
i/fv  rijv  (iidvovuv '  y.ai  yd()  to  a<fif(><t\iifrov  n'l 
OkJi  dvdO-tj/tn  ovond^fTcti,,  xcd  to  toi'toii  «/.- 
).6t(ii-ov  rijv  arrtjv  iya  TTQOfTtjyotiiai'.  [The  word 
dvdOfiia  has  a  twofold  sense  :  for  both  that  which 
is  consecrated  to  God  is  named  drdOtjiia,  and  the 
contrary  of  this  has  the  same  appellation.]  So  much 
respecting  the  distinction  between  didOi/ia  and 
ai'ai9;;i(«." 

"  Tlie  dvd&ffia  in  the  passage  before  us  has 
been  understood  principally  (1.)  of  excommunica- 
tion.* So  Grotius,  Semler,  Burger  (wavcringly), 
Rosenmiiller,  Flatt ;  the  rationaHsimts  vulgaris  in 
the  well-known  Bremen  controversy  occasioned  by 
Y.  W.  Krummaclior's  Gastpndigt,  upon  this  pa.ssage, 
represented  by  Paniel,  Weber,  and  I'aulus  (comp. 
Gilderaeister,  passim,  and  also  Baumgarten-Crusius). 
Either  an  actual  excommunication  was  understood, 
as  by  Rosenmiiller  {ij-rliulafur  e  ccetu  vc'<trn),  which 
Flatt  thinks  possible  with  regard  to  a  teacher,  or  it 
was  even  explained  as  by  Grotius  {ri(in  eo  nihil  vohia 
sit  coMMKitni,  tion  magiii,  </uaiit  fiiin  lis  quo.s  S'/na- 
goga  aut  h'cclesia  penitus  almcidit)  and  by  Semler 
(fugifi;  ahliorrete  talem  doctornn) ;  in  which  case 
we  .should  at  least  have  expected  ii'ta nut  dvdOfim 
{litnntQ  o  dvaDfiiarKT/iitvi;)  iarof  vfilv;  comp. 
Matt,  xviii.  17." 

"  In  partii-ular  in  recent  times,  it  is  explained 
(2.)  almost  universally  and  also  correctly:  '  to  have 


♦  ["  Moius  even  nssumes  a  wider  Bicniflciition  of  avaStita 
f  (TTw  :  Intigiil  eiini  .MAl.i'M,  rflSNA,  mule  ei  sil,  nmi  d'/iiitc 
nunr  viiiilf.  pifc  eniliis,  mi  eTcnmmunvnnd'if  on  alio  Mono 
dii  III  till  ndiif.  For  this  imaKiiiary  nk'iiificsitit'n  lie  iippoiils  M 
Oal.  v.  10,  whtTo  it  is  Piiid  of  tlio  nanio  fnlee  to;ii'hor  :  jwli- 
ciiim  frr.'—i.  •■.,  'Ho  will  soon  find  liis  rewnrcL'  Itiirirer, 
who  wiivcrs  between  tliis  exjiliiiiiitioii  and  tlmt  "f  (Jrotin* 
and  .Scnilir.  thinks  that  I'aul  in  Iioth  caso.s  meant :  lulnn 
A'/niin<m  jirrqiKim  etxe  nce'eslitm  nlqif  mien  jiHiiiindum,  nun 
vern  iiidmne.  ot'anau  sil  ptemi  phri-ndiis.  Wc  see,  in  the 
oane  of  the  atderixa.  how  thorousrhly  tho  unscientific  ex— 
gvuM  of  all  times  and  all  places  is  dependent  ou  all  thi 
wiaheii  and  prejuditcs  of  tUc  individual.   — 11.] 


CHAPTER  IX.   1-33. 


303 


beconie  obnoxious  to  the  wrath  or  curse  of  God ;  * 
Winer,  Suhott,  Riickert,  De  Wette,  Usteri,  Meyer, 
Gildemeister ;  so  that,  therefore,  Luther,  with  his : 
'  der  sci  verjlucht^  according  to  Krumniacher's  in- 
terpretiition,  is  justified.  Luther  would  be  right  also 
in  tlie  main  matter,  aceoi'ding  to  Olshauseti's  asser- 
tion, which  he  presents  without  proof,  and  which 
stands  midway  between  Nos.  1  and  2,  that  in  this 
formula  (3.)  we  are  not  mei-cJy  to  understand  ecclesi- 
astical excommunication,  but  that  this  is  only  so  far 
i'  eluded  in  the  signification  as  it  presupposes  Divine 
reprobation." 

"All  these  explanations,  notwithstanding  their 
divergences,  proceed  from  the  correct  assumption 
that  tliis  uvdOfna  is  the  translation  of  the  Hebrew 
n~in .  The  question  is  therefore  this,  what  this 
C~n  among  the  Jews  was,  and  whether  it  denoted 
■ — i.  €.,  in  the  time  of  Paul — the  Jewish  excommu- 
nication. If  the  latter  were  disproved,  Nos.  1  and 
3  would  fall ;  but  if  this  should  really  be  the  case, 
the  question  would  be  whether  drdOffia  here  is 
used  of  excommunication,  or  of  what  it  is  used. 
But,  in  the  first  place,  it  is  clear  that,  in  the  v/iole 
Old  Testament,  C";n  and  Cinn  are  never  used 
of  excommunication.  Indeed,  they  are  used  with 
at  least  as  frequent  reference  to  the  idolatrous  apos- 
tasy of  the  heathen  nations,  especially  of  Canaanitish 
ones,  as  with  reference  to  idolatry  and  impiety  with- 
in Israel.  CTH  is  used  of  every  thing,  person  or 
thing,  which,  on  account  of  its  worthiness  of  death, 
founded  in  God's  Word — the  thing  usually  in  con- 
nection with,  and  on  account  of,  its  impious  jios- 
sessor — was,  whether  of  free  resolve,  or  at  the  ex- 
press command  of  God,  consecrated  to  Jehovah, 
witliout  capabiUty  of  hciiiff  ransomed ;  Levit.  xxvii. 
21,  28.  The  person  who  had  become  a  C"in  might 
not  continue  to  live  ;  Levit.  xxvii.  29  ;  and  only  the 
thing — to  which  class,  according  to  ancient  view, 
the  slave  also  belonged — could,  if  a  living  creature, 
remain  alive,  falling  then  forever  to  Jehovah — that 
is,  to  the  priests  ;  Levit.  xxvii.  28  ;  Num.  xviii.  14  ; 
Ezek.  xliv.  29.  From  this  it  arises,  that  Cinn ,  as 
to  its  sense,  signifies  simply  '  to  destroy,'  and  is  not 
seldom  connected  with  ^"in  ^sb  (comp.  the  Hebrew 
^11%  >  which  also  originally  signifies  '  to  be  holy  ; ' 
Exod.  xxix.  37 ;  xxx.  29  ;  and  n"in  is  rendered  in 
the  LXX.  not  simply  by  drdOfticc,  or  dqoQKTfia, 
Ezek.  xliv.  29,  but  also  by  dqdvL<Ttia,  Deut.  vii.  2  ; 
iio/.6&(>frfia,  1  Sam.  xv.  21  ;  and  dniiy.na,  Isa. 
xxxiv.  .5.  From  this  it  appears  that,  according  to  the 
Old  Testament,  Cinn  neither  literally  nor  by  de- 
rived use  can  signify  excommunication,  as  exclusion 
from  the  fellowship  of  the  chosen  people.  Nay,  the 
latter  is  expressly  mentioned,  Ezra  x.  28  ;  but  the 
verb  -Tn  is  not  used  of  the  excommunicated  per- 
sons, but,  in  contrast  with  it,  the  verb  b"]3  ;  the 
former  verb,  on  the  other  hand,  is  used  in  its  true 
sense  (see  above)  of  their  property,  because  this 
escheated  forever  to  the  sanctuary.  Had  the  C^.nri 
been  decreed  against  the  persons  in  question  on  the 
part  of  the  Jewish  assemljly,  they  would  thereby 
rot  have  been  excommunicated,  but  destroyed  in 
honor  of  the  God  whom  they  had  outraged.  On 
the  other  hand,  in  the  Talmud,  C";n  is  unquestion- 
ably used  formally  of  excommunication.  According 
to  Elias  Levita,  the  three  grades  of  excommunica- 
tion among  the  Jews  have  not  seldom  been  assumed 


as  (1.)  the  ""ins ,  (2.)  the  C-;n ,  and  (3.)  the  NSS^O . 
Paniel  and  Weber  also  assumed  them,  asserting  that 
only  the  highest  grade,  as  the  Shammatha,  was  con- 
joined with  those  '  fearful  curses '  which  we  read  in 
the  Tahnudists,  but  that  Paulj  with  his  dvdO f^a, 
meant  no  other  than  the  C"in  .  On  the  other  hand, 
Gildemeister,  passim,  preceded  by  Selden,  and  oth- 
ers, has  lately  thoroughly  demonstrated  anew  that 
the  Talmud  and  the  Jews,  by  those  three  names,  do 
not  designate  three  different  grades  of  excommuni. 
cation,  but  that  the  Shammatha  is  only  another  word 
(the  Chaldaic  translation)  for  Niddui ;  that,  there- 
fore, if  the  Apostle,  by  his  dvdOtfia,  meant  the 
Cherem  as  excommunication,  the  highest  grade  of 
excommunication  —  that  accompanied  with  these 
'  curses  ' — must  have  been  meant." 

"  The  next  question  is,  therefore,  whether  the 
Cherem,  as  excommunication,  already  existed  among 
the  Jews  at  the  time  ivhcn  the  Epistle  to  tlie  Gala- 
tians*  was  writtoi.  Although  the  primitive  history 
of  Jewish  excommunication  is  veiled  in  great  ob- 
scurity, we  certainly  shall  not  err  if  we  ascribe  to 
it,  from  its  first  documentarily  attested  appearance 
under  Ezra  (Ezra  x.  8),  up  to  the  time  of  Paul,  a 
certain  course  of  development,  and  that  a  more  ex- 
tensive one  than  Gildemeister  appears  to  do." 

"  According  to  New  Testament  testimony  there 
were,  then,  the  two  grades  of  excommunication : 
(1.)  The  exclusion  from  the  worship  in  the  Temple 
and  synagogue,  John  ix.  22  ;  xii.  42  ;  xvi.  2 ;  and 
(2.)  what,  as  it  was  already  practised  under  Ezra, 
can  least  surprise  us,  the  expulsion  f  from  the  con- 
gregation of  the  people,  Luke  vi.  29  (dqoqltfvv), 
which  concluded  with  obliteration  of  tlie  name  in 
the  <)e/.TOi.i:  iirjiiocfioiQ  (i/.pd'/.ht,v  rb  ovona  wq  tto- 
vfjijov,  I.  c.) ;  which  latter  circumstance  is  here  ex- 
pressly added,  that  the  hearers  may  not  understand 
the  excommui  lie  alio  minor.  Quite  as  certainly,  how- 
ever,  is  the  Jewish  excommunication  at  Paul's  time 
not  yet  designated  as  Cherem,  which  even  antece- 
dently is  improbable,  on  account  of  the  above  de- 
veloped Old  Testament  use  of  Q"]n,  which  could 
only  gradually,  and  after  a  longer  time,  be  so  con- 
siderably modified.  For  in  the  Mishna,  where  ex- 
communication is  largely  handled,  Cherem  is  as  yet 
never  used  of  excommunication,  but  this  is  denoted 
by  Niddui;  it  is  in  the  Gemara  that  Cherem  appears 
as  excommunication,  and  that  the  sharpest  form  of 
the  same — that  joined  with  fearful  '  curses '  having 
reference  to  eve: lasting  destruction,  from  whence 
also  its  name — is  explained.  With  this  alone  agrees, 
moreover,  the  New  Testament  use  of  drdOf/ia  and 
«rai9f,((«T(-n.r,  Rom.  ix.  3  ;  1  Cor.  xii.  3;  xvi.  22; 
Gal.  i.  8,  9  ;  Acts  xxiii.  12  ;  xiv.  21  ;  Mark  xiv.  71. 
which  in  no7ie  of  these  passages  sigiiily  excommu- 
nication,  or  to  excommunicate.  On  the  other  hand, 
dvddf/i<a,  in  entire  congruity  with  the  Old  Testa- 
ment Cherem,  is  used  of  a  person  who  is  dedicated  to 
God,  subjected  to  the  Divine  curse  for  his  death, 


*  (The  Epistle  to  the  Romans  was  written  but  a  year  or 
two  afterwards.     See  Introd.,  pp.  1-1,  40. —K.] 

t  ["If  PhuI,  by  tlie  efapare  tov  Trovrfpov  f{  vniav  avrav, 
1  Cor.  T.  13,  with  which  he  enjoins  the  excommunication 
of  the  incestuous  person— comp.  1  Cor.  v.  2 — alludes,  as  ia 
commonly  assiimed,  to  the  technical  exprcsbion  of  Dcutcr" 
onomy :  ?]3"i|5'a  3."iri  n"i"^1 ,  and  the  translation  ol 
it  in  the  LXX! ;  Deut.  xvii.  7,  xxi.  22  et.  at,  this  term  must, 
at  the  time  of  Paul,  have  been  already  understood  among 
the  Jew?  not  of  the  death  pi'ualty,  but  of  cxcommuhioa- 
tion;  comp.  Winer,  Bibl.  Realworterhuch,  under  LthenS' 
slrafc,  ii.  p.  12."— R.] 


304 


THE    EPISTLE    OF   PAUL   TO   THE    ROMANS. 


not,  however,  to  bodily,  as  in  the  more  ancient 
formula — which  reference,  however,  wus  not  neces- 
earily  contained  in  the  root,  but  resulted  only  IVoni 
the  historical  relations  of  the  Jews  in  ancient  time 
— but  to  .spiritual  and  eternal  death.  The  arciOtfia, 
1  Cor.  xvj.  22,  cannot  signify  excommunication, 
Bince  otherwise  it  would  be  denounced  against  a 
temper  of  mind,  the  oi'»  ifUfiv ;  nor  yet  1  Cor.  xii. 
8,  since  no  one  could  have  wished  to  excommuni- 
cate Jesus,  no  longer  dwelling  on  earth  ;  nor  Rom. 
ix.  3,  113  appears  sulliciently  trom  the  defining  k/To 
Tor  A'otfTTor.  In  the  case  of  the  verb  avaOfiiu- 
Ti'-fH",  indeed,  it  has  not  yet  come  into  any  one's 
head,  in  reiii)ect  to  the  New  Testament  passages, 
that  it  signitics,  to  excomtuunicate ;  but  afal>f/i. 
ort,  Mark,  /.  c,  signifies,  '  under  self-imprecations 
(by  his  soul's  salvation)  to  attest,  that ; '  dra&ffia- 
run.v  tftcTor,  Acts,  /.  c,  '  under  self-imprecations 
to  oblige  himself.'  Quite  as  little  can  HvdOfna, 
Gal.  i.  8,  'J,  be  used  of  excommunication,  on  this 
account,  if  no  other,  because  one  cannot  excommu- 
nicate an  angel  from  heaven  (vcr.  8),  but  can  very 
■well  call  down  God's  curse  of  damnation  upon  him, 
in  the  dvdOffia.  Ver.  9  must  have  been  used  in 
the  same  sense  as  in  ver.  8.  Independently  of  the 
subjective  particiiiation  expressed  by  the  imperative, 
avaOfiia  t(TTi>i  expresses  neither  more  nor  less  than 
Gal.  V.  10,  where  Paul  denounces  against  t/<e  same 
false  teachers  tlie  ju  lytnent  of  God  at  the  end  of 
days ;  comp.  2  Tliess.  i.  9.  In  form,  as  in  meaning, 
the  Pauline  «i'a.9f,««  iaru)  (or  /yro),  1  Cor.  xvi.  22) 
reminds  us  strongly  of  the  "1"iX,  LXX. :  im-xard- 
(jaro<;,  Deut.  xxvii.  15  if. ;  only  that  not  every  "iliX 
iu  the  Old  Tastament  needs,  like  our  nvdOfna,  to 
be  taken  as  invoking  the  highest  and  most  intensive 
evil — eternal  damnatiun — but  may  very  well,  accord- 
ing to  the  connection,  be  used  of  that ;  comp.  Gal. 
iii.  13;  Matt.  xxv.  41  ;  it  being,  of  course,  under- 
stood that,  by  the  dvdOfiiu,  the  loss  of  eternal  life 
and  the  blessed  fellowslii|j  of  God  is  meant  to  be 
invoked  against  tiie  sinner,  only  so  far  and  so  long 
as  he  persists  in  his  wickedness,  or  this  in  its  nature 
is  irremissible.  As  to  the  rest,  when  Kiickert  and 
Scliott,  in  the  case  of  the  drdOtna.  iu  this  passage, 
will  have  it  that  it  does  not  mean  exconununication, 
for  the  additional  reason  that  that  age  was  not  yet 
acquainted  with  this  among  the  Christians,  this 
assertion  is  uncjuestionably  erroneous  ;  1  Cor.  v.  2 
ir. ;  1  Tim.  i.  20  ;  3  John  10  ;  Jude  22  ;  comp.  Matt, 
xviii.  17,  18;  2  Thess.  Hi.  14;  2  John  x.  11.  The 
Churcli  fathers  afterwards  used  the  dvdf^f/ia,  doubt- 
less deriving  the  use  through  the  Pauline  passages, 
of  Cliristian  excommunication,  similaily  as  the  Jews 
thf'ir  Cin ,  but  these  commonly  u)isnnderstood  the 
pro[)er  sense  of  this  expression.  Comp.  the  criti- 
cism of  them  in  Fritzsche,  /.  c,  tom.  ii.,  p.  249, 
Note:' 

With  this  well-established  view  of  the  meaning 
of  our  word,  wc  can  pxss  to  the  exegesis  of  this  [ 
passage,  remembering  that  the  burden  of  proof  now 
rests  willi  those  who,  to  avoid  difliculties,  assign  any 
other  meaning  than  that  so  ably  defended  by  Wiesc- 
ler.— K.J 

Meyt-r :  "  The  destruction  to  whidi  Paul  would 
commit  himself  for  his  bretliren  nmst  not  be  under-  j 
stood  Hi  a  niolenl  death  (Jerome,  Limborsch,  Flatt,  j 
and  others),  but  as  the  eternal  umlilnct,  as  is  re-  j 
quired  by  the  nno  t.  A'.  It  has  often  been  ob-  | 
jected  that  the  wish  of  this  dnio'/.Ha  is  unreasonable,  I 
aud  Miclmelis  even  suyn  tliat  it  would  be  a  ravimj  | 


prayer.  But  the  standard  of  selfish  (!)  reflection 
does  not  harmonize  with  the  emotion  of  boundlesa 
self-denial  and  love  in  which  Paul  here  speaks." 
(Comp.  Chrysostom  and  Pengel  in  loco.)  Tholuck 
quotes  Chrysostom's  expression  on  tliii«  point,  and 
adds  :  "  Thus  interpret  the  vast  majority  of  exposi. 
tors  of  ancient  and  modern  times,  even  the  Socin- 
ians,  with  Socinus  himself"  We  ncvcrtludess  hold 
unhesitatingly  that  the  explanation  of  Micluielis  ia 
more  admissible  than  Meyer's  well-nigh  unmeaning 
overstraining  of  the  idea  of  self-denial. 

The  justifiai)le  hesitation  iu  accepting  the  ex- 
planation, that  Paul  wished  to  be  eternally  cast  out 
I'rom  Christ — that  is,  given  over  to  the  devil,  to  be 
damned — has  led  to  mitigations  of  the  real  meanit^ 
of  the  dvdl)f/ia.     It  iias  been  interpreted  : 

1.  As  temporal  death,  as  already  mentiorsi. 
Analogies  in  2  Cor.  xii.  15  :  the  death  of  Christ  tJi 
xardi^iu  (Jerome,  Niissclt,  and  others).  Thol'.ciC, 
on  the  other  hand  :  Witli  temporal  ilcath  as  Ch'  f<ita, 
there  is  connected  the  accursing,  which  is  adLi'.ion- 
ally  comprised  here  in  a;ro  t.  y. 

2.  Banishment  from  church  fellowship  f'»i;otiu3, 
and  others  ;  apparently,  Luther  also). 

On  the  controversies  arising  from  a  Si  raon  by 
Fr.  Krummacher  on  Gal.  i.  8,  in  regard  VJ  this  ex- 
planation, comp.  Tholuck,  p.  471  ff.  Tli-'^tc  is,  now, 
no  question  that  the  supposition  of  an  rcclusion  to 
injury  is  always  connected  with  a  tr'..e  exclusion 
from  church  fellowshi|).  But  if  we  tfplain  the  Old 
Testament  Cherem  and  the  ecclesiastical  ban  accord- 
ing  to  the  New  Testament — that  is,  specifically  ac- 
cording to  the  words  quoted  from  1  Cor.  v.  5 — then 
it  becomes  evident  that  the  Old  Testament  Cherem 
did  not  declare  eternal  condemnation  when  it  de- 
clared extermination  from  the  congregation  of  the 
people,  and  that  devotion  to  eternal  condemnation 
could  never  have  been  the  meiming  of  an  authorized 
ecclesiastical  Christian  ban.  If  the  explanation,  1 
wished  to  be  accursed  from  Christ,  were  therefore 
correct,  it  would  nevertheless  not  be  the  same  as : 
I  wished  to  be  eternally  damned  ;  but :  I  would  be 
willing  to  be  cast  into  boundless  misery  for  the 
brethren.*  From  the  overstrained  interpretation  of 
the  accursed,  it  would  follow,  that  the  Apostle  re. 
ffarded  the  brethren  in  question  as  ctcrnalli/  damnid. 
See,  on  the  contrary,  Rom.  xi. — Tholuck  refers  to 
the  Jewish  and  Arabic  manner  of  speaking ;  May 
we  be  thy  ransom  ;  may  my  soul  be  tlie  redemption 
of  thine  !  Evidently,  hyperboles  of  Oriental  polite- 
ness, lie  cites  the  relerence  of  Origcn  to  the  ex- 
amine of  Moses  (Exod.  xxxii.  32  ) :  Paul  has  spoken 
like  Moses,  says  Origen  :  devotione,  non  prwearica' 
tione.  But  Moses  spoke  thus  at  a  moment  of  the 
deepest  emotion,  and  just  as  Moses,  in  the  Old  Tes- 
tament sense  of  the  theocratic  judgment  of  repn^ 
bation.  Jerome  takes  the  value  of  numy  souis 
against  one  into  accoimt ;  Cyril  accepts  a  hy|)er- 
bole  ;  and  Thomas  Aquinas  di.-tinguishes  between  a 
separatio  a  damnatis  per  enl/min  and  a  srpar  itio  a 
fruitione  glorice.\    Tholuck  remarks,  that  Fencloo 


•  (So  Hod);o,  who,  while  nilvomtin-?  the  common  if.tor- 
prctntion,  wmiUl  ra-ike  tlio  munuinit  very  gencriil,  nnd  tho 
woril.H  express  not  "  (Iffluitc  idoiu,''  but  "strong  and  indis- 
tinci  emotions." — U.) 

t  (There  Koems  to  l)c  some  nlwtrnot  B:round  for  this  dia- 
tinrtion.  The  tirst,  scpariilion  from  Cnriyt'a  /o/i/  mii7/,  ia 
opposed  to  love  to  Chnsi  nnd  strlvitin  aftir  sanciifl^Miion  ; 
It  IS  ffodlMS,  and,  of  couiso,  cxoluilcd  liore.  Tlio  ci-oond. 
H'pMratlon  from  tlio  e.iij'iymeiil  >/  ChritI,  is  iiot  in  itself 
immoral,  yet  can,  indeed,  be  distin^^uished  from  ttii;  (irbt 
ouly  abeiruclly  luid  iu  tljuugbt,.bi'iii|{  alao  iiiipuwiblu,  ut 


CHArTER   IX.    1-33. 


SOS 


has  referred  to  this  passage  in  order  to  defend  the 
mystical  idea  of  amour  dcsinteren-w,*  and  that  Bos- 
Buet  replies,  by  saying,  that  fellowship  with  God 
cannot  be  separated  from  participation  in  saving 
blessin^^  (salvation).  Yet  Tholuck  returns  at  last 
to  Fenelon's  distinction,  after  quoting  many  other 
theological  explanations  (Calvin  :  erup'io  animi  con- 
fusi  ;  later  moralists,  especially  Dannhauer,  Spener, 
and  Bengel :  vertus  heroica).  Most  expositors,  by 
their  reference  to  the  hypothetical  si  Jieri  posset, 
return  to  the  acceptance  of  a  hyperbolical  expres- 
sion. 

The  ccvTOi;  I  yd)  leads  us  back  to  the  simplest 
rendering. 

The  current  explanation  is  incorrect  at  the  very 
outset.  Meyer  is  nearest  right :  The  antithesis  is 
the  brethren,  the  majority  of  whom  are  seen  by 
Paulas  avd&ffia  txnb  Xqt,arov  going  to  the 
aTirnhM.  In  this  case  the  iyii)  would  still  be  su- 
perfluous. Our  present  expression  refers  to  the 
ai''To-  iyii)  (chap.  vii.  25).  We  have  seen  how  the 
expression  there  designated  the  opposition  of  spir- 
itual and  carnal  life  in  the  identity  of  the  same 
individuality.  And  thus  it  denotes  here  the  antithe- 
sis of  his  earlier  and  of  his  present  standpoint,  in 
the  identity  of  an  individuality  which,  at  that  time, 
acted  from  a  love  for  Israel. f  For  I  even  ■pledge! 
myselfy  /,  tlte  same  Paul  who  must  now  pronounce 
the  foUim'ing  judgment  on  Israel,  &c. — His  forfiier 
wish  to  destroy  the  Christians  by  means  of  the 
Cherem,  he  now  denominates  in  its  true  meaning : 

least  in  permanency.    For  holiness  and  blessedness  are 
inseparable,  and  it  is  the  will  nf  Christ  that  we  become 
bksicd  through  fellowship  with  Him.— P.  S.] 
*  [Compare  Madame  Guion  (died  1717) : 
"I  consent  that  thou  depart, 

Though  thine  abpcnue  breaks  my  heart, 

Go,  the-',  and  foi-ever,  too  ; 

All  is  right  that  thou  wilt  do." 
"  My  last,  least  offering,  I  present  thee  now — 
Renounce  me,  leave  me,  and  be  still  adored ! 
Slay  me,  my  God,  and  I  applaud  the  blow." 

Coviper's  Translation. 
The  doctrine  of  disinterested  affection  has  been  sup- 
ported in  America  by  Samuel  Hopkins,  D.D.,  :ind  his 
system  is  commonly  called  Hopkinsianism.  He  holds  that 
self-love,  which  cannot  be  distinguished  from  selfishness  in 
his  view,  "is  the  root  and  essence  of  all  sin  ;  "  that  holiness 
consists  in  disinterested  benevolence.  He  makes  the  pos- 
session of  this  benevolence  a  test  of  religion  and  relig  ous 
exercises,  and  s.iys,  that  though  a  benevolent  person 
"  could  know  that  God  designed,  for  His  own  giory  and  the 
general  good,  to  cast  him  into  endless  destruction,  this 
would  not  make  him  cease  to  approve  of  His  character  ;  he 
would  continue  to  be  a  friend  of  God,  and  to  be  pleased 
with  His  moral  perfections."  {SyHem  af  Doct tines,  2d  ed., 
Boston,  1811,  i.  p.  479.)  But  be  puts  certain  limitations 
respecting  proper  personal  interest,  and  non-here  implies 
that  one  must  reach  this  point  of  experitnee  in  order  to  be 
converted.  The  cnrrent  opinion  of  his  view  is,  that  he 
teaches  :  "  a  man  must  be  willing  to  be  damned,  in  order  to 
be  saved" — a  logical  sequence  which  he  does  not  afBrm. 
Kor  does  he  quote  this  passage,  which  would  seem  to  favor 
his  position.  It  is  probable  that  he,  too,  would  admit  the 
impos.-!ibility  of  such  a  wish  being  granted,  and  claim  no 
other  meaning  for  this  passage  than  that  which  many  of 
the  most  judicious  commentators  adopt,  and  which  is  the 
most  literal  and  obvious  one.  It  may  well  be  held  that 
I'aul  reached  such  a  pitch  of  feeling  as  this,  without  insist- 
ing tnat  this  is  the  constant  and  conscious  state  of  the 
Christian  heart. — K.] 

t  [This  obviates  one  dilflculty,  tirged  by  Dr.  Hodge, 
against  the  sense  /  wished :  "  J^o  Jew  would  express  his 
hatred  of  Christ  and  his  indifference  to  the  favors  which  He 
offered,  by  saying  he  wished  himself  accursed  fiom  Christ." 
But  it  makes  the  grammatical  difficulty  still  greater.  An 
imperfect  is  made  to  do  service  not  only  as  an  aorist,  but  in 
a  sense  very  unusual :  while  what  is  closely  joined  with  it 
—viz.,  the  purport  ot  the  wish  or  vow — derives  its  signifi- 
cance from  the  jiresent  standpoint.  Extremely  doubtful,  to 
say  the  least ! — R.] 

20 


to  be  accursed,  (xtto  roT'  X.,  away  from  Christ ;  aa 
he  is  not  aware  of  any  other  ban  from  the  Church 
of  God  than  banishment  i'roni  Christ.  Nossclt,  and 
others,  have  understood  by  the  expression,  that 
Clirist  would  be  the  author  of  the  ban  ;  which  wouid 
increase  the  harshness  of  the  expression.  "With  our 
view,  the  v n i^  t w v  ti d i  '/.q>  mv  /u  o  i'  can  only 
mean  this  :  for  my  brethren,  as  one  zealous  for  their 
interests.  JEven  with  the  opposite  view,  Meyer  ex- 
plains v7ii:(j  as  for  the  good  of ;  but  Tholuck,  on 
the  contrary,  says  that  the  idea  of  substittition  un- 
derlies the  vni(j,  at  least  indirectly.  [Olshausen 
makes  ini^  =  arri. — R.]  This  would  render  tht 
idea  still  more  intolerable.  Paul  would  not  venture 
to  utter  the  thought,  that  his  ruin  might  still  bring 
salvation  to  the  people  for  whom  even  the  death  of 
Christ  brought  no  salvation. 

[The  interpretations  of  this  difiBcult  passage  may 
be  classified  as  follows  : 

(1.)  Those  which  take  7jv'/6fir,v  in  the  past 
sense.  The  grammatical  objection  to  this  is  so  de- 
cided, that,  unless  the  gravest  difficulties  attend 
every  other  view,  it  must  be  rejected.  The  view 
of  Dr.  Lange,  which  makes  it  equivalent  to  a  defi- 
nite aorist,  is  grammatically  less  admissible  than  that 
which  takes  it  as  =  ojitobam,  I  was  wont  to  wish. 

(2.)  Those  which  give  to  avciOitta  some  less 
strong  sense  than  accursed,  devoted  to  destruction. 
Dr.  Lange  has  cited  most  of  these.  The  least  ob- 
jectionable among  these  is  that  which  interprets  the 
word  as  meaning :  untold  misery,  not  necessarily 
eternal.  The  lexiccd  objection  here  is  very  strong  ; 
see  Excursus  above.  If  Wieseler's  statements  are 
reliable,  all  of  these  are  necessarily  excluded.  There 
remains,  then, 

(3.)  The  obvious  meaning,  /  could  wish  myself 
devoted  to  destruction  from  Christ  for  my  brethren'' s 
sake  ;  implying  either  that  the  wish  was  not  formed, 
because  it  was  injpossible  to  viiah,  or  of  impossible 
fulfilment ;  {'ticij,  involving,  not  necessarily  substi- 
tution, yet  such  a  sulfering  lor  the  benefit  of  others 
as  would  turn  to  their  corresponding  advantage  ;  for 
Paul  often  speaks  of  what  he  does  for  (tniit)  his 
readers.  The  question  then  arises,  Are  the  difficul- 
ties attending  this  view  so  great,  that  it  must  be 
abandoned  for  such  doubtful  exegesis  as  (1.)  and  (2.) 
present  ?     Dr.  Lange  objects  : 

(a.)  That  it  imjilies  a  senseless  overstraining  of 
the  idea  of  self-denial.  But  who  shall  put  the  limit  ? 
"  It  is  the  expression  of  an  affectionate  and  self- 
denying  heart,  willing  to  surrender  all  things — even, 
if  it  might  be  so,  eternal  glory  itself ^ — if  thereby  he 
could  obtain  for  his  beloved  people  those  blessings 
of  the  gospel  which  he  now  enjoyed,  but  from  which 
they  were  excluded.  Others  express  their  love  by 
professing  themselves  ready  to  give  their  life  for 
their  friends :  he  declares  the  intensity  of  his  affec- 
tion by  reckoning  even  his  spiritual  life  not  too 
great  a  price,  if  it  might  purchase  their  salvation  " 
(Alford).  Surely  we  dare  not  let  our  assumption  of 
how  far  his  self-denial  would  go,  limit  words,  which, 
if  they  do  not  mean  this,  have  always  borae  this  as 
their  obvious  meaning. 

(6.)  It  is  further  objected,  that  then  the  Apostle 
would  regard  the  brethren  in  question  as  eternal!]' 
damned.  But  it  is  Paul  who  says  that  those  out 
of  Christ  are  already  perishing  (1  Cor.  i.  18);  and 
Christ  himself  speaks  of  the  wrath  of  God  abiding 
on  men  (John  iii.  18,  3G).  This  objection  sunders 
too  widely  the  present  and  the  future  state  of  un- 
believers.    Paul  would,  at  all  events,  feel  the  power 


yoG 


THE   EPISTLE   OF  PAUL   TO  THE   ROMANS. 


of  the  future  state  of  retribution  in  the  case  of  tiiese 
brethren,  just  to  the  extent  that  he  attached  a  defi- 
nite meaning  to  avd&tna ;  so  that  this  objection  is 
of  no  weiglit. 

(c.)  Tlie  implication  suggested  above,  that  Paul 
then  would  deem  his  ruin  more  powerful  than  the 
death  of  Christ,  involves  the  strongest  meaning  of 
\>ni().  If  the  idea  of  substitution  be  excluded,  this 
objection  falls  to  the  ground.  But  if  Paul  could 
not  use  r.Tt'o  here,  in  the  sense  that  his  sufferings 
might  produce  certain  beneficial  results  to  others, 
be  could  not  use  it  elsewhere  in  the  same  sense 
(Eph.  iii.  13  ;  CoL  i.  24  twice).  The  oljjection,  in 
njiy  case,  lies  not  against  the  degree,  but  the  quality 
of  the  Buffering. 

{(1.)  Lange  characterizes  the  current  interpreta- 
tion as  kiipcrbolical.  If  it  be,  then  oljjection  {(i.) 
has  no  weight,  for  a  hyperbole  would  not  overstrain 
the  idea  of  self-denial.  But  this  interpretation  is 
not  strictly  a  hyperbole.  For  Paul  wished  by  this 
to  express  a  degree  of  feeling  which  could  be  meas- 
ured in  human  expression  by  nothing  less  strong 
than  this.  The  objective  impossibility  did  not  de- 
stroy the  subjective  intensity  of  feeling.  And  al- 
though he  may  not  have  actually  formed  the  wish, 
still  any  student  of  human  nature  knows  that  feel- 
ings often  exist,  never  taking  shape  in  definite  wish, 
which  are  contrary  both  to  what  is  possible  and  what 
is  actually  wished.  The  expression  is,  however, 
truthful  in  Paul's  consciousness,  hence  not  a  hyper- 
bole. 

On  the  whole,  the  objections  to  this  view  (3.) 
seem  of  so  mucli  less  weight,  that  the  majority  of 
commentators  adopt  it.  Besides  the  grammatical 
and  lexical  grounds  in  its  favor,  it  presents  the  great 
Apostle  to  the  Gentiles  under  the  influence  of  feel- 
ings most  akin  to  the  self-sacrificing  love  of  the 
Lord  he  preached.  And  it  detracts  nothing  from 
our  estimate  of  his  all'ection  to  know,  as  he  did  also, 
that  such  love  flowed  only  from  his  love  to  Christ, 
his  fellowship  with  Christ,  which  would  itself  change 
h^l  to  heaven. — R.] 

My  kinsmen  according  to  the  flesh  [  t  oi  r 
■avyytviiiv  /tor  xarct  ff«(jx«].  This  addition 
expresses  both  his  former  motive  and  his  continued 
patriotic  feeling  (see  chap.  xi.  14).*  [There  is,  how- 
ever, here  an  implied  antithesis  to  "  brethren  in  the 
Lord."  Paul's  patriotism  is  here  justified,  but,  as 
the  next  verse  shows,  it  hits  a  deeper  ground  in  the 
gracious  gifts  and  religious  advantages  which  the 
Jews  had  hitherto  enjoyed. — Pi.l 

Ver.  4.  Who  are  Israehtes.  O'i'th-*?. — 
Quippe  qui.  Thus  he  announces  the  characteristics 
of  his  kindred  "  according  to  the  flesh,"  who  lay  so 
near  his  heart,  and  the  decline  of  whose  glory  ex- 
cited his  profound  compassion.  The  collective  glory 
of  tile  Jews  lies  in  the  fact  tiiat  they  are  Israelites 
— that  they  bear  the  honorable  name  of  Israel,  as 
those  who  are  called,  like  their  ancestor,  to  be  % 
peoi)le  of  G(jd  consisting  of  wrcstli-rs  with  God — u 
people  of  wrestling  prayer.  [It  should  be  remarked 
here,  that  the  ground  of  the  prerogatives  afterwards 
enumerated  was  the  free  grace  of  God,  not  any  su- 
perior natut-al  excellence  of  this  people  as  compared 
with  the  heathen.  This  is  implied  in  the  very  char- 
acter of  tiie  prerogatives.  Besides,  in  calling  them 
"  Israelites,"  there  ia  a  direct  reference  to  the  fact 


•  In  ihn  disrnsaions  on  this  subject,  a  Rocond  mennitiR 
of  oir<5  ha^  not  heon  taken  into  consideration  ;  oirb  TraTp<it, 
on  the  patvmal  side,  &o. 


that  their  advantages  grew  out  of  their  relation  to 
one  directly  chosen  of  God.  So  that  the  very  glory 
of  Israel  siiows  the  sovereignty  of  God,  toward  whiih 
the  chapter  points,  in  discussing  the  enigma  of  the 
present  position  of  this  favored  people. — K.] 

By  a  rhetorically  forcible  xai,  x««,  &c.,  Paul 
now  discloses  six  prerogatives,  from  vloO^iaia  to 
iTzayyt/.iai.,  after  which  he  extols  the  highest 
glory  of  the  Israelites — that  the  fathers  belong  to 
them,  and  of  whom,  as  concerning  the  flesh,  Christ 
also  came. 

He  calls  them  Israelites,  and  not  merely  Isruel 
(see  ver.  6).  Although  the  majority  of  the  people 
turned  away  from  Cinist,  and  but  a  minority  iden 
titied  themselves  witli  Him,  this  minority  neverthe- 
less constitutes,  pur  excellence,  the  people  of  IsraeL 
See  the  rwii;  in  chap.  iii.  3,  and  also  chap.  xi.  1. 
He  can,  indeed,  call  also  the  unbelieving  majority 
"Israel"  in  a  qualified  sense  (ver.  31).  But  the 
name  "  Israelites "  is  still  placed  as  the  name  of 
honor  at  the  very  head  of  the  advantages  (.see  2  Cor. 
xi.  22  ;  Phil.  iii.  5  ;  John  i.  47).  On  the  use  of  the 
name  in  Josephus,  see  Tholuck,  p.  47(5. 

Tholuck's  division  of  the  advantages  into  three 
pairs  is  well  grounded  ;  but  he  is  less  warranted  in 
regarding  them  as  designations  of  their  theocratic 
honor,  their  theocratic  basis,  and  their  theocratic 
hope,  "  to  which  the  prerogatives  of  the  fathers  of 
the  theocracy,  and  of  their  head,  is  connected  as  a 
fourth  member."  According  to  the  import  of  the 
designations,  the  vioOKTia  indicates,  at  the  out- 
set, the  whole  state  of  honor ;  then  the  first  pair 
describes  the  patriarchal  foundation,  including  the 
new  calling  of  Israel  as  a  people  ;  the  second  pair, 
on  the  contrary,  set  forth  the  Mosaic  legal  constitu- 
tion of  Israel;  then,  again,  the  in  ciyyt /.i  ai., 
^^  the  promises,"  denotes  the  collective  transition  from 
Moses  to  Christ  by  the  prophets.  To  these  real  ad 
vantages  of  Israel  there  then  corresponds  the  au 
tithesis  of  personal  advantages :  the  true  liithers  of 
the  people  down  to  Christ. 

Who.se  is  the  adoption  [  w  v  t;  i  ■  /  o  ■'>  f  rr  / «  ] 
God's  acceptance  in  the  place  of  a  child,  adoption  ; 
yet  not  in  the  sense  of  the  Xew  Testament  realiza- 
tion, but  in  that  of  the  Old  Testament  typification 
(see  Exod.  iv.  22  ff. ;  Dent.  xiv.  1  ;  xxxii.  tj ;  llosca 
xi.  1 ;  Rom.  viii.  1,  2).  The  foundation  of  this  adop- 
tion was  the  election,  calling,  and  sealing  of  Abra- 
ham. But  in  tills  right  of  the  child  there  was  not 
merely  comprised  the  real  enjoyment  of  "  theocratic 
protection,"  but  also  the  foundation  and  guidance  to 
real  adoption  (Gal.  iv.  1,  2) ;  and,  in  relation  to  the 
promise  for  the  remaining  nations,  the  determination 
that  Israel  should  be  the  first-born  son  of  God  (Exod. 
iv.  22).  [It  therefore  comprises,  though  only  ger- 
minally  and  typically,  the  close  union  wliich  Christ, 
the  Oidy-ljegotten,  who  was  in  tlie  bosom  of  the 
Father  from  eternity,  forms  between  God  and  men 
through  the  regeneration  of  the  Holy  Ghost. — P.  S.] 

And  the  glory.  The  6 61  a,  ^^ri"]  m'3J . 
This  is  that  revealed  form  of  Jehovah  underlying 
the  call  to  adoption  throughout  the  Old  Testament, 
which  often  stands  out  more  definitely  in  the  appear- 
ance of  the  Angel  of  the  Lord  (see  Langc's  Cotnm, 
Oenesis)  [j).  3K5  ft'.,  Amer.  ed.].  Comp.  Exod.  xxW. 
1« ;  xl.  34  ;  1  Kings  viii.  10  f. ;  Ezek.  i.  28,  and 
other  passages).  Untenable  explanations :  1.  The 
ark  of  the  covenant  (Beza,  Gnitius,  and  others,  witb 
reference  to  1  Sam.  iv.  22).  2.  The  glory  of  Israel 
itself  (Calovius,  Kidlner,  Fritzsche,  Beck,  and  oth- 


CHAPTER  IX.   1-33. 


307 


ets).  For  the  still  more  untenable  explanations  of 
Michaelis  and  Koppe,  see  Meyer  (the  adoption  itself 
as  glory,  the  promised  felkitas).  Meyer's  own  ex- 
planation is  totally  unsatisfactory :  "  The  symboli- 
cal and  visible  presence  of  God  as  manifested  in 
the  desert  as  a  pillar  of  cloud  and  of  fire,  and  as 
the  cloud  over  the  ark  of  the  covenant,  the  same 
n2"'rir"  (Buxtorf,  Lexic,  Talmud,  &c.).  For  more 
particular  information  on  Meyer's  indefinite  view, 
Bee  Tholuck. — De  Wctte  and  Philippi  do  not  really 
get  beyond  "  the  visible  and  operative  presence  of 
God,'.'  or,  tiie  "  symbol  of  God's  gracious  presence." 
[As  Paul  is  enumerating  the  prerogatives  of  the 
Jews,  a  definite  meaning  is  to  be  sought  for.  Mey- 
er's view  attaches  a  definite  meaning  to  rfoia,  ex- 
tending it,  however,  over  a  wide  period  of  time. 
Dr.  Lange's  objection  to  this  grows  out  of  his  classi- 
fication of  these  prerogatives  in  chronological  order. 
If  this  fVoia  must  be  referred  to  patriarchal  times, 
then  Lange's  view  alone  is  admissible ;  but  the  word 
is  used  by  one  who  is  glancing  over  the  whole  Jewish 
history,  and  in  that  history  "  the  visible  presence  of 
God  "  seems  most  worthy  of  the  title  6 61a. — R.] 

And  the  covenants.  ^41  dta&T/xai,.  The 
coiiijjarU.  The  r)dj«  already  announced  itself  at 
the  call  of  Abraliam.  [If  Meyer's  view  of  (5dia 
be  adopted,  then  the  reference  to  the  call  of  Abra- 
ham in  iloOtffia  is  the  point  of  connection  here. — 
R.]  The  covenant  with  Abraham  was  renewed  with 
Isaac  (and  this  is  of  importance  here,  in  contrast 
with  Ishmael),  with  Jacob  (in  contrast  with  Esau), 
and,  filially,  with  the  whole  people  through  Moses. 
Various  explanations:  1.  The  two  tables  of  the  law 
(Beza,  and  others).  2.  The  Old  and  the  New  Tes- 
taments [see  Tezhuil  Note  ^ — R.]  (Augustine,  Je- 
romn,  Cocceius,  Calovius ;  with  reference  to  Jer. 
xxxi.  33).  Meyer :  "  The  compacts  concluded  by 
God  with  the  patriarchs  after  Abraham."  Comp. 
Book  of  Wisdom  xviii.  22;  Sirach  xliv.  11  ;  2  Mace, 
viii.  1,5  ;  Eph.  ii.  12.  [Tliis  is  undoubtedly  the  sim- 
plest view. — R.] 

And  the  giving  of  the  liw.  Opposite  ex- 
planations: 1.  Meyer,  and  others  :  the  act  of  giving 
the  law,  not  6  voiioi;  itself.  2.  Tholuck  [Hodge], 
and  most  expositors  :  vofio&ffflci,  by  metonyme 
for  6  vii/iw;;  vo/i  o  f)  tatct  is  the  more  rhetorical 
and  euphonious  word.  Evidently,  the  act  of  giving 
the  law  would  have  had  no  permanent  force  for  Is- 
rael apart  from  its  substance ;  but  even  its  substance 
would  be  no  permanent  voiio&KTia  without  the 
continued  repetition  (Deuteronomy),  establishment, 
and  restoration  of  the  law.  The  voiioq  was,  and 
continued  to  be,  a  permanent  act  of  the  vofo&fnict. 
[Meyer  inquires  why  Paul  did  not  write  voaoc,  if 
he  meant  it.  "  At  all  events,  whoever  had  the 
I'oiioSnTia,  had  also  the  vo/ioq.  Still,  the  differ- 
ence of  signification  is  to  be  preserved.  The  givinrt 
of  the  faw  was  a  work  by  means  of  which  God,  who 
was  himself  the  i'o/(o.9^t^/<;,  distinguished  the  Jews 
above  all  other  nations."  It  seems  safer  to  make 
Ihe  piimary  reference  to  the  giving  of  the  law,  with- 
o'lt,  however,  excluding  the  necessary  secondary 
reference  to  its  substance. — R.] 

And  the  service  of  the  sanctuary.  The 
■worship,  t;  }.aT(jfia;  Heb.  ix.  1.  [The  Jewish 
ritual  service,  including  the  tabernacle  worshi[),  but 
fully  established  in  the  temple.  The  connection  of 
this  with  the  giving  of  the  law  is  sufficiently  ob- 
vious.— And  the  promises,  ul  inayyilim. — 
R.]     Meyer  holds  that  the  service  corresponds  to 


the  giving  of  the  law,  as  al  inayytXitti,  (th« 
Messianic  prophecies)  correspond  to  at  dtaS^xat, 
This  is  a  chiasm,  according  to  Meyer,  occasioned  by 
the  necessity  of  the  promises  standing  at  the  con . 
elusion,  immediately  before  the  Promised  One.  But 
a  chiasm  is  altogether  out  of  the  question,  as  the 
promises  in  the  stricter  sense — the  prophetic  prom- 
ises— followed  the  giving  of  the  law,  and  as  the 
XatQfla  also  was  already,  in  the  main,  a  typical 
pi'omise,  from  which  the  inayytliav  are  only 
to  be  distinguished  as  verbal  prophecies.  Tholuck 
concludes,  without  good  ground,  from  the  reasoning 
(ver.  6),  that  the  predictions  of  the  prophets  are  not 
meant  here,  but  "  chiefly  "  those  communicated  to 
the  patriarchs.  But  how  could  Paul  have  enumera- 
ted the  principal  elements  of  Israel's  glory,  without 
thinking  of  the  prophets  ?  We  must  adhere  to  the 
position  that,  apart  from  the  connections  of  histori- 
cal sequence,  the  ilodiaia,  the  doia,  &c.,  and,  in- 
deed, all  the  particular  elements,  pervaded  all  the 
periods  of  Israel's  existence.  Even  the  vo/iioOfaia, 
for  example,  is  found  in  the  germ  in  Abraham. 

Ver.  5.  Whose  are  the  fathers  [o)v  ol  no.- 
xiqfc\  The  fathers,  the  elect,  the  men  of  God, 
as  preludes  to  the  chief  Chosen  One,  the  Son  of 
God ;  the  glorious  root  of  the  Israelitish  parent-tree, 
as  well  as  the  fatness  of  the  tree  (see  chap.  xi.  17), 
referring  to  the  only  glo-ious  crown  (Exod.  iii.  13  ; 
iv.  5).  These  are  chiefly,  but  not  exclusively,  the 
patriarchs,  but,  in  addition  to  them,  the  long  line  of 
the  true  fathers  of  Israel. 

And  of  -whom  as  to  the  flesh  is  Christ 
[  z  «  t  i  i  wv  0  X  ()  ifTT  bi;  TO  y.ar  a  a  d.  (i  /.  a'\. 
It  is  the  highest  characteristic  of  Israel's  glory,  that 
Christ  descends  from  it,  or  conies  of  it  according  to 
the  flesh  (Rom.  i.  3  ;  iv.  1  ff.).  [Christ,  the  prom- 
ised  Messiah,  is  the  greatest  of  all  the  blessings 
imparted  to  the  people  of  Israel,  to  whom  all  the 
others  pointed  typically  and  prophetically,  and  in 
whom  they  first  obtained  their  full  truth  and  reality. 
— P.  S.]  The  TO  y.ar  a.  aaqxa  is  evidently  a 
qualifying  addition,  and  refers  to  an  antithesis ; 
Tholuck:  "op  y.ara  Tip'  flfortjTa^^  (chap.  i.  3,  4). 
[Alford  marks  the  antithesis  by  rendering :  "  as  far 
as  regards  the  psh  ;  "  finding  in  to.,  accusative,  the. 
implication  "  that  He  was  not  entirdy  sprung  from 
them,  but  had  another  nature." — R.] 

Who  is  over  all  [  '0  w  r  In  I  n  dvT  o>v . 
There  are  two  renderings  which  are  nearly  allied : 
W/w  is  God  over  al/,  blessed  forever,  and  :  Who  is 
over  aU,  God  blessed  forever.  The  doctrinal  results 
are  the  same,  whichever  be  adopted ;  but  Lange 
prefers  the  latter,  for  reasons  which  will  appear, 
and  seems  warranted  in  his  preference.  The  E.  V. 
gives  the  latter ;  Luther,  and  most  interpreters,  the 
former. — R.j  We  explain  the  passage  thus :  He 
who  is  over  all  Israelites,  believers  and  unbelievers, 
is  that  glorified  One  of  our  universally  known  syna- 
gogical  formula  :  God,  blessed  forever.  Amen.  We 
must  first  of  fill  accept  a  strong  Pauline  brevilo- 
quence.  Then  we  must  call  to  mind  Paul's  expres- 
sion concerning  the  unknown  God  (Acts  xvii.  23). 
As  Paul  could  say  to  the  Greeks :  "  You  seek  and 
worship  by  your  altar  the  one  true  God,  withcut 
knowing  Him,"  so  can  he  say  of  the  Jews :  *'  Evea 
those  who  reject  Christ  must  render  homage  to  Him, 
though  unconsciously,  as,  by  the  well-known  dox- 
ology,  they  often  praise  Jehovah,  the  God  of  reve- 
lation, who  has  appeared  in  Christ,  and  thus  rules 
supremely  over  all,  believers  as  well  as  unbeliev- 
ers."     The    6    oiv    therefore   stands   for  6?   ian, 


308 


THE   EPISTLE   OF   PAUL   TO   THE    RO^rANS. 


though  with  tlie  additional  strength  peculiar  to  the 
participle.  Tiiat  the  in  I  ndvnov  here  refers  to 
the  Jews,  aeeording  to  their  autilliesis  of  believing 
auJ  uubelieviug  Jews,  is  evident  from  the  strong 
prominence  previously  given  to  tlieiu  (oi'rn'*?, 
*tv,  it  wy).  [The  form  of  the  E.  V.  favors  this 
view  of  t'/rt  ndyTi'iv.  By  taking  it  as  nia-sculinc, 
the  whole  clause  is  brought  into  closer  conneeticm 
with  the  context,  an  increased  diificulty  in  the  in- 
terpretation of  the  doxology  is  obviatLci,  while  this 
closer  connection  gives  strength  to  the  view  that 
the  doxology  refers  to  Christ.  It  seems  preferable 
to  the  view  which  connects  it  with  Otoe,  in  the 
sense  of  the  supreme  God  (Ilodge,  and  many  others). 
Whether  all  that  Lange  suggests  is  included,  is  per- 
haps doubtful ;  but  comp.  his  remarks  below  on  Ps. 
Ixviii.  1'.).— K.] 

God  blessed  for  ever.  Amen  [Qi6<;  iv- 
A  0  y  i;  T  6  s  (  i<;  t  o  r  ?  a  li'iv  a<; ,  a  /(  >/ 1'  ].  We 
must  regard  this  clause  as  a  quptation  from  the 
synagogical  liturgy,  sufficiently  well-known  to  all 
the  Jews,  and  to  Jewish  Christians  and  believers  in 
general.  According  to  modern  usage,  it  should, 
therefore,  be  written  witli  quotation-iiiarks.  Ihit  the 
sense  is  this:  Christ  is  the  object  of  the  Israelitish 
doxology  to  the  revealed  God,  Jehovah,  for  lie  is 
the  (yo;«  itself;  is  consciously  praised  by  some,  and 
unconsciously  by  the  rest ;  for  this  latter  class,  not- 
withstanding their  rtyection  of  Jesus  of  Nazareth, 
cannot  get  away  from  the  adoration  of  the  Shekinah, 
and  thus  Christ  also,  the  personally  revealed  God, 
rules  over  all  (as  they  praise  Him),  even  over  un- 
believers, for  their  future  salvation.  This  is  there- 
fore the  last  advantage  of  Israel  (see  chap.  xi.). 
For  the  details  of  iill  the  explanations,  we  must  refer 
to  the  Commentaries  extant.* 

Every  exposition  is  attended  with  great  difhcul- 
ties.  The  strongest  reasons  are  still  in  favor  of  the 
old  one,  transmitted  to  us  by  the  early  writers,  all 
of  whom  favored  it,  with  the  single  exception  of 
Theodore  of  .Mopsvestia  (see  Tholuck,  p.  47'.1).  We 
may  say,  pediaps,  that  Julian  maintained,  with  Cy- 
ril, that  Paul  never  called  Jesus  "  God,"  and  that 
the  Codd.  11  [5],  47  place  a  period  after  adi^'y.n, 
and  Cod.  Tl  places  one  after  i/rl  7Tni>ro>v.  Here 
■belong  also  Iren;cus,  Tertuliian,  Origen,  &c.,  and 
the  most  of  the  later  expositors  (see  Meyer).  The 
passixge  is,  therefore,  a  doxology  to  the  divinity  of 
(Jhrist.  Tliis  is  most  strongly  favored  by  the  re- 
quirement of  the  antithesis  comprised  in  the  to 
Hctrcc  (Toiifxn  (see  chap.  i.  15,4;  1  Tim.  iii.  IG). 
Tins  explanation  has  been  rendered  unnecessarily 
dilBcult  by  regarding  inl  ncivroiv  as  neuter:  "over 
every  thing"  (IJeza  referred  it  as  masculine  to  the 
patriarchs,  to  tlie  antithesis  of  Jews  and  Gentiles), 
thus  giving  ui>  its  i)ro.\imate  reference  to  the  Jews. 

Since  the  time  of  Enismus,  this  exposition  has 
been  directly  opposed  by  another,  the  reference  of 


•  iComp.  ft  loamcd  essay  by  TTormJinn  Srhultr  (ProfosBor 
in  Basic)  :  Rom.  ix.  5,  in  ex<:<;rHscl)er  uml  hihlitrli-llieiilnffi- 
irhtr  R  xi'hniig,  erklurl,  in  tho  Jit/ubSi-liiy  fur  V'U'shc 
Thinlogie.  for  1S08,  pp.  462-.')08,  ami  tho  older  exeiretical 
lilcmture  on  this  piissaijo,  there  cited  aualnst  tho  inler- 
T)ret<itioii  of  tho  Hociniaiis  and  Seinler.  Srhultz  refers  tho 
aoxoloiry  to  Christ,  yet  not  to  thu  preoxistent,  hut  tho 
♦  hennthropic,  Rloriflod  Christ,  to  what  lie  now  is.  Tills  is 
tho  liichcst  (flory  of  Israel,  th;it  He  w:ho  is  exalted  above 
all  thinL's  was  born  of  it.  This  essay  is  exhaustive  and 
convincliiK  in  its  dtfenco  of  the  rec<'ived  punctuation.  It 
closes,  however,  with  some  sneiuIutionH,  which  imply  a 
discrepancy  between  the  simple  Gospel  narratives  and  the 
more  profound  Christ olotrical  positions  of  tho  Upistlcs  (and 
,h«  Qusprl  of  John}.— U.l 


the  clause  to  God,  "The  Codd.  11  [5],  47,  of 
the  11th  and  I'ith  centuries,  like  Diodorus  of  Tar- 
sus, place  a  period  after  ndiixa ;  this  punctuation 
has  been  preferred  by  Era,smus,  so  that  what  foUawg 
is  a  doxology  to  the  Almighty  God.  Tiiis  pioi>osi 
tion  has  found  favor  with  the  majority  of  recect 
exegetical  writers,  with  the  Socinians,  <kc.,  with 
Reiche,  Riickert,  Meyer,  and  Fritzseiie."  Tlioluck  . 
A  middle  ground  is  occupied  by  the  interpretatioc 
which  unites  with  a  secoiul  punctuation  proposed 
by  Erasnms,  according  to  Cod.  71,  as  it  places  a 
period  after  ini  ncit'nor  ;  this  has  been  adopted  by 
Locke  and  Baumgiirteu-Crusius,  a  construction  to 
which  Tholuck  also  inclines  to  a  certain  degree.  In 
addition  to  these  three  explanations  are,  the  conjec- 
ture of  Erasmus,  that  Oto^  is  not  authentic,  and 
the  reading  m'  6  >9fOs"  proposed  by  Crell,  and  oth 
ers.  But,  according  to  Tholuck,  the  detacheil  char- 
acter  of  the  doxology  is  against  the  third  exposition. 
The  following  may  be  .said  against  the  second  ex- 
planation : 

1.  In  simple  doxologies,  without  a  relative  form, 
the  itkoytjTo^  generally  precedes  the  Otoi;.  See  ex- 
amples in  Tholuck,  483  ;  Philippi,  3C9  tt".  Tholuck 
regards  it  as  a  lieautiful  fact  connected  with  Faustus 
Socinus,  that  his  attention  was  first  directed  to  this 
circumstance,  and  that,  owing  to  it,  ho  changed  his 
exposition  of  the  i)assage.  Tholuck,  indeed,  citea 
a  passage  in  which  the  fv'/.oyijxoi;  comes  after  the 
fyt6<;  (Ps.  Ixviii.  Id) — a  passage  which,  in  view  of 
its  connection,  we  regard  as  very  important,  and 
must  hereafter  return  to  it. 

2.  A  doxology  to  the  omnipotent  God  cannot 
interrupt  the  train  of  thought  under  consideration 
at  its  very  outset ;  least  of  all,  can  an  elegy  or 
funeral  discourse  be  changed  afiruptly  into  a  hymn. 
The  doxology  for  the  wliole  discussion  in  Rom. 
ix.-xi.,  is  at  the  conclusion  of  chap.  xi. 

3.  The  expression,  to  x«t«  ndoxa,  which  limits 
Christ's  descent  from  the  Jews  to  His  hmnan  nature, 
requires,  as  an  antithesis,  a  reference  to  His  divine 
nature.  We  have  here  had  S])ecial  reference  to  Cal- 
vin, Tholuck,  Neander,  and  Philippi.  In  the  attack 
on  the  old  exposition,  it  is  remarkat)lc  that  tiie  same 
critical  exegesis  which  elsewhere  urges  the  imme- 
diate context,  and  leaves  the  analogy  of  Scripture 
altogether  in  the  background,  here  reverses  ita 
metliod.  Meyer,  indeed,  oidy  says,  that  both  ex- 
positions might  be  equally  right,  according  to  the 
words.  But  he  imagines  that  he  can  overcome  the 
requirement  of  the  antithesis  in  this  i>as.>'age  merely 
by  the  assurance  that  divinity  does  not  necessarily 
belong  to  the  object  represented.  The  doxologies 
to  God  which  Meyer  cites  (Rom.  i.  25  ;  2  Cor.  xi. 
31  ;  Gal.  i.  5  ;  1  Tim.  i.  17),  are  fully  occasioned  by 
the  connection,  which  would  not  hold  good  of  the 
present  doxology.  Meyer  contradicts  himself  when 
lie  first  urges  that  the  present  passage  does  not  read 
6  i'>*di,i  hut  only  the  predicative  i9*oe,  without  the 
article  ;  and  when  he  concedes  that  Paul,  by  virtue 
of  his  appropriate  and  real  harmony  with  Jolin's 
christology,  coultl,  just  as  jiroperly  as  John  (chap.  i. 
1),  have  used  the  predicative  Ok'}!;  (divine  nature) 
of  Christ  (with  reference  to  Phil.  ii.  6  ;  Col.  i.  16 
ff. ;  ii.  9 ;  2  Cor.  iv.  4),  and  yiet  urges  that  Paul 
never  used  the  expression  {iton  of  Christ,  since  he 
never  accepted  the  Alexandrian  form,  like  John, 
but  adhered  to  tho  strictly  monotheistical  form.  He 
seems,  therefore,  to  regard  that  "Alexandrian  form" 
as  prejudicial  to  strict  numothcism.  I  It  shoidd  be 
remarked  tliat  Meyer,  who  is  usually  8o  clear  and 


CHAPTER  IX.    1-33. 


SOS 


decided  in  liis  statements  of  the  reasons  for  his 
views,  halts  here,  as  if  the  grounds  against  the 
reference  to  Christ  were  not  sufficient  to  satisfy 
himself.  This  fact  is  suggestive. — K.]  As  far  as 
tliosc  passages  are  concerned  in  wiiich  Paul  brings 
out  tlie  divinity  of  Christ,  we  refer  to  the  Dodr. 
Notea.  \Y(!  must  here,  however,  oppose  the  her- 
meneutical  supposition  that  there  are  no  doctrinal 
cc^al  hyofii-va  as  culminating  points  of  the  view 
corresponding  with  them.  Meyer  even  holds  that 
John  calls  C'hrist  Otoe  but  once.  It  is  a  perfectly 
gratuitous  increase  of  the  tiifficulty  before  us,  to  say 
that  Christ  is  here  called  God  over  all.  It  is  cer- 
tainly a  fact  tliat  Paul  speaks  preeniiuently  of  the 
historical  Christ,  and  that,  when  he  expresses  also 
the  ontolocfical  idea  of  Christ,  he  immediately  places 
it  in  relation  with  the  historical  perfection  of  Christ; 
but  when  this  historical  subordination  which  Paul 
expresses  (1  Cor.  viii.  6  ;  Eph.  iv.  5  f. ;  1  Cor.  xv. 
28)  is  allowed  to  be  identical  with  His  ovtological 
subordination,  the  error  is  owing  to  a  defective  ec- 
clesiastical education  and  speculative  penetration. 

We  now  come  to  Ps.  Ixviii.  19,  according  to  the 
Septuagint :  Kr^ioc;  6  {)t6-;  Hi'/.oytjroc,  tii/.uytjToc 
xi'^toc  ljii(i>r(v  xoti9'  Ti/ni)C(v.  It  must  be  borne  in 
mind  that  Paul  was  particularly  familiar  with  that 
passage.  In  Eph.  iv.  8  he  quotes  a  good  part  of 
ver.  18,  and  refers  it  to  Christ.  But  this  verse  reads, 
according  to  De  Wette's  translation,  thus :  Thou 
ascendest  to  the  high  seat,  thou  leadest  captive,  thou 
receivest  gifts  for  men,  and  the  rebellious  shall  also 
dwell  tvi'h  Jah.  Tholuck  :  Even  the  apostates  shall 
still  dwell  with  God  the  Lord.  Do  we  not  plainly 
hear  the  reecho  of  this  passage  in  the  6  i!>v  tnl 
ndvTMv  ?  And  since  we  know  that  Paul  applies 
this  passage  to  the  glorification  of  Christ,  is  it  not 
clear  that  he  immediately  adds  that  ascription  of 
praise  in  Ps.  Ixviii.  19  ?  His  expression  occupies 
the  middle  ground  between  the  LXX.  and  the  He- 
brew text.  Hence  we  return  to  the  acceptance  of  a 
synagogical  form. 

[The  main  point  being  not  the  synagogical  form 
— to  which,  however,  there  is  little  to  object — but 
the  reference  to  Christ,  the  following  summary  in 
favor  of  that  view  is  added  : 

(1.)  This  view  is  the  most  simple  and  natural 
one.  Alford  seems  justifiable  in  remarking :  It  is 
the  onlii  one  admissible  by  the  rules  of  grammar  and 
arrangement. 

(2.)  It  accords  best  with  the  context,  presenting 
an  antithesis  to  to  xara  irdsj/.a,  and  forming  a 
suitable  culminating  point  after  the  enumeration  of 
the  advantages  of  the  Jews. 

(3.)  It  is  sufficiently  Pauline,  for  Paul  wrote  Col. 
i.  15  ff.,  and  in  view  of  that  and  many  similar  pas- 
gages,  any  other  reference  would  be  derogatory  to 
the  divinity  of  Christ. 

(4.)  On  no  exegetical  point,  where  there  is  room 
for  di.scussion,  has  the  unanimity  of  commentators, 
of  all  ages  and  confessions,  been  so  entire,  as  in  re- 
ferring this  to  Christ. — R.] 

B.  The  Apostle's  exultation  at  the  thought  that 
the  pronihe  of  God  for  Israel  nevertheless  remains 
in  force  (vers.  6-33). 

First  Proof:  Differences  in  election  (vers.  6-13). 
Meyer:  "The  first  part  of  the  theodicy  is,  that  God's 
promise  has  not  become  untrue  through  the  exclusion 
of  a  portion  of  ibe  Israelites ;  for  the  promise  is  valid 
pnly  for  the  tru-?  Israelites,  who  are  according  to  the 
promise — which  result  is  confirmed  by  the  IScripiures." 


Ver.  6.  It  is  not  however  so  that.    The  o  i';; 

viov  d i.  oTi  is  variously  rendered:  1.  Analo- 
gously  to  the  or/  on,,  not  that,  not  in  the  .fense  tha\ 
(Tholuck).  But  this  does  not  aflbrd  a  satisfactory 
connection  with  the  foregoing.  2.  Eritzsche :  oh 
TotocTor  ori,  [the  matter,  however,  is  not  so,  as 
that^.  3.  Oi'  Toioj'  ()e  ).iy(r,  oiov  oti,  "  but  I  do 
not  say  any  thing  of  such  a  kind  as  that  "  (Meyer). 
4.  The  least  tenable  explanation  is,  it  is  not  possible 
that  (Beza,  Grotius).  [Beiweeu  (2.)  and  (3.)  tliere 
is  little  choice.  Paul  does  not  say  any  thing  of 
such  a  kind  as  that,  because  the  matter  is  not  so  as 
that ;  or  vice  vcisa. — R.]  The  connection,  there- 
fore, consists  in  the  Apostle's  declaration  of  a  re- 
striction of  the  profound  sorrow  which  he  has  al- 
ready expressed ;  but  not,  according  to  Origen,  in 
connecting  the  declaration  that  the  promise  still 
holds  good,  to  the  previously  mentioned  inay/t- 
).iai.  Tholuck  :  "  Paul  adduces  the  proof  accord- 
ing to  the  idea  with  which  he  was  quite  familiar, 
that  the  real  Israel  was  not  based  upon  its  physical 
relationship  with  Abraham  (Gal.  iii.  9  ;  Rom.  iv.  12). 
This  brings  out  in  glaring  contrast  the  shibboleth  of 
the  carnal  Jew,  &c. ;  gross  heretics,  denieis  of  the 
resurrection  of  the  dead,  &c.,  are  only  mentioned  as 
exceptions." 

The  Tvord  of  God  hath  come  to  nought 
[iy.  n  i  Tit  M  y.  f  V  6  X  6  y  o  i;  r  o  Ti ,  d  f  o  Z  ^.  The 
word  of  patriarchal  promise  in  its  relation  to  Israel, 
not  specially  to  the  inayyi'i.iav  alone. 

For  not  all  -who  are  of  Israel,  Eire  Israel 
[  0  i''  y  VLfj  TT  c'c  vr  f  i;  o  I  t'S  ^1  a  (j  a  r]  ). ,  o  l  t  o  t 
'J  (T^  «///].  The  germ  of  tiie  distinction  between 
the  true  religious  Israel  and  the  impure  and  merely 
national  Israelites,  already  lay  in  the  Old  Testament 
(see  chap.  x. ;  Ps.  cxii.  1 ;  Ezck.  xiii.  9  ;  Jer.  vii, 
23,  &c.) ;  the  distinction  was  already  prepared  by 
the  relations  of  election  in  the  history  of  the  patri- 
archs.  The  Apostle's  thought  distinguishes,  first 
of  all,  between  Israel  as  the  collective  people  of 
God,  and  the  single  apostate  branches.  But  then 
he  establishes  this  general  distinction  chiefly  by  the 
relations  of  election. 

Ver.  7.  Neither,  because  they  are  the  seed 
of  Abraham  are  they  all  children  [oiiV  ort 
liaiv  aTzi^fia  yl[j(jadn,  ndvxii;  rixra^. 
The  antQfta  L^/?^.  denotes  here  natural  pos- 
tei-ity,  but  the  jixva,  on  the  contrary,  his  spirit- 
ual posterity,  and  directly  fiom  Israel.  It  may  be 
asked  here,  whether  the  subject  of  the  preceding 
verse  {which  are  of  Israel)  still  continues  (Meyer), 
or  whether  the  present  clau.se  generalizes  the  sub 
ject :  not  all  those  who  are  Abraham's  seed  are 
therefore  also  Abraham's  children.  We  prefer  the 
latter  construction,  because,  otherwise,  the  verse 
cited  would  furnish  no  proof  The  first  clause — for 
they  are  not  all  Israel  which  are  of  Israel,  God'i 
people — is  therefore  supplemented  by  the  second — 
likewise  not  all  who  are  descended  from  Abraham, 
and  thus,  directly  from  Ishmael  and  Isaac,  are  tr'ie 
children  of  Abraham  ;  that  is,  not  merely  individ:  al 
believers,  as  in  chap,  iv.,  but  rather  the  indi\  idunls 
chosen,  elected  beforehand  through  God's  fiee  choice. 

This  is  now  followed  by  particular  proofs,  which 
show  that  God's  election,  notwithstanding  the  prom- 
ise given  to  Abraham,  remained  totally  free,  con- 
trary  to  the  boast  of  a  right  of  natural  descent. 

First  proof:  Abraham's  first  born  son  was  not 
Abraham's  child  of  promise,  but,  according  to  God't 
disposition,  the  younger,  with  his  seed.  And  that, 
indeed,  was  previously  es*ablishcd  by  God.     Refer 


310 


THE   EPISTLE   OF   PAUL   TO   THE   ROMANS. 


ence  could  also  be  made  here  to  tlie  preference  of. 
Sarali  to  Uagar;  and,  therefore,  the  second  aud  more 
convincing  |)roof  follows :  Rebecca.  It  is  import- 
ant that  Rebecca,  and  not  Isaac,  appears  iu  the  fore- 
ground, but  then,  also,  that  she  conceived  twins  by 
Isaiic  in  one  pregnancy  ;  and  thiyil,  tliat  a  determi- 
nation is  made  respecting  children  as  yet  unborn, 
which  gave  the  preference  to  Jacob. 

But  (thus  the  promise  reads)  in  Isaac  [a/./' 
'Ev  'load/..  Gen.  xxi.  12.  See  Textual  Note  ' 
for  the  Hebrew.]  Though  the  decisive  promise  id 
quoted  directly  and  authentically,  without  a  yiy{ia- 
TTTui,,  or  any  thing  of  similar  import,  as  in  (ial.  iii. 
11,  12,  it  is  nevertheless  a  simple  logical  require- 
ment to  supply  something  of  the  kind  mentally  ; 
this,  however,  is  contested  by  Meyer.  The  promise 
is  quoted  from  the  Septuagiut.  Meyer  maintains, 
in  accordance  with  Gesenius,  that  the  original  text 
pn^"3  would  say  :  Through  Isaac  will  the  pos- 
terity be  called  ;  but  that  the  Apostle  has  conceived 
the  sense  of  the  passage  according  to  its  typical 
meaning,  and  confined  it  to  Isaac's  person.  [So 
Philippi,  Ewald.]  The  entire  digression  on  this  sup- 
l)osed  antithesis  rests  upon  a  mistake  of  the  signifi- 
cance of  the  typical  collective  name.  The  name  of 
Isaac  here  can  just  as  little  exclude  his  posterity,  as 
the  included  posterity  can  exclude  Isaac  himself. 
Meyer  says :  all  Jews  belonged  to  the  ott'spiing  of 
Isaac,  and  therefore  the  expression  would  be  inap- 
propriate, if  those  whose  claims  are  to  be  disap- 
pointed, are  also  described  by  it.  But  yet,  in  vers. 
11  and  12,  the  election  of  Jacob  is  evidently  meant 
at  the  same  time  with  that  of  his  posterity,  but  with- 
out the  Apostle  having  designed  thus  to  favor  again 
the  claim  of  individual  Jews.  The  examples  cited 
ierve  to  prove  that  the  distinguishing  process  of 
election,  in  reference  to  the  descendants  of  Jacob 
also,  was  not  hindered  by  the  election  of  their  an- 
cestor with  his  (T7it(i/ia,  but  rather  that  it  took  place 
with  perfect  freedom  in  reference  to  the  posterity. 

Shall  thy  seed  be  called  [y.  ).  tj  0  i}  a  ft  ai 
ffot  (T^rtiificiJ.  Difl'erent  exi)laiiations  of  the 
y,  ?.  rj  0- I'i  a  f  r  at.  (rrit,  shnU  be;  shall  be  dwakeiicd  ; 
shall  be  called  from  nothing) ;  [Tholuck,  Stuart ; 
Reiche.  Meyer  objects  to  this,  on  the  ground,  tiiat 
tliis  promise  was  made  after  Isaac  was  born.  As 
we  are  le.ss  warranted  in  referi'ing  the  citation  ex- 
clusively to  Isaac's  descendants,  than  to  Isaac  alone, 
this  objection  seems  to  be  valid  and  conclusive. — R.] 

The  y.aktlv  brings  out  the  freedom  of  Divine 
choice  ;  not  in  the  sense  that  he  merely  became  the 
ancestor  of  the  promised  seed,  but  in  and  with  Isaac 
the  seed  of  promise  belonging  to  Abraham  was  call- 
ed, according  to  the  election.  [Hodge,  Alford,  and 
most.]  PVeedom  of  election  is  thus  distinguished 
by  two  characteristics  :  ordy  in  Isaac,  and,  ouly  by 
virtue  of  free  appoiutmnit. 

Vcr.  8.  That  is,  They  who  are  the  children 
of  the  flesh  ['/'oTt'  taruv,  ov  to.  rixva 
T^^  irdoxoi;.  Comp.  (Jal.  iv.  2;^].  The  children 
who  are  to  be  regarded  merely  as  the  fruit  of  physi- 
cal generation.  The  autithesi.s,  the  children  of 
tha  promise  [rci  rixva  t^s"  i^nyyt^.iai;\ 
makes  these  appear  aH  liorn  umlcr  the  predeternn- 
Ottion  and  cooperation  of  the  Divine  i)romise.  The 
expression,  ^^  jirontised  ehiMrtin,"  woidd  be  too  lit- 
tle ;  while  the  ex|)ressi<)n,  "  begotten  by  the  i)0wer 
of  the  Divine  promise"  (Meyer),  would  l»e  too 
strong.  [The  facts  respecting  the  birth  of  Isaiie, 
■ad  I'aul's  language  in  Galatians,  seem  to  Justify 


Meyer's  view  ;  the  conception  of  Isaac  was  no  extra, 
ordinary,  and  so  connected  with  the  promise,  that 
he  is  called  "  after  the  Spirit,"  in  distinction  from 
one  "  born  after  the  flesh,"  as  well  as  "  by  prom- 
ise ;  "  still  in  neither  case  is  Isaac  said  to  "be  b^rn 
by  promise  or  ufirr  tJu.  Sjdrit,  sis  if  to  guard  after 
any  thought  of  miraculous  conception.  Lange  him- 
self says  below,  that  "  the  pronnse  acted  aa  a  pro- 
ducing and  cooperative  cause." — R.] 

Not  *ha=e  children  of  the  flesh  are  childien  of 
God  [ravra  rixva  toT  fJfoeJ,  but  the  chil- 
dren designated  by  the  promise  are  reckoned  as 
seed  [.^.o ;'t^f T«i  ti<;  <s7Ti(>fia'\.  Tiie  antithe- 
sis uuist  be  carefully  observed.  Even  the  children 
of  promise  are  not,  in  themselves,  children  of  God 
in  the  New  Testament  »ense.  They  are  counted 
such  according  to  their  faith,  and  therefore  typically 
so  called  in  the  sense  that  they  are  the  seed  of  God'a 
children  as  the  seed  of  promise.  Also  in  this  line 
there  are  not  yet  children  born  of  God  (see  John  i. 
13).* 

Ver.  9.  For  this  word  was  of  promise 
{^Inayy f ).ic(,i;  yctQ  6  /.oya;  oiWos'.  Notice 
the  emphatic  position  of  inayyi/.ia(;.  "  The 
children  of  promise  are  reckoned  for  seed  ;  for  this 
word,  in  fulfilment  of  which  Isaac  was  born,  was  a 
word  of  promise  "  (Alford). — R.]  Free  quotation 
from  Gen.  xviii.  10,  14,  according  to  the  Septuagint. 

At  this  season  [Kara  rov  /.at.(t or  r ov- 
rov;  i.  e.,  next  year  at  this  time.  See  Textual 
Note  **. — R.]  The  accessory  proof  in  this  verse  will 
show,  first,  that  Isaac  was  now  already  an  object  of 
promise  ;  second,  that  the  promise  ("  according  to 
the  time  ")  acted  as  a  producing  and  cooperative 
cause  ;  and  third,  that  the  bestowal  of  the  right  of 
childhood  was  attributed  for  Abraham's  faith. f 

Ver.  111.  And  not  only  this ;  but  when 
Rebecca  also  [  o  v  u  6  r  o  r  d  i  ,  d  /.  ).  «  y.  a  I 
' P f [liy.xa'\.  Winer's  su[>plenicnting  exi)lanation, 
on  fiovov  Sk  2id.ti^a  tnayyt).fiivt]  /;r  (Meyer: 
Not  only  Sarah,  but  Rebecca  also,  had  a  Divine 
promise),  is  repelled  by  Tholuck,  with  the  reminder 
that  it  was  not  Sarah,  but  Al)rahani,  who  hail  re- 
ceived that  tnayyt/.lu.  Tholuck,  with  Erasnnis  and 
Riickert,  prei'ers  to  supply  a  toTtd  to  /lovov  lU',  and 
dfiy.rifn  Torro,  or  something  similai-,  to  Rebecca. 
Grotius,  and  others,  in  acordance  with  the  sen.sc, 
interpret  similarly :  von  solum  id,  quod  jam  aixi- 
)inis,  docuinentuiii  est  ejus,  quod  iuferre  rolumus. 
[The  view  of  Tholuck  seems  least  objectionable. 
'I'fpiy.xa  is  then  either  the  nominative  absolute, 
or  we  nmst  accept  an  anacohithon.  The  sense  is 
the  same  in  either  ease.  riiili]i|)i  prefers  the  former 
decidedly,  on  grannnatical  grounds,  and  takes  this 
as  almost  =  behold,  liibfxa  too.  The  progress  of 
thought  is  against  Meyer's  view. — R.] 

♦  [Stuart,  and  others,  deny  tho  hiKliost  apiritimt  conso 
to  the  i>hru,so  "  childreti  of  (ioil,''  liniitiiiir  it  to  "iliildron 
of  proniiso  in  rospocl  to  tbo  external  J>r^^^!opos  and  hle^s- 
inps  of  tlio  ancient  covenant  or  dispensation."  In  itsoll 
there  would  be  no  objection  to  this  view,  but  Paul  hud 
aire  iidy  written  Oal.  iv.  2'J-31,  where  these  pln-a-e.s  receive 
u  deeper  nieauinfr  (see  Liinjrc's  Comm.  Oil.,  pp.  113  ff.,  120 
ff.).  Itesides,  tf  ihisi  were  all,  it  would  ret  ditler  finm  the 
idea  already  Buntfisted  In  vers.  C,  7  (llc.lf:;).  We  must 
hold  then  to  a  typical  pcnse  nt  least,  an<l  fir.d,  in  "reck- 
oned," the  (luiird  atrninst  the  assumption  of  spiritn;\l  prlvi- 
lesfo  from  natural  descent. — R.l 

t  [Stuart  HuiTKests  tlie  interpretation  :  " 'i.«  at  li/r-ijirtna 
titne  ;  in  which  ease  the  nieaninc  would  he,  that  God  wuuld 
acain  address  her  .is  a  mother,  who  (fives  life  to — i'.  c,  Iv-irs, 
chiMrcii."  Kut  there  seems  to  he  no  reason  for  departing 
from  the  simple  rendering  uf  the  LXX.  quoted  by  Paul. 
-R.] 


CHAPTER  IX.    1-33. 


3U 


In  consequence  of  the  ambiguity  of  the  brief 
form  of  expression,  we  must  consult  the  contents 
themselves.  But,  according  to  these,  Rebecca  is 
not  merely  a  second  example,  but  even  a  new  one 
for  the  same  fundamental  thoughts.  She  is  a  new 
example,  in  whom  there  appeur  three  new  character- 
istics. First,  Rebecca  appears  in  the  foreground  as 
ft  principal  i)erson,  and  becomes  the  parallel  to  Abra- 
ham. The  Apostle  says  to  the  Jews,  as  carefully 
as  he  can,  that  the  weight  of  the  promise  does  not 
rest  upon  Isaac,  the  promised  natural  seed  of  Abra- 
ham, but  on  the  daughter-in-law,  Bethuel's  daughter, 
v;lio  had  become  Isaac's  wife.  Then  comes  the  prin- 
cipal characteristic  which  constitutes  the  real  antithe- 
sis : 

[Had  conceived  by  one,  our  father  Isaac, 
JJ  svoi;  y.oirtjv  e/ovacc,  'laaoc/.  rov  nd- 
r^ot;  ?jfio)v. — R.]  Between  the  twin  children  of 
one  marriage,  by  one  husband,  and  from  one  con- 
ception or  pregnancy  {bed,  y.oirtj,  see  cliap.  xiii. 
12  ;  not  emphasized  as  unity,  but  really  so  under- 
stood), the  election  already  made  the  greatest  diti'er- 
ence  before  birth.  This  leads  to  the  third  charac- 
teristic : 

Ver.  11.  [Without  their  having  as  yet  been 
born,  or  done  any  thing  good  or  evil,  /<  /)  n  m 
y  a  ^  y  f  vv  rj  Q-  ivx  0)  V  ft  rj  d  e  n  q  a  i  d  v  r  lo  r  r  i 
dya&ov  Tj  ^ar'Aov.  See  Textual  Hotcs  '°  and 
". — R.]  Before  the  children  had  done  any  thing 
either  good  or  bad.*  This  example  denies  once 
more,  as  though  superfluously,  the  exclusive  privi- 
lege of  birthright.  In  view  of  all  this,  we  think 
that  the  real  explanation  of  the  ov  /(orov  <)i  is  con- 
tained in  the  second  characteristic — not  merely  that 
Sarah,  the  unfruitful  one,  is  a  proof,  but  also  Re- 
becca, in  her  pregnancy  with  twins.  It  is  Sarah,  in 
so  far  as  the  promise  determines  a  year  beforehand 
that  the  unfruitful  Sarah,  instead  of  the  mother  of 
Ishmael,  should  be  the  mother  of  the  promised  one; 
and  Rebecca,  in  so  far  as  the  promise  made  even 
the  greatest  difference  between  the  twin-fruit  of  her 
■womb. 

The  expression,  toTi  Trar^cx,'  ^j/iwv,  indicates  that 
also  the  paternity  of  Isaac  did  not  guarantee  any 
choice  concerning  the  Jews.  The  /i  i^  n  at  j^  ex- 
presses the  fact  that  God's  revelation  concerning  the 
preference  of  the  younger  before  the  birth  of  the 
twins  (at'Toiv  must  be  supplied)  was  intentional,  in 
order 

That  the  purpose  of  God  according  to 
election  might  stand  [tV«  ^  xmt'  ix/.oyrjv 
7z (J  6  \)k)  0 i;  rov  OioTi  /^«i"/].]  Meyer  holds, 
that  tlie  \'va  therefore  determines,  at  all  events, 
a  purpose.  But  he  incorrectly  denies  that  the  i/.- 
).oyrj  here  precedes  the  7i(i6&ea(,i;.  [Meyer  op- 
poses this  precedence,  on  the  ground  that  the  elec- 
tion is  essentially  pre-temporal  (Eph.  iii.  11 ;  2  Tim. 
i.  9),  objecting  also  to  the  view  of  Grotius,  and 
others,  that  the  phrase  means :  a  decree  considered 
with  respect  to  an  election.     He  holds  that,  as  an 


*  [It  must  be  noticed  that  this  expression  contains  nn 
incidental  argument  against  the  Platonic  and  Origeiiistic 
ioctiine  of  the  iireesi&tence  of  souls,  and  their  exile  into 
this  world  in  consequence  of  a  previous  fall.  This  theory, 
revived  again  and  again,  is  as  unsatisfactory  as  it  is  un- 
Bcriptiiral,  T>ut  must  be  considered  one  of  the  many  at- 
tem,.s  to  solve  the  enigma  which  this  chapter  confronts. 
Clearly,  then,  Paul  rejects  this  solution. — R.] 

t  [Mey?r:  "Not  oviru,  because  the  negative  relation  is 
to  be  ex],r'  ssed  stihj'Xiively — i.  e.,  as  presented  and  con- 
ridered  by  God  in  the  giving  of  His  sentence."  See  Winer, 
p.  441  — E.] 


essential  inherent  of  the  purpose,  y.ar'  tx).oy/jv  ex 
presses  the  modality  of  7i(j60tai,<;.  Perhaps  it  is 
not  safe  to  affirm  positively  more  than  this  respect, 
ing  what  belongs  to  the  order  in  the  mind  of  God, 
Meyer  also  repels  the  strong  view  of  Bengel :  pro- 
positum  Dei  electivum  ;  but  after  all  has  been  ad- 
mitted, that  must  be  respecting  the  primary  refer- 
ence to  theocratic  privilege  (Meyer  limits  llius),  the 
Apostle's  language  fairly  implies  a  choice  of  indi- 
viduals, and  a  free  choice,  whether  we  can  reconcile 
this  with  our  systems,  or  our  consciousness  of  our 
own  freedom  or  not.  The  emphasis  throughout,  it 
may  well  be  admitted,  rests  on  the  unmerited  choice 
of  Jacob,  rather  than  on  the  rejection  of  Esau.— 
R.]  The  i/.loyi]  is  founded  in  the  iv<)oy.la,  and 
the  n^oOtai,^  joins  with  the  latter.  Meyer's  op- 
position to  the  explanation  of  the  expression  (of 
Rosenmiiller,  and  others)  propos'd-itm  Dn  liberum, 
is  correct  only  so  far  as  the  election  of  love  and 
arbitrarii  freedom  are  different ;  but  the  election  of 
love  is  certainly  free  in  relation  to  human  claims. 
The  following  clause  expresses  a  principal  maxim  of 
the   n (JO  & tai.Q. 

Not  of  works,  but  of  him  that  calleth 
[oi'i!  i'S.  t(jy(f)v  d).).'  in  roTi  y.  a  }.ovvr  oi;^. 
The  explanation  of  most  commentators,  that  the 
7T^  6  0  tail;  is  announced  by  this  negation,  is  con- 
trary to  Meyer's  assertion,  that  this  addition  relates 
only  to  /uirti:  and  indeed  he  has  this,  his  strong 
assurance,  nut  from  work--:,  &c.,  but  of  him  that 
calleth. — Works  cannot  be  the  founda+ion  of  the 
cfill  to  salvation,  but  just  the  reverse  ;  it  is  only  this 
call  that  can  be  the  foundation  of  works.  [This 
phrase  seems  to  be  "  a  general  characteristic  of  the 
whole  transaction  "  (Alford).  Such  a  view  is  fa- 
vored by  the  peculiarly  broken  construction  of  the 
whole  verse.  In  any  case,  it  establishes  the  i)osition 
of  Augustine :  "  God  does  not  choose  us  because 
we  believe,  but  that  we  may  believe."  "  Hence, 
too,  we  are  justified  not  on  account  of  faith  {prop- 
ter fidem),  but  through  faith  {per  fidem),  which 
God  himself  works  in  us  through  the  Holy  Ghost 
(Schaff).  Any  other  view  would  contradict  the 
obvious  meaning  of  this  verse.  Comp.  Hodge  and 
Philippi  on  each  side  of  the  predestinarian  question 
as  involved  here. — R.] 

Ver.  12.  The  elder  (that  is,  the  first-bom) 
shall  serve  the  younger  [6  niL^mv  ()ovkfv- 
ffft  rm  eld(T(Tovi'\  (Gen.  xxv.  23,  according  to 
the  Septuagint). — Here,  again,  Meyer  finds  a  differ- 
ence between  the  original  sense  of  the  passage  and 
the  Apostle's  explanation.  According  to  the  con- 
nection of  the  original,  the  expression  extends  to 
the  nations  concerned  (Jews  and  Edomites),  and  was 
fulfilled  in  David's  conquest  of  the  Edomites  (2  Sara, 
viii.  14,  &c.) ;  *  but  Paul  means,  on  tlie  contrary, 
Esau  and  Jacob  themselves.  The  adjustment  of  the 
difference  by  regarding  the  two  brothers  as  repre- 
sentatives of  two  nations,  is  insufficient ;  rather, 
the  indoles  of  Jacob  was  really  continued  in  the 
Jewish  people,  and  the  indoles  of  Esau  in  the  Edo- 
mites. [The  reference  of  the  original  Hebrew,  as 
shown  by  the  context,  is  to  the  nations  springing: 
from  the  twin  children  ("  two  nations  are  in  thy 
womb ; "  Gen.  xxv.  23).  Lange  and  Meyer  agree 
that  there  is  also  a  personal  reference,  though  differ 
ing  in  their  mode  of  stating  the  relation  of  the  two, 

*  [Subsequent  conquests  of  the  Edomites  are  men- 
tioned;  2  Kings  viii.  21;  xiv.  7,  22  ;  2  Chion.  xxv  11 J 
xxvi.  2.  They  were  finilly  conquered  by  John  HyrcannS' 
and  iucorporated  into  the  Jewish  nation. — K.] 


312 


THE   EPISTLE   OF   PAUL   TO   THE   ROMANS, 


Neither  should  be  excluded,  though  the  whole  pass- 
age secnis  to  indicate  tiiat  the  pi-rsonal  refereiien 
was  tlie  more  ])i-ominent  one  in  Paul's  mind.  On 
the  national  reicrence,  Scliart"  remarks :  "  At  all 
events,  in  the  passages  quoted  here  and  ver.  13, 
Jacob  and  Esau  appear  as  the  heads  of  two  nations. 
If  the  promised  lordsliip  of  Jacob  bo  not  limited  to 
the  transfer  of  the  birthright  and  the  theocratic 
blessing  to  Jacob,,  but  taken  in  its  full,  pliysical,  and 
Bpiritual  sense,  tlie  fulfilment  did  not  take  place 
until  lung  after  their  death,  in  their  descendants, 
when  David  con(iuered  the  Edomites  (2  Sam.  viii. 
14).  Since  then  the  Ishmaelites  and  the  Edomites, 
together  with  the  other  heathen,  were  at  all  events 
called  to  the  gospel,  though  later  than  the  Jews 
(corap.  Gen.  x.wii.  40,  where  Isaac  predicts  tlie  fu- 
ture cessation  of  the  bondage  of  Esau  ;  and  Amos 
ix.  12;  Acts  xv.  1(5,  17;  Kom.  xi.  11  if.);  it  fol- 
lows that  Paul  S[)eaks  here,  not  as  many  Calvinistic 
expositors  misunderstand  him,  of  an  eternal  repro- 
bation, but  of  sueli  a  pi-eference  of  one  nation  as 
shall  prepare  for  the  final  salvation  of  all  nations 
(we  do  not  say,  all  individuals)."  The  individual 
reference  is  also  undeniable,  though  it  l)y  no  means 
follows  that  it  here  implies  eternal  resultx.  Tlie 
point  here  is  not  what  or  Jioto  nmch  God  did  in  His 
election,  but  that  He  had  a  nfjoihiffn;  xar'  i/.- 
^.oyt'j  1'.— R.] 

Vtr.  1;;.  As  it  i.s  Tvritten,  Jacob  I  loved, 
but  £sau  I  hated  [7'o»'  'Iuy.t<i{l  tiydrx tjnu, 
T  6  V  ii  i.  '  H  J  ccti  i/i  I  (T  tj  <T  a^.  Mai.  i.  2  ff.  : 
*'  I  have  loved  you,  saitii  the  Lord.  Yet  ye  say, 
Wherein  hast  thou  loved  us?  Was  not  Esau  Jacob's 
brother V  saith  the  Lord:  yet  I  loved  Jacob,  <ind  I 
hated  Esau,  and  laid  his  mountains  and  his  lieritagc 
waste  for  the  dragons  of  the  wilderness."  Here  tlie 
Btatement  that  Jehovah  /lute  >  Esau  is  proved  by  tlie 
fact  that  He  gave  a  desolate  land  to  the  Edomites 
for  an  inheritance,  and  that  He  called  it  a  wicked 
land,  on  which  His  indignation  rested.  Thus  the 
people  are  placed  first  here,  l)ut  with  tiiem  also  their 
ancestor,  as  in  Gen.  xxv.  23  the  ancestor  is  placed 
first,  but  with  him  his  people  also. 

The  following  is  tiiercfore  assumed  throughout : 
1.  The  continuity  of  the  indoles  in  the  ancestor  and 
in  the  real  substance  of  his  posterity ;  2.  The  uni- 
vemal  connection  between  tiie  indolis  and  its  reli- 
gious and  moral  conduct ;  3.  The  universal  connec- 
tion lietween  the  religious  and  moral  conduct  and 
the  historical  decrees.  The  sum  of  these  character- 
istics is  now  referred  to  the  Divine  jnirposr^  and  is 
applied  to  E.sau  in  the  sentence,  "  I  hated  him." 
Yet  this  sentence  ha.s,  at  most,  only  a  relative  mean- 
ing :  God  has  hated  Esau  in  the  relation  of  Esau  to 
Jacob,  and  in  antithesis  to  the  fact  that  He  loved 
Jacob.  God's  whole  arrangement,  therefore,  pro- 
ceeds from  the  firimaiy  nooDKni;  that  lb-  loved 
Jacob.  In  that  fact  lies  tli(>  causality  of  Jacfili's 
glorious  history,  the  determination  of  his  theocratic 
inheritance.  Hut  the  whole  sentence  dejiends  upon 
Tvious  couditions  on  both  sides : 

1.  An  rcoiiomirnl  condition.  The  question  is  not 
at  all  concerning  decrees  of  eternal  salvation  and 
damnation,  but  concerning  the  eronoiniral  relations 
of  the  ordination  and  cull  to  the  possession  of  .sal- 
tition  and  to  the  economy  of  salvation  in  time.  On 
ii'ic!  prospects  of  salvation  for  Edorn,  comp.  Isa.  xi. 
14  (Dan.  xi.  41);  Amos  ix.  12;  Mark  iii.  8,  On  the 
Other  hand,  Edorn  has  become,  on  its  dark  side,  a 
type  of  anti-christianity.  See  the  article  Edomlter, 
iu  the  Bibl.    Worlcrbiich  fur  das  ckriUicke  Vvlk. 


Likewise  the  passage  in  Heb.  xii.  17  relates  to  Esau'j 
incapacity  to  inherit  the  theocratic  blessing  even 
with  teai-s  and  penitence. 

2.  An  iiidiv  dual  condition.  There  could  be  also 
in  Edoni  individuals  having  the  character  of  Israel, 
and  in  Israel  there  could  be  individual  Edomites. 
The  LXX.  has  regarded  Job  as  an  Edomite  prince. 
Allowing  this  to  be  uncertain,  the  Ed(jmite  nature 
of  the  Israelitish  Judas  is  beyond  a  doubt. 

3.  A  rilic/ious-ct/dcal  condition.  Salvation  Wa3 
as  little  seemed  unconditionally  to  the  individual 
Jew  by  Israel's  election,  iis  the  individual  Edomite 
was  personally  subjected  to  condemnation  by  that 
theocratic  rejection  of  Edom  (see  Hengel).  Meyer : 
"  We  must  not  attach  such  a  merely  privative  mean- 
ing to  the  tfiiatifTa  *  as  not  to  love,  or  to  love  less 
(Grotius,  Estius  [Hodge,  Stuart],  and  others),  which 
is  also  not  confirmed  by  Matt.  vi.  24  ;  Luke  xiv.  2(j ; 
xvi.  13  ;  John  xii.  25  ;  but  it  expicsses  just  the  op- 
posite of  the  positive  tjyaTT. — positive  abhorrence." 
This  would  be  still  more  than  hatred  I  Meyer  also 
speaks  of  a  becoming  fond  of  and  ab/crreuce  evea 
before  the  birth  of  the  brothers.  Yet  here  the  mean- 
ing might  be  ;  I  have  loved  the  letter,  but  the  spirit 
of  the  letter  I  have  loved  less  !  f  This,  indeed, 
might  be  said  of  many  of  the  results  of  modern 
criticism  and  exegesis.  Philippi  lessens  at  least  the 
antithesis  in  relation  to  Jacob  and  Esau  themselves, 
but  yet  without  thereby  becoming  rid  of  the  tradi- 
tional prejudices  respecting  the  sense  of  this  pas- 
sage. "  Jacob's  recejition  of  the  theocratic  birth- 
right, and  Esau's  exclusion  tioin  it,  constitute,  in 
Paul's  mind,  only  the  type  for  the  law  of  the  recep- 
tion of  eternal  xalvalion  and  of  abandonment  to 
etrnal  perdition.''^  But  the  law  of  this  reception 
and  abandonment  is  not  given  here,  but  in  Mark 
xvi.  16.  The  following  interpretation  is  better,  if 
we  understand  thereby  not  absolute,  but  relative  an- 
titheses. Calvin  well  explains  ayanCtv  and  inirnv 
by  a^munere  and  repellere.  The  use  of  /nrrfir  is 
similar  (Gen.  xxix.  30,  31  ;  Dent.  xxi.  15  ff. ;  Prov. 
xiii.  24;  Matt.  vi.  24;  Luke  xvi.  13;  Matt.  x.  37; 
comp.  with  Luke  xiv.  2G  ;  John  xii.  25).  "  To  hate 
father  and  mother,  and  his  own  soul,  does  not  mean 
to  love  them  less  than  the  Lord,  but  to  reject  them 
altogether  in  a  case  of  collision,  or  to  so  act  toward 
them  as  if  one  posiiivcly  hateil  them  (V) ;  in  which 
case  there  might  slill  exist  a  great  deal  of  love  for 
them,  though  certainly  less  than  for  the  Lord." — If, 
indeed,  absolute  lore  and  a  conditional  love  =  lovinq 
les.i,  are  at  variance  with  each  other,  then  the  disre- 
gard, which  is  similar  to  hatred,  though  not  partak- 
ing of  the  nature  of  hatretl,  follows  of  itself;  it  is 


*  [It  c.innot  l>e  denied  that  half,  in  the  Scripture,  does 
not  nlwaj'H  di-»criln'  jiositive  fitilupnenoo,  but  occnsionally  a 
less  dodrec,  or,  ninrc  iicouratcly,  the  nbscnco  of  love  ;  c.  g., 
Oon.  xxix.  ;JI  (wliore  iho  orijrinal  text  says:  "Lrah  waa 
hi'liil"  l>y  .laciih— I.  .■.,  less  loved  than  Uacliel  ;  comp.  vor. 
30)  ;  Matt.  vi.  24,  iind  especially  Luke  xiv.  24  ;  compared 
with  Miitt.  x.  .{7,  where  one  evangelist  says  hulilh  no',  and 
the  otiier,  Icvilh  mure.  The  word  undoubtedly,  even  in 
these  pas.iaKes,  taken  exactly,  de.>-cribes  not  merely  an 
absence  of  love,  but  u  fonnal  putting  info  the  background. 
-1'.  S.) 

t  [This  is  nn  allusion  to  the  strictly  literal  and  m'am- 
mnticrd  method  of  exetjesis  adopted  by  Mever.  lint  if  we 
liepart  from  the  letter,  who  is  to  Ih)  the  discemer  of  tho 
spirit!  There  are  but  two  answers:  that  of  Itonie  (eccle- 
siastical antlioriiy),  and  that  of  li^itionaliBin  (individual  hu- 
miin  eonscioasness).  'I'he  strict  interpretation  of  .Meyer  ig 
ndopteil  by  Kntr.schc,  lie  Wette,  and  others.  Unquestion- 
ably the  dealin^rs  of  Cod  with  Ksau  imlicato  something 
positive,  thoiiKh,  Were  it  but  the  deprivation  of  love,  the 
reoults  of  ovii-Uoing  would  still  account  for  tho  historical 
ticts.— ll.J 


CHAPTER  IX.   1-38. 


313 


the  negation  of  the  defect  or  of  the  sin  to  which 
the  hated  individual  cleaves,  but  it  is  not  the  indi- 
vidual to  which  the  defect  or  the  sin  cleaves.  See 
also  Tlioliick,  p.  498,  against  Fritzshe,  Meyer,  De 
Wctte,  and  Philippi. 

It  must  be  obsei'ved,  further,  that,  in  ver.  18,  the 
description  of  fore-ordination  or  predcuinaiion  ac- 
cording to  election,  is  introduced  by  !j  xar'  i/.'/My'ijv 
7T(j6f)Kri<.  The  idea  of  election  refutes  tlie  follow- 
ing claims  to  a  right  in  God's  kingdom  : 

1.  The  claim  by  virtue  of  natural  descent  from 
Abraham,  the  father  of  the  faithful,  especially  l)y 
virtue  of  birthright ;  2.  The  claim  by  virtue  of  de- 
scent from  the  legitimate  marriage  concluded  under 
the  promise ;  3.  The  claim  by  virtue  of  the  merit 
of  works. 

Election  takes  place  freely  : 

1.  Without  regard  to  the  advantage  of  birthright ; 
2.  to  descent  from  a  family  that  is  blessed  ;  3.  to 
community  even  in  a  twin-birth  ;  4.  and  to  the  fore- 
seeing of  works.  And  all  this  is  on  the  simple 
ground  that  election,  a.  voluntarily  determines  the 
indoles  beforehand,  thereby  avoiding  all  appearance 
of  natural  necessity,  the  requirement  of  birthright, 
&c. ;  b.  and,  accordng  to  the  iiidoles  or  economical 
endowment,  it  also  makes  a  TT^oOfrnt;  in  regard  to 
the  economical  call.  [The  sum  of  the  whole  matter, 
detaching  from  it  all  reference  to  the  extent  of  the 
preference  or  the  result  of  the  choice  of  God  in  this 
instance,  is,  that  God  does  exercise  a  prerogative  of 
choice  or  election,  independently  of  all  these  human 
considerations.  That  this  is  the  point  to  which  Paul 
■would  bring  his  readers,  is  evident  from  what  im- 
mediately follows.  A  fuither  proof  that  a  general 
truth  is  also  to  be  drawn  from  it,  is  afforded  by  the 
constant  use  made  of  special  points  in  Old  Testa- 
ment history  and  of  Old  Testament  passages  to  es- 
tablish general  propositions  (see  the  case  of  Pharaoh, 
below,  ver.  IV,  which,  as  far  as  the  individual  in 
question  is  concerned,  has  no  connection  with  the 
discussion,  and  New  Testament  passim).  This  me- 
thod of  citation  is  based  on  the  stability  of  the 
Divine  character ;  to  deny  its  propriety,  is  to  pre- 
sume an  arbitrariness  on  the  part  of  God,  in  far 
greater  opposition  to  His  character  than  is  implied 
even  in  most  fearfully  fatalistic  view  of  this  chap- 
ter.—R.] 

Second  Proof  :  The  antithesis  in  fore-ordinatlon 
{predestination).  God  is  not  unrighteous  in  slioioing 
mercif  and  in  hardening,  and  in  His  manner  of 
uniting  judgment  and  compassion  (vers.  14-18).* 
Meyer :  The  second  part  of  the  theodicy. 

Ver.  14.  What  shall  we  say  then  ?  Is  there 
unrighteousness  \vith  God?  {Ti  ovv  i(JoT<- 
fi  f  V  ;  /I  7)  ai)  ix  i  a  tt  a()  a  r  iZ  d  i  (7) ;  Comp. 
chap.  iii.  5.]  The  Jew  cannot  refute  the  facts  that 
Ishmael  was  rejected  in  spite  of  his  birthright,  and 
that  Esau  was  rejected  in  spite  of  his  legitimacy  and 
birthright.  Just  here  was  a  special  point  of  pride 
with  tl)e  Jew.  But  the  consistency  of  this  fact  liad 
now  appeared  —  the  absolute  freedom  of  Divine 
choice.  Israel's  call  was  itself  the  strongest  witness 
against  the  claims  of  the  Israelites,  because  by  it  the 


*  [Br.  Hodge  considers  this  paragrraph  the  stntement 
»nd  answer  of  the  first  objection  arising  ag;iinst  the  doc- 
trine that  God  is  sovereign  in  the  distribution  of  His  t'iivors, 
ind  th:it  the  ground  of  His  selecting  one  and  rejecting 
anotlieris  not  their  works,  hut  His  ow-n  gooii  pleasure.  A 
second  objection,  he  thinks,  is  stated  in  yer.  19.  So  Meyer, 
Bchuli,  and  most. — K.] 


most  weighty  prejudices  concerning  their  privilege! 
were  overcome.  But,  finally,  God's  promise  to  Re- 
becca  stood  firm,  and  by  tliis  was  decided,  that  the 
works  of  the  Israelites  could  no  more  impose  con- 
ditions  on  God's  free  exercise  of  His  authority,  than 
could  be  done  formerly  by  the  works  of  Jacob,  wliec 
God  assigned  to  him  beforehand  the  domination  over 
his  brother — that  is,  the  theocratic  honor.  It  was 
especially  this  declaration  against  the  claims  estab- 
lished on  works  which  was  calculated  to  excite  the 
Judaizing  spirit,  and  lead  it  to  the  conclusion  that, 
by  so  doing,  God  would  be  unrighteous.  Tliis  is  the 
interpretation  of  Augustine,  Hervteus,  the  majority 
of  Lutheran  writers,  and  Bullinger  and  Tholuck. 
But  even  this  conclusion  he  rejects  with  abhorrence 
(comp.  chap.  hi.  5).  He  adduces  his  proof  imme- 
diately afterwards. 

Meyer  remarks  :  "  This  reason  is  demonstrative, 
in  so  far  as  by  it  tlie  absolute  divhie  worthiness  of 
what  God  predicates  of  himself  must  be  assumed." 
Yet  this  would  be  only  an  absolute  proof  of  author- 
ity. Also,  according  to  Calvin,  the  proof  lies  in 
the  refuting  effect  of  the  biblical  declaration :  satis 
habet,  Scriplurce  iestinwniis  impuros  latraius  com- 
P'scere.*  [In  this  choice  and  preference  of  the  one 
before  the  other  there  is  no  unrighteousness.  For 
he  only  is  unrighteous  who  is  under  obligations  which 
he  does  not  fulfil ;  but  God  is  under  no  obligations 
to  His  creature,  hence  can  do  with  him  what  He 
will  (vers.  14-29).  God's  will  is  the  absolute  and 
eternal  norm  of  righteousness,  and  all  that  He  does 
is  necessarily  right  (Deut.  xxxii.  4).  There  is  no 
norm  of  righteousness  above  Him  to  which  He  is 
subject ;  else  were  God  not  God. — P.  S.]  For  other 
explanations,  see  Tholuck,  pp.  50*7,  508. 

Tholuck  :  "  Origen's  regarding  this  as  the  ob- 
jection of  an  opponent,  and  ver.  15  as  the  Apostle's 
answer,  and  vers.  16-18  as  another  objection  of  the 
opponent,  is  a  result  of  doctrinal  perplexity."  Theo- 
dore of  Mopsvestia,  Storr  [Jerome],  and  Flatt,  re- 
garded vers.  15-18,  and  Heumann,  vers.  15-21,  as 
the  objection  of  an  opponent.  [Vers.  15  and  IV 
are  quotations  from  the  Scripture,  and  hence  cannot 
be  objections  ;  while  vers.  16  and  18  are  not  the 
incorrect  deductions  of  an  opponent  from  these  pas- 
sages, as  Chrysostom  and  Peh^gius  suppose,  but  the 
correct  conclusions  of  the  Apostle  himself. — P.  S.] 

Ver.  15.  For  he  saith  to  Moses,  I  ■will  have 
mercy  on  ■whom  I  have  mercy,  and  I  will 
have  compassion  on  whom  I  have  compassion 
[  '£  /.  f  ;/  ff  (/)  o  V  a  1'  i  ?.  i  b) ,  y.  a  i  oi  y.t  t  i  (t  ti  a  01 
ov  civ  olxtii()o).f  See  Textual  Note  ^*,  iw  the 
Hebrew],  An  answer  to  the  self-proposed  objection 
in  ver.  14,  taken  from  Exod.  xxxiii.  19,  according 
to  the  LXX.  Tiie  form  of  the  original  text  is  evi- 
dently  this  :  I  have  (already)  had  mercy  on  whom  I 
will  have  mercy,  and  I  have  had  compassion  on 
whom  I  will  have  compassion.  The  sense  is  there- 
fore not :  To  whom  I  am  gracious,  to  him  I  am 
gracious ;  that  is,  I  act  in  the  matter  according  to 


*  [Hodge  :  "  It  will  he  remarked  that  these  argrimeuts 
of  the  Apostle  are  founded  on  two  assiimptions.  The  first 
is,  that  the  ScriptureB  are  the  "Word  of  God  ;  and  the  sec- 
ond, that  what  God  actually  does  cannot  be  unrighteous." 
-R.] 

t  [On  the  distinction  between  eAcu  and  oi/cTeipw,  Meyer 
remarks  :  "  The  distinction  between  these  two  words  is  not 
to  be  thus  defined,  with  Tittmnnn,  8yiion.,  p.  C9  f.,  that  eA. 
describes  the  active  mercy,  and  oikt.  the  sympallietic  coin- 
passion;  but  rather,  that  the  same  notion  of  mineriri  ig 
expressed  more,  slr<mghj  by  oixT.  The  latter  is  originally 
the  bewailing  sympathy,  contrasted  with  (xcucapcfeif  (Xen. 
Anoh.,  3,  1,  19).''— B.J 


314 


THE  EPISTLE   OF   PAUL  TO   THE   ROMANS. 


my  own  authority  or  freedom,  unrcstraincdness  (the 
view  of  most  commentators,  also  of  Thohick,  p.  511. 
Yet  the  latter  thus  modifies  his  view,  against  Olshau- 
Ben :  The  question  is  not  concerning  God's  right, 
but  God's  grace;  p.  114),  but:  I  remain  just,  as 
Jehovah,  and  continue  the  work  of  my  grace  where 
I  have  once  revealed  it,  &c. — That  is,  Jehovah  is 
the  God  of  revelation  in  His  consistency,  and  so  are 
also  His  grace  and  His  compassion  consistent.  His 
freedi^m  binds  or  unbinds  itself.  His  freedom  is 
rather  to  be  regarded  as  decision  also.  According 
to  the  connection,  indeed,  the  "'HSni  could  be  re- 
garded as  a  future  form ;  but  this  is  hardly  admis- 
sible in  connection  with  the  simple  future  form  V^^  i 
and  with  the  name  Jehovah  ;  therefore  the  Hebrew 
translations — for  example,  that  of  Philippson — are 
to  no  purpose :  "  And  as  I  have  mercy  on  whom  I 
have  mercy,"  &c. 

In  sense,  the  inverted  form  of  the  LXX.,  from 
which  Paul  quotes,  is  therefore  correct:  /.ai  t).f- 
irj(Tii)  ov  av  t).n~),  x.T.A.  [Alford  objects,  with- 
out sufiSicent  reason,  to  laying  the  stress  on  ov  av, 
whomsoever  ;  but  Paul,  following  the  LXX.,  makes 
it  the  scriptural  expression  of  general  proposition. 
It  is  in  the  form  of  a  Divine  axiom  (Meyer). — R.] 
The  meaning  of  the  name  Jehovah  is :  Divine  con- 
gisfenc'/.  But  Jehovali's  speaking  to  Moses  has  a 
special  significance.  The  Jews  regarded  Moses  as 
the  founder  of  righteousness  by  works.  Paul,  on 
the  contrary,  brings  out  the  fact  that  God  said  to 
this  very  Moses,  that  the  consistency  of  the  work 
of  grace  is  grounded  on  the  beginning  of  the  work 
of  grace  in  free  grace.  [This  view  is  ingenious,  and 
gives  at  least  some  warrant  for  a  reference  to  works, 
which  too  often  is  "  all  supplied  by  the  commenta- 
tor "  (Hodge).  But  it  can  scarcely  be  accepted,  as 
it  seems  to  be  rather  an  effort  to  .avoid  tlian  to  dis- 
cover the  meaning  of  the  passage. — As  regards  the 
thought  of  Divine  consistency,  which  seems  to  rest 
on  the  present  tense  in  the  relative  clauses,  it  is 
scarcely  proper  to  limit  the  meaning  thus.  Certainly 
Meyer  does  not  often  let  a  grammatical  point  escape 
him ;  yet  he  pariiphnwes :  "  '  I  will  have  mercy 
upon  him  who  (in  whatever  given  case)  is  the  object 
of  my  merc.v,'  so  that  I  am  thereby  dependent  on 
nothing  without  myself  That  is  the  sovi-n-ignty  of 
the  Divine  will  of  mercy.  Notice  that  the  future  is 
the  mercy,  proving  itself  in  fact  and  act,  wliieh  God 
accords  in  all  those  cases  where  He  st;iuils  to  the 
persons  affected  in  the  settled  disposition  (present 
i).K7))  of  mercy." — R.] 

Vcr.  Ifi.  So  then  it  is  not  of  him  who  wiU- 
eth,  &c.  [«(>«  01' I'  Tor  {yi).ovroii,  x.r.)..  On 
the  construction,  see  Winer,  p.  .5.")6. — Meyer:  "  From 
the  saying  of  (Jod,  Paul  deduces  the  inference  lying 
therein  respecting  tiie  causality  of  tlie  Divine  sav- 
ing deliverance." — R.]  That  the  entrance  of  human 
good  conduct  in  faith  is  presupposed,  follows  not 
only  from  tiie  analogy  of  Scripture,  but  also  from 
the  antithesis  (ver.  17) ;  though  the  Apostle  here 
precludes  the  delusion  that  n)an,  by  his  willing  and 
running,  can  acquire  that  foundation  of  salvation 
which  |)roceed3  only  from  the  freedom  of  the  com- 
passionate God.  Meyer  :  "  Incorrect,  according  to 
Locke,  and  most  connnentators  ;  Reiche  :  Oi'/.nvT.  is 
probably  chosen  with  regard  to  Abraham's  wish  to 
constitute  Ishmael,  and  Isaac's  wish  to  constitute 
Ks.iu,  the  heir ;  but  riii-/.  is  chosen  with  regunl  to 
Esau's  fruitless  running  home  from  hunting  (The- 
ophyluct  thought  that  it  refers  to  his  running  to  the 


hunt).*  For  Paul,  by  his  ctfja  oi%,  draws  his  con- 
clusion only  from  God's  declaration  pronmlgated  to 
Moses."  But,  by  this  declaration  to  Moses,  Paul 
proves  that  God  was  not  unjust  to  Esau ;  that  is, 
that  God,  acting  in  harmony  with  the  application  of 
that  declaration  to  Judaism,  does  not  now  do  any  in 
justice  t8  one  who  relies  on  righteousness  by  works. 
The  willing  and  rifnning  are  not  rejected  in  them 
selves,  l?ut  are  elsewhere  required  according  to  the 
I)ivine  t'all  (1  Cor.  ix.  24.  Meyer  even  derives  the 
Punning  in  this  passage  from  the  races,  which  ill 
suits  the  connection);  it  is  only  not  recognized  as  the 
causality  of  the  line  of  development.  This  causality 
is  God's  grace  (the  i/.twvToi;  must  here  be  defined 
conformably  to  the  preceding  distinction  between 
D.ftlv  and  otxTfi()n.v). 

[Paul  obviously  draws  an  inference  from  ver. 
15,  with  u()a  oi'v.  The  question  is.  How  gen- 
eral is  that  inference  ?  The  verse  is  certainly  gen- 
eral in  form ;  any  limitation  must  be  found  in  the 
preceding  context,  or  in  the  scope  of  the  Apostle's 
argument.  To  limit  it  to  Esau,  as  an  illustration 
of  God's  method,  is,  in  fact,  to  extend  it,  since 
Esau  was  not  of  the  chosen  people ;  and  what 
God  said  to  Moses,  the  head  of  the  chosen  peo- 
ple, could  not  be  api)licable  to  him,  unless  it  was 
of  general  validity.  To  limit  it  to  the  Jewish  peo- 
ple, because  they  are  under  discussion  in  this  part 
of  the  Epistle,  is  forbidden  by  the  fact  that  the  in- 
stances or  illustrations  are  outside  that  people  (Esau, 
Pharaoh).  The  only  safe  view  is,  that  the  word  to 
Moses  is  a  Divine  axiom,  and  this,  an  inference  of 
universal  application  and  validity.  It  will  not  inter- 
fere with  human  means  in  salvation  ;  for,  if  true,  it 
applies  to  willing  and  running  in  general,  and  yet  it 
stops  no  volition  and  i|ts  accompanying  inxiscular  ex 
ertion.  That  side  of  the  matter  is  not  under  con 
sideration.  Alford  :  "  At  present  the  Apostle  is  em 
ployed  wholly  in  asserting  the  divine  Sovereignty, 
the  glorious  vision  of  which  it  ill  becomes  us  to 
distract  by  contiinial  downward  looks  on  this  earth. 
It  is  most  true  tliat  the  imimdintc  subject  is  the 
national  rcjiction  of  the  Jews ;  but  we  must  con- 
sent to  hold  our  reason  in  abeyance,  if  we  do  not 
recognize  the  inference,  that  the  sovereign  powei 
and  free  election,  here  proved  to  belong  to  God, 
extend  to  evcrii  excrciie  of  His  nieriy — whether 
temporal  or  spiritual,  whether  iii  Providence  or  in 
grace,  whether  national  or  individual.  It  is  in  parts 
of  Scripture  like  this  that  we  must  be  especially  (care- 
ful not  to  fall  short  of  what  is  written — not  fo  allow 
of  any  compromise  of  the  plain  and  awful  words  of 
God's  Spirit,  for  the  sake  of  a  caution  which  He 
himself  does  not  teach  us." — R.] 

The  antithesis  of  the  consistency  of  free  Divine 
grace,  iis  experienced  by  Mo.ses,  is  the  consistency 
of  Divine  judgment  as  revealed  in  the  case  of  Pha- 
raoh. 

Ver.  17.  For  the  Scriptxire  saith  unto  Pha- 
raoh. The  j'uo  announces  the  proof  which  arises 
from  the  uniformity  of  the  same  Divine  dealing  in 
its  rejection.  7'/f  Scripture  saith,  is  a  metonymy 
for  (r'oil  Miii/h  according  to  the  testimnni/  of  Scrip- 
ture. But  the  metonymy  brings  out  prominently 
the  fact  that  this  deehiration  of  God  is  not  merely 
temporary  and  isolated,  but  has  the  force  of  a  per- 
manent  scriptural  declaration,  which  is  applicable  to 

*  (This  is  tho  intorpretntion  of  'Wntson,  and  man^ 
Arminlan  cominontntorB.  Hut  it  is  not  iiecossiiry  to  oppose 
a  viow  so  far-fctchod,  and  forming  such  an  anli-climux  I 
-B.1 


CHAPTER  IX.   1-33. 


315 


all  analogous  cases.  The  scriptural  statement  itself 
is  in  Exod.  ix.  16. 

[Even  for  this  very  purpose  have  I  raised 
thee  up,  fts'  ai'iTo  toTto  iii^yii^^d  ff  i . 
For  the  original  Hebrew,  and  LXX.,  here  altered, 
Bee  Textual  Note  ^^. — R.]  If  we  look  at  the  con- 
nection, Paul's  translation,  e^/yyft^a  fff,  corre- 
sponds in  sense  to  the  original  text,  T^'^ri"l^3.;n  , 
j.ist  as  well  as  the  (JifTtujt'jOrjq  [LXX.]  does,  only  it 
is  more  specific ;  from  which  consideration  Meyer 
again  educes  a  difference  between  the  original  sense 
of  the  Hebrew  text  and  Paul's  meaning.  After  the 
judgment  of  murrain  and  boils  and  blains  (the  fifth 
and  sixth  plagues)  on  Egypt,  we  read,  as  before : 
"  The  Lord  liardened  the  heart  of  Pliaraoh,"  after 
it  had  already  been  said  (Exod.  viii.  15,  32) :  "  Pha- 
raoh hardened  his  heart ; "  and  Moses  must  solemnly 
declare  God's  message  to  Pharaoli,  which,  accord- 
ing to  the  translation  of  Zunz,  is  as  follows  :  "  For 
I  would  already  have  stretched  out  my  hand,  and 
would  have  smitten  thee  and  thy  people  with  pesti- 
lence, so  that  thou  wouldst  be  cut  off  from  the  earth. 
Yet  I  have  allowed  thee  to  exist  on  purpose  to  show 
tliee  my  strength,  and  that  my  name  may  be  extolled 
throughout  all  the  earth."  Evidently  the  transla- 
tion a/low  to  exist  (also  in  Stier),  is  as  much  an  ener- 
vation of  the  causal  T'^yn  as  that  of  the  LXX.  is, 
and  probably  the  cause  in  this  case  is  also  the  same 
hesitation  in  accepting  the  full  strength  of  the 
thought. 

The  expression  is  chiefly  used  of  positive  set- 
ting up  (for  example,  of  statues),  and  then  also  of 
arousing^  awaking  ;  and  even  the  weaker  meaning 
of  allowiiiii  to  exist  has  still  the  sense  of  a  positive 
support.  .  According  to  Meyer,  Paul  makes  the  Scrip- 
ture say:  "'I  have  awakened  thee;'  that  is,  allowed 
tb.ee  to  appear,  to  stand  forth  ;  thy  whole  liistorical 
appearance  has  therefore  been  effected  by  me,"  &c. 
This  interpretation  introduces  a  harsh  fatalistic  sense 
into  the  text;  and  though  Meyer  presents  a  series  of 
expositors  as  saying  the  same  thing,  this  proves  in- 
correct in  the  case  of  the  very  first  one,  Theopliylact, 
who  says:  flq  to  /.daov  i'lyayov.  Bengel:  T'^l^n  ; 
omnibus  locis  omnino  jirceaupponit  subjectum  Jam 
ante  produdiim.  Philippi's  explanation  is:  "I  have 
awakened  thee  to  heiiui,  let  thee  exist."  Calvin's 
interpretation  is  strongest :  Deiis  Pharaonem  a  se 
profedum  elicit,  <ique  banc  impoaitayn  esse  personam. 

The  explanation :  vivum  te  servavi  (Grotius,  Wolf, 
and  others),  at  all  events  weakens  the  force ;  but  it 
is  not  incorrect,  since  it  follows  from  the  connec- 
tion :  "  I  might  have  already  destroyed  thee,  but, 
on  the  contrary,  I  have  once  more  fully  raised  thee 
up."  The  interpretation,  "  I  have  raised  thee  up  to 
opposition  "  (Augustine,  De  Wette  [Haldane,  Hodge: 
have  placed  and  continued  thee  as  my  adversary. 
Alford :  pro  dire  fecit,  excitavit.  Stuart :  have  roused 
thee. — R.],  and  oth^s),  has  one  feature  of  the  con- 
text in  its  favor,  namely,  the  circumstance  that  the 
word,  according  to  the  following  ay.Xrii)vvfv,  appears 
to  be  used  synonymously  with  this  <Tx/.t]()rvfi.  For, 
according  to  the  sense,  this  idea  is  also  comprised  in 
the  Apostle's  translation,  ej/jj'n^a  a f  ;  although 
this  sense  does  not  follow  directly.  He  also  pre- 
sents no  antithesis  to  the  declaration :  I  could  have 
cut  thee  off;  the  sense  is  rather:  I  have,  so  to 
speak,  once  more  erected  and  raised  thee  up  in  thy 
hardened  conduct  from  the  judgment  of  death  to 
which  thou  wast  already  subject,  that  I  might  show 
my  power,  &c. — To  the  more  forcible  construction  of 


the  Apostle  there  also  corresponds  the  fit;  avrc 
rovro,  even  to  this  end ;  instead  of  the  weaker 
tvfxfv  rovrov  of  the  LXX. 

[It  is  perhaps  to  be  expected,  that  in  the  some, 
what  wide  scope  afforded  to  interpreters  by  the  text 
of  the  Hebrew,  LXX.,  and  our  passage,  theological 
bias  will  largely  determine  the  view  of  each.  But 
Paul  has  chosen  the  stronger  term,  and  uses  it  to 
establish  a  strong  position  (ver.  18,  introduced  by 
the  inferential  a^a  ot<v).  Hence,  while  we  must  ut. 
terly  reject,  both  on  lexical  and  theological  grounds, 
the  extreme  supralapsarian  view :  God  created  thee 
— i.  e.,  as  a  hardened  sinner ;  the  view  of  Lango, 
and  many  modern  interpreters,  is  too  weak — is  out 
of  keeping  both  with  tiie  original  transaction  and 
the  use  here  made  of  it.  Tiie  view  of  Meyer  (and 
also  substantially  of  Theophylact,  Beza,  Calvin,  Ben- 
gel,  Reiche,  Olsliausen,  Tholuek,  Philippi,  De  Wette, 
Hofmann,  Schaff,  and  many  others)  is  perhaps  most 
tenable,  and  is  certainly  accordant  with  the  original 
passage.  The  objection  that  it  is  fatalistic,  is  an  ob- 
jection of  too  wide  scope.  Olshausen  :  "  It  by  no 
means  follows  from  this  high  view  of  the  subject, 
that  St.  Paul  intends  to  say  that  God  has  made  Pha- 
raoh evil  by  any  positive  operation ;  but  he  only 
means  that  God  permitted  that  evil  person,  who  of 
his  own  free  will  resisted  all  those  rich  workings  of 
grace  which  were  communicated  in  rich  measure  even 
to  him,  to  come  into  manifestation  at  that  tune,  and 
under  these  circumstances,  in  such  a  form  that  the 
very  evil  which  was  in  him  should  serve  for  the  fur- 
therance of  the  kingdom  of  The  Good  and  the  glory 
of  God."  So  Schaff:  "All  events  of  history,  even 
all  wicked  deeds,  stand  under  the  guidance  of  God, 
without  whose  will  not  a  hair  falls  from  our  heads, 
much  less  is  a  world-historical  fact  accomplished. 
God  does  not  cause  the  evil,  but  He  bends  and 
guides  it  to  His  glory." — A  too  definite,  and  too 
weak  view,  though  a  modification  of  the  correct  one, 
is  that  of  Flatt,  Benecke,  Glockler,  and  Wordsworth : 
placed  thee  as  kinii. — R.] 

That  I  might  show  in  thee  my  power,  and 
that  my  name  might  be  declared  throughout 
all  the  earth.  This  is  a  strengthening  generaliza- 
tion of  the  purpose,  namely,  that  God  will  mako 
Pharaoh,  precisely  in  his  opposition,  a  monument  of 
His  power  (His  majestic  power),  by  allowing  him  to 
perisli.  Pharaoh,  the  hardened  one,  will  only  ex- 
perience  His  crushing  power  and  become  a  monu- 
ment of  it ;  but  in  the  world,  the  glory  of  His  name 
revealing  itself  in  Pharaoh's  case  will  be  declared  to 
Israel  (see  the  Song  of  Moses,  Exod.  xv.). 

Yer.  18.  Therefore  on  whom  he  will  he 
hath  mercy,  and  whom  he  wiU.  he  hardeneth 
[  a  ^  a  0  T)  1'  o  v  0  i).(  I,  i  J.f  il ,  ov  d  k  &  i  /.  f  i 
<Tx  At/p  I'/vf  t].  This  passage,  if  taken  out  of  its 
connection,  seems  to  declare  an  absolute  predestina- 
tion in  the  supralapsarian  sense.  Meyer,  with  oth- 
ers, protests  against  any  mitigation  of  the  sense : 
"  Paul's  simple  and  clear  meaning  is,  that  it  depends 
upon  God"s  free  authority  either  to  bless  by  His 
saving  mercy,  or  to  remove  to  that  spiritual  state  in 
which  one  cannot  be  a  subject  of  His  saving  grace, 
but  only  of  His  o^y/."  Of  the  two  modes  of  view, 
each  of  which,  according  to  him,  forbids  the  other 
— that  Pharaoh  in  part  produces  his  own  hardness 
himself  (Exod.  viii.  15,  32  ;  ix.  34),  and  that  it  in 
part  seems  to  be  wrought  by  God  (Exod.  Iv.  21 ;  vii. 
3,  &c.) — he  makes  the  Apostle  expressly  follow  the 
latter.  [Meyer  is  perhaps  unnecessarily  harsh  in  his 
view,  but  he  intimates  that  it  suits  the  purpose  of 


316 


THE   EPISTLE   OF  PAUL   TO   THE   ROMANS. 


the  Apostle  better  to  choose  tliis  aspect  of  tlie  liard- 
eiiiiig,  lU  tliis  Pliaraoli,  hardened  bji  God,  is  to  liim 
a  type  of  the  Jew  resisting  the  gospel. — K.] 

Tiie  usual  niitigutioiis  of  the  pa.-<suge  are,  at  all 
eveuls,  insutHcieiU,  particularly  the  explanation  : 
t/i'>u/,h  God  jieniii's  hardeu'nr/  ("Origen,  Grotius,  and 
Others),  and  also  the  interpretation  of  a  x  ).  tj  (/ r - 
V  nv  as  duritcr  tractare  (Carpzov,  Sender,  Beck, 
aad  others).  Tholuek,  without  finally  and  positively 
adopting  the  latter  of  these,  adduces  many  special 
grounds  in  its  favor.  [Against  this  untenable  view 
of  a  ■/.'/.  >io  i' V  n. ,  see  Alford  in  loco.  "The  word 
here  refers  to  a  hirderiug^  such  a  fortification  in 
Bin,  tiiat  tiie  sinner  is  unsusceptible  of  all  workings 
of  grace  and  better  influences,  the  removal  into  a 
state  where  conversion  is  either  absolutely  impossi- 
ble, or  rendered  difhcult  in  the  highest  degree.  This 
is  an  act  of  God,  in  so  far  as  He  has  ordained  the 
laws  of  the  development  of  evil,  '  tliat,  i)ropagating 
still,  it  brings  forth  evil,'  (Schiller).  It  is  here 
viewed  as  a  punishment  for  a  previous  self-harden- 
ing of  tiie  sinner"  (Scliaff).  So  Hodge,  wlio  regards 
it  as  "  the  judicial  abandonment  of  men  '  to  a  rep- 
robate mind,'  a  punitive  withdrawing  of  the  influ- 
ences of  His  lioly  S|)irit,  and  the  giving  them  up  to 
the  uncounteracted  operation  of  tiie  liardening  or 
perverting  influences  by  wiiieh  they  are  surrounded." 
So  Wordsworth,  but  less  strongly.  If  objection  be 
made  to  such  a  judicial  process  as  a  work  of  God, 
then  the  same  ditliculty  "  lies  in  the  dnUii  course  of 
His  proiidence,  in  wiiich  we  see  this  hardening  pro- 
cess going  on  in  the  case  of  the  prosperous  ungodly 
man  "  (Alford).  The  facts  remain,  the  solution  is 
lacking,  except  so  far  as  God  plainly  speaks  in  such 
pa.ssages  as  this.  Meyer  objects  to  the  introduction 
of  previous  self-hardening  here.  See  the  clear  and 
thoughtl'ul  note  of  Olshansen  i»  loco. — R.] 

Evidently,  the  context  in  Exod.  ix.  indicates  a 
•postponement  of  the  well-merited  judgment,  in 
which  postponement  God's  long-suffering  is  concur- 
rent (comp.  chap,  xxiii.).  The  definite  sense  of  the 
passage  must  be  ascertained  from  the  connection. 
We  must  here  take  into  consideration  the  follow- 
ing: 

1.  Previously  the  question  was,  God's  purposes 
preceding  the  birth  of  the  children  ;  here,  on  the 
contrary,  it  is  the  free  will  with  which  God  dealt 
with  fixed  characters— Moses,  on  the  one  hand, 
Pharaoh,  on  the  other.  If  this  free  will  be  referi'cd 
to  a  purpose  of  God,  it  is  nevertheless  not  the  pur- 
]>ose  of  el'ction,  wliich  first  settles  personality,  Itut 
the  pur[)ose  of  ordination,  which,  in  the  establish- 
ment of  its  destiny,  presuppo.scs  its  conduct.  Con- 
Bciuently,  because  this  purpose  is  conditional,  God  is 
still  left  free  to  iiave  mercy  on  the  real  Moses,  just 
as  He  is  free  to  harden  the  still  existing  Pharaoh. 

2.  As  the  n.nT)  must  here  be  taken  emphati- 
cally, anil  expresses  the  free  consistency  of  Jehovah 
in  His  mercy  to  Moses  until  He  can  reveal  His  glory 
to  him  (see  Exod.  xxxiii.  19  ff.),  so  has  also  a/./.tj- 
oi'vti,  the  meaning  of  a  continuation  of  the  judg- 
ment of  hardening  to  tlie  extreme,  in  antithesis  to 
the  self-ripened  judgment  of  retribution.  The  more 
Btrongly  we  here  press  the  or  fl  t  /.  n ,  the  more 
will  every  notion  of  an  abstract  authority  be  ex- 
cluded, and  the  stronger  becomes  the  emphasis  on 
the  pure  divinity  of  the  fli-'/.fu'.  [In  othi-r  words, 
the  more  will  the  will  of  God,  in  its  absolute  free- 
dom, appear,  iii)t  as  blind  ariiitrariness,  wliicli  is  the 
very  reverse  (tf  freedom,  but  as  a  will  of  infinite 
love  uud  wisdom.     It  proveri  itself  such  iu  the  spe- 


cial cases  from  which  the  general  proposition  of  thia 
verse  is  drawn. — If  Oe/.nv  (as  is  claimed  by  Pro* 
lessor  Hitchcock,  Lange's  (oiujh.,  Eph.  i.  'J)  always 
implies  spontaneity,  then  the  "  will  "  here,  in  each 
case,  finds  its  justification  in  the  character  of  God, 
which  immediately  prompts  it.  This  may  be  what 
Dr.  Lange  means  by  the  "  pure  divinity  of  the 
OihLi:"—R.] 

3.  The  wliole  of  the  immediate  result  of  this 
fearfully  significant  expression  is,  that  God,  in  HLs 
freedom,  has  mercy  on  Moses  to  the  utmost,  and 
has,  to  the  utmost,  led  Pliaraoh  to  judgment;  that 
Moses  can  thereby  make  no  just  claim  on  the  ground 
of  the  righteousness  of  works,  and  that  Pliaraoh 
can  protest  against  nothing  that  he  might  regard  as 
injustice  done  to  him.  In  this  way  the  justifiable 
use  of  the  passage  quoted  by  Paul  is  determined. 
[The  freedom  of  God  seems  to  be  the  main  thought. 
The  reference  to  the  righteousness  of  works  seema 
needless.  Meyer  concludes  his  exegesis  of  the  pas 
sage  thus :  ''  Undoubtedly  the  will  of  God  is  just 
and  holy,  but  it  is  not  conceived  and  presented  here 
from  this  point  of  view,  but  in  its  itidijjendmce  of 
all  h 'email.  OU.hv  and  r(>t/n,r,  consequently  in  its 
simple  self-origination  (Aseitdt) ;  which  meaning  ia 
to  be  preserved  in  tlie  clear  sharpness  of  o  i'  0  i).fi, 
t/fft."  The  words  certainly  favor  this  view;  we 
need  but  guard  against  inferences,  which  are  drawn, 
not  by  the  Apostle,  but  by  imperfect  human  logic. 
-R.] 

Third  Pkoof  :  Gnd''s  freedom  in  the  actual  call 
to  salvation  (vers.  19-29). 

A.  ITie  proof  from  the  real  relation  (vers. 
19-24). 

Tholuek  regards  this  section  as  the  collective 
carrying  out  of  the  thought,  that  the  excluded  one 
can  bring  no  complaint  against  God,  because  he  is 
left  free  in  liis  conduct,  &c.  ;  but  Meyer,  on  the  con- 
trary, regards  vers.  19-21  as  the  third  part  of  the 
theodicy :  "  Man  is  not  entitled  to  reply  against 
God  by  saying,  'Why  doth  He  yet  find  fault?'  For 
his  relation  to  God  is  as  that  of  the  thing  formed 
to  him  that  formed  it,  or  of  the  vessel  to  tlie  [)otter, 
who  has  power  over  the  clay,  of  the  same  lump  to 
make  one  vessel  unto  honor  and  another  unto  dis- 
honor." *  Then  he  regards  vers.  22-2'.)  as  the  fourth 
part  of  the  theodicy  :  "  God  has  endured  with  much 
loug-suft'ering  the  vessels  of  wratii  fitted  to  destruc- 
tion, in  order  to  make  known  His  glory  on  the  ves- 
sels of  me'-cy,  even  us  Cliristians,  whom  He  hatb 
called,  not  of  the  Jews  only,  but  also  of  the  Gen 
tiles."  We  make  the  following  distinction  :  In  the 
first  case,  in  vers.  C-13,  the  (piestion  was  the  free- 
dom of  Gild's  election  in  ai.titliesis  to  the  human, 
and  especially  to  the  theocratic,  right  of  inheritance. 
Then,  in  vers.  14-19,  the  fpiestion  wa.s,  the  freedom 
of  God's  ordination  in  antithesis  to  the  claims  of 
human  righteousness  by  works  (since  even  Moses 
himself,  the  lawgiver,  did  not  merit  mercy  by  the 
works  of  the  law,  and  Pharaoh  was  visited  by  the 
judgment  of  hardening,  instead  of  by  the  judgment 
of  destruction  which  he  had  merited).  The  Apostle 
now  pa.sses  over  to  God's  freedom  in  His  call. 

[Whatever  be  the  division  adopted,   or  distino- 


♦  [Olshinipen  :  "  The  Apostle  now  Introduoos  nnew  the 
unwise  imiiiirer  of  ver.  H,  in  order  to  find  an  iipoloijy  for 
him-'elf  in  thin  oi'oration  of  God,  even  in  the  foi-ms  of  evil. 
St.  I'iuil  at):iBlios  tliic  arroipinre  with  an  ajipeal  to  tlic  abso- 
late  ihiiracter  of  (led,  wilh  re.'-]iei't  to  whoHo  wiiy.';  the  crea- 
ture nnifit  render  iiii  imfoiiditiiined  Hiilmiission,  even  when 
he  la  not  able  to  oomproheud  tbeui."— K.] 


CHAPTER  IX.    1-38. 


sn 


tions  made,  there  can  be  no  doubt,  that  the  objec- 
tion the  Apostle  here  raises  and  answers  is  one  which 
arises  at  once  against  the  freedom  of  God's  will,  viz., 
that  it  destroys  our  responsibility.  As  this  was  more 
likely  to  arise  as  an  inference  {ovv,  ver.  19,  which 
Beems  to  have  troubled  tlie  transcribers,  however) 
from  what  precedes,  there  is  the  greater  ground  for 
holding  that  the  preceding  verses  refer  to  God's 
Kovereignty,  considered  in  the  light  of  an  objection 
(ver  14),  and  that  this  paragraph  presents  it  in  op- 
position to  another  (ver.  19).  At  all  events,  what- 
ever limitations  and  special  applications  be  made, 
the  reader  now  deals  with  the  passage  (and  subject) 
in  this  more  general  reference,  and  mo^t  commenta- 
tors have  felt  obliged  to  treat  it  thus. — R.] 

Yer.  19.  Thou  wilt  say  then  unto  me 
[epfii,-  fiot  ovv].  The  conclusion  which  the 
Apostle  allows  the  Jew  to  draw  from  the  supposition 
that  he  has  derived  mercy  and  hardness  from  God's 
will,  has  been  urged  by  thousands  against  Calvin's 
predestinarian  system  ;  and,  indeed,  they  have  done 
it  with  much  better  ground  than  the  Jew  could  ob- 
ject to  Paul's  doctrine  ;  yet  they  have  also  in  many 
■ways  mistaken  the  infinite  importance  of  the  exer- 
cise of  Divine  authority  in  human  guidance. 

If  the  whole  development  of  man  is  only  an 
absolute  Divine  decree,  the  objection  in  ver.  19  says  : 
Why  then  doth  he  yet  find  fault  ?  [  t  t  o  i'  r 
e  T  t  fi  i  /(  (f  f  T  «  1- ;  See  Textual  Mote  ".]  How, 
then,  can  God  find  fault  with  man,  or  rebuke  him 
for  being  a  sinner?  By  doing  so.  He  would  even 
contradict  himself.  The  expression  //.  s/t  qi  (rai. 
seems  to  be  purposely  chosen  to  bring  out  the  au- 
thoritative character  in  a  finding  fault,  in  which  the 
question  cannot  be  a  really  objective  relation  to 
guilt.  Tholuck  :  "  Neither  the  charge  against  Pha- 
raoh (Justin  Martyr),  nor  that  of  the  ungodly  in  the 
prophets  (Zwingli,  and  others),  is  meant,  but  the  re- 
buke of  hardening  brought  against  the  Jews.  Every 
penal  declaration  of  revelation  in  general  is  meant, 
in  so  far  as  it  would  not  be  authorized  by  the  doc- 
trine of  fate.  The  Jew  does  not  here  have  in  mind 
God  himself,  but  that  presupposition  of  the  idea  of 
God  which  Paul  seems  to  present.  But  he  never- 
theless betrays  the  inclination  of  the  one  who  relies 
upon  the  righteousnss  of  works  to  find  fault  with 
God.  [In  so  far  as  one  holds  that  notion  of  God, 
however  derived,  which  in  any  way  allows  the  pos- 
sibility of  His  being  the  author  of  evil  in  man,  this 
objection  will  arise.  It  cannot  be  confined  to  the 
Jew  and  his  legal  righteousness.  (Meyer,  De  Wette, 
make  the  objection  general,  while  Philippi  finds  in 
the  sharp  answer  of  ver.  20  a  proof  that  the  objector 
is  a  Jew.) — R.] 

[For  who  resisteth  his  will?  Tw  yaQ 
^ov  ).r^  II  ax  t,  avroti  ri(;  av  &  iarrj  xfv ;  Mey- 
er renders  fioi'/.ijua,  which  Paul  uses  only  here,  dm 
GewoUte  —  i.  e.,  captum  consilium.  It  obviously 
implies  deliberation,  as  fiov).o,iiat  does,  when  prop- 
erly distinguished  from  SDm. — R.]  Though  the 
a,v&i(rrtj/.f  has  the  present  meaning,  yet  the  form 
seems  to  indicate  also  the  thought  that  God  has 
already  anticipated  every  attempt  of  human  oppo- 
sition. The  Apostle  does  not  hasten  to  refute  the 
charge  directly,  by  urging  the  truth  of  the  relations 
of  guilt,  because  this  charge  is  based  upon  such  a 
Dne-sided  standpoint  from  the  overrating  of  human 
action,  that  this  human  boasting  must  first  of  all  be 
prostrated.  Chap.  iii.  5  ff.  proves  that  he  can  also 
reply  to  a  similar  charge  by  an  answer  which  brings 
out  the  ethical  relations  in  harmony  with  the  con- 


nection. But  the  first  task  presented  to  him  her* 
is,  to  go  back  with  the  quarrelsome  Jew  resting  upon 
the  righteousness  of  his  works,  to  the  absolute  de- 
pendence of  man  on  God. 

Ver.  20.  Nay  but,  O  man  [o'  av&Qotn i, 
// f  T'o  r  vy  f  ].  We  translate  the  fi  tvovvyi  with 
Tholuck:  Much  more ;  Meyer  construes  it  as  irony: 
"  Yes,  indeed,  0  man."  Its  most  probable  use  is  to 
strengthen  the  thought :  "  Just  the  opposite,  0  man, 
&c.  Thou  sayest  that  God  disputes  with  thee,  and 
thou  ratlier,  in  thy  erroneous  claims  of  right,  darest 
to  dispute  with  God."  [Still  better,  Alford :  "  Yea, 
rather,  taking  the  ground  from  under  the  previous 
assertion,  and  superseding  it  by  another ;  implying 
that  it  has  a  certain  show  of  truth,  but  that  the 
proper  view  of  the  matter  is  yet  to  be  stated.  It 
thus  conveys  an  intimation  of  rebuke ;  here  with 
severity."  Comp.  chap.  x.  18.  Hodge  :  "  Gross  aa 
is  this  perversion  of  the  Apostle's  doctrine  on  the 
part  of  the  objector,  Paul  at  first  rebukes  the  spirit 
in  which  it  is  made,  before  he  shows  it  to  be  un- 
founded."— R.]  The  0)  avd^MTti  expresses  al- 
ready man's  complete  dependence  on  God  ;  and  this 
is  increased  by  the  ah  ii^  li,  w^ho  art  thou 
l^quantnlus  es  ;  Meyer]. 

[That  repliest  against  God,  6  cuvxcuno- 
y.Qi,v6nivoii  TiJ)  dnj).']  According  to  Theodore 
of  Mopsvestia,  Jerome,  and  others,  Paul,  in  using 
the  avT n n o y. Q i,v 6 n  i V ot;,  refutes  his  opponent 
by  referring  him  to  his  own  words.  His  opponent 
replies  against  God,  and  therefore  opposes  God,  in 
the  very  moment  in  which  he  maintains  that  He  can- 
not be  opposed.  In  that  case,  indeed,  ni^'ovvyt 
would  be  ironical.  This  interpretation  is  ingenious, 
but  too  refined,  and  is  opposed  by  the  following 
words. 

Shall  the  thing  formed  say  to  him  that 
formed  it,  Why  didst  thou  make  me  thus  ? 
\_Mt]  iQ  fl  TO  71  /.da ft  a  roi  nldaavxi,,  Ti 
/( f  inolrjaaq  ourojq  ;  An  echo  of,  but  scarcely 
a  quotation  from,  Isa.  xxix.  16,  though  the  first 
clause  is  found  word  for  word  in  the  LXX. — R.] 
The  explanation  tractasti  (Grotius,  and  others)  i« 
evasive.  The  tcrtium,  comparationis  is  the  causality 
of  him  that  forms,  but  here  as  the  causaUty  of  the 
form.  [It  must  be  observed  that  even  a  pressing 
of  the  figure  cannot  m.ake  n ?.da n  a  mean  the 
thi7ig  created ;  the  reference  is  not  to  original  crea- 
tion, but  to  the  subsequent  ethical  moulding,  from 
which,  of  course,  must  be  excluded  the  mystery  of 
universal  sin  referred  to  in  chap.  v.  12.  That  en- 
ters into  the  nature  of  the  "  clay  "  and  the  "  lump  " 
alike.  Against  Glockler's  argumentatio  a  minorc  ad 
majus :  "  If  a  thing  moulded  cannot  thus  speak, 
much  less  a  man,"  &c.,  see  Meyer  in  loco. — R.] 

Yer.  21.  Hath  not  the  potter  power  over 
the  clay  [?}  ovy.  i'/it,  iiovaiuv  6  KtQa- 
fKvq  Tor  TTTj/.ov.  The  order  indicates  the  two 
emphatic  thoughts  :  1.  That  the  human  subjects  un- 
der discussion  are  as  "  clay  ;  "  "  bis  clay,"  would  be 
a  proper  rendering.  2.  That  God  has  pown' ;  the 
definition  of  that  power  is  given  in  the  next  clause. 
— R.]  Tholuck  :  "  The  potter's  clay  j  regarded  by 
infralapsarianism  as  the  massa  jam  perdita.  The 
vessels  are  not  considered,  as  is  observed  by  the  GL 
ord.  and  Brenz,  as  naturally  part  silver  anl  gold, 
and  part  dirt,  but  altogether  dirt.  Consequently, 
these  expositors  prefer  the  allusion  to  the  Old  Tes- 
tament,  Jer.  xviii.,  where  a  people  already  ruined, 
which  God  forms  into  vessels  of  honor  or  dishonor 
according  to  its  own  conduct,  is  spoken  of ;  the  8U« 


318 


THE   EPISTLE    OF   TAUL   TO   THE   ROMANS. 


pralapsarians,  on  the  contrary,  as  Thomasius,  Estius, 
Calvin,  and  Gornarus,  decide  in  favor  of  an  allusion 
to  Isa.  xxix.  or  xlv.  Siipnilap.sarianism,  to  wit,  re- 
gards the  71  r/  Xoi;  as  the  mas^a  absolute,  qualin  erat 
ma^sa  anrreloruin  (Estius)  and  the  nldafta — which 
the  meaning  of  the  word  is  alleged  to  favor — as  the 
product  of  the  first  creation."  Tholuck  finds  in  the 
simile  only  the  sense  expressed  by  Calvin :  NtiUam 
dei  arbilrio  cmisam  sitperiorem  posse  adduci,  &e. 
For  the  harsh  expressions  of  Calvin,  the  still  harsher 
ones  of  Zwingli,  and  the  equally  mild  ones  of  Bul- 
linger,  see  Tholuck,  p.  528. 

According  to  Ariniiiius,  and  others,  together  with 
Lutherans,  ver.  21  contains  only  a  preliminary  re- 
joinder ;  the  real  answer  follows  in  vers.  22,  23. 
[It  is  indeed  a  preliminary,  but  one  that  "  aims 
rather  at  striking  dumb  the  objector  by  a  statement 
of  God's  undoubted  right,  against  which  it  does  not 
become  us  men  to  murmur,  than  at  unfolding  to  us 
the  actual  state  of  the  case  "  (AlCord).  Comj).  the 
emphatic  order  of  the  words. — R.]  Besides,  Ar- 
minians  and  Socinians  have  asserted  that  here  Paul 
does  not  speak  of  "  an  election  of  individuals,  but 
of  classes — of  believing  Gentiles  "  (Tholuck).* 

According  to  Tholuck,  further,  the  principal 
question  here  is,  What  must  we  understand  by  the 
nti/.o.;  ?  If  we  regard  the  earthy  clod  as  the  real 
clay  from  which  man  was  made,  then  the  work  of 
Him  that  formed  may  be  transferred  to  the  creation 
itscll'.  According  to  this  idea,  indeed,  the  individual 
man  is  only  "  a  specimen  of  the  species."  But  if 
we  regard  God's  breath  as  the  real  substance  of 
man's  formation,  according  to  the  biblical  idea  of 
personality,  Calvinistic  supralap.'sarianism  is  obvi- 
ated. 

[Of  the  same  lump  to  make,  Ix  toT  avrov 
q>  V  o  d  II  a  T  o  1^  noitjffai.  The  power  of  the  potter 
ia  defined  more  closely  by  the  infinitive.  Fairness 
to  the  figure  compels  us  to  identify  the  "  clay  "  and 
the  "  lump."  The  "  clay  "  Is  the  substance  itself ; 
the  "  lump  "  presents  it  as  already  in  use  by  the 
potter  for  his  purpose.  Beyond  this  we  cannot 
press  it.  Meyer  perhaps  goes  too  far,  but  certainly 
is  ju'^tified  in  making  the  nrjlnq  co-extensive  with 
human  nature.  It  must  be  borne  in  mind  that  the 
pott(,'r  is  not  represented  as  making  the  "  clay,"  or 
even  the  "  lump,"  but  as  having  power  "  over  the  clay," 
to  make  vessels  "  of  the  lump." — R.]  Tlie  word  here 
is  not,  as  Meyer  has  properly  remarked  against  Hof- 
mann,  created,  but  made.  lie  understands  by  the 
g>  VII  n/i  a  "  the  V(!ry  same  mass  of  human  nature  in 
and  of  itself"  But  we  can  just  as  little  regard  the 
maxxa  jam  perdifa  as  merely  the  human  race,  pros- 
trated in  the  ruin  of  the  fall.  In  chap.  xi.  ir>  the 
9i'(>aiia  is  the  Jewish  people ;  and,  according  to 
ver.  2t  of  the  present  chapter,  it  is  the  same  wretch- 
ed stitc  of  the  Jew.'!  and  Gentiles  at  the  time  of 
Christ.  God,  as  the  Maker,  in  Jlix  exerrine  of  the 
efficacinm  call  (see  ver.  24),  has  disposed  of  this 
qii'iiniift,  first  of  all,  of  the  Jewish  people.  [Grant- 
ing this  immediate  reference,  we  must  still  avoid 
limiting  the  meaning  of  iiron/ia.  For  even  ver.  24 
includes  the  fientiles,  wliile  the  di>icussion  hitherto 
biS  tmhniced  Lshmacl,  Esau,  and  Pharaoh. — R.] 


•  [ThU  avoids,  but  does  not  meet,  tho  difflcultv.  For 
U  fimpl y  transfiTd  to  Qod's  doir.Rrt  a  distinction  wiiicli  In 
Ti'ality  bclonifs  only  fo  our  .«tiitc  of  jiartinl  knowlt-dRO. 
With  u«,  doalinif  with  classes  is  often  a  mcro  convcnienco 
fomvoidino;  tho  doalinc  with  individual.s.  0<id'g  dcalini; 
vitli  mm  ahvavs  iinplii'S  IIin  tlionmi-li  and  minute  as  well 
M  ]Iid  comprehensive  mode  of  uolioii.— 11.J 


[One  vessel  unto  honor,  and  another  unto 
dishonor,  o  fi  i  v  t  li;  r  i.  /i  ij  v  er  /.  i  T'  o  t; ,  o  di 
fii;  d,Ti,/.iiav.  Meyer  calls  attention  to  the  posi 
tion  of  fli;  tifiTjv.  Even  here,  in  this  strong  as. 
scrtion  of  "power,"  the  preparation  of  the  vessel 
for  h(moral)le  use  is  emphasized. — R.]  But  as  he 
that  forms  does  not  wantonly  destroy  his  (fiQci/ia, 
but,  according  to  his  own  pleasure,  makes  of  it  ves- 
sels unto  honor  and  unto  dishonor — that  is,  vessels 
for  honorable  and  vessels  for  dishonorable  use — so 
also  does  God's  exercise  of  authority  as  Maker  go  no 
further  than  to  appoint  a  great  dilfcrcnce  between 
honorable  and  dishonorable  vessels  of  Uis  call,  .ac- 
cording to  the  personal  conditions  which  have  been 
established  by  the  call  corresponding  to  the  neces- 
sity of  salvation  (2  Tim.  ii.  20  ;  1  Cor.  xii.  23).  But 
the  Apostle  does  not  carry  out  his  figure  in  this 
direction.  lie  rather  urges,  only  for  a  moment,  the 
figure  that  God  has  the  iioi'trin,  the  free  and  full 
power,  wliich  is  at  the  same  time  essentially  the 
right,  to  make  of  the  (fvnana,  of  His  people  [or, 
of  all  people,  of  the  race]  vessels  unto  honor  and 
vessels  unto  dishonor;  but  then,  in  ver.  22,  he  turns 
to  say  that  God  has  never  made  full  use  of  this 
right ;  but  that  He  has  even  endured  with  much 
long-suffering  the  vessels  of  wrath  ^ehich  He,  found 
before  Him,  His  object  being  to  make  known  the 
riches  of  His  glory  on  the  vessels  of  mercy.  In 
ver.  22  there  is  thus  repeated  the  thought  of  ttie 
sentence  awarded  Pharaoh. 

Preliminary  note  on  the  connection  of  vers.  22, 
23.  But  how 'now?  If  God — notwithstanding  His 
perfect  power  and  His  ready  will  to  show  forth  Ilia 
wrath  and  demonstrate  His  power — haa  just  as  much 
adhered  to  Inmself  as  formerly,  when  He  suspended 
the  judgment  of  destruction  on  Pharaoh,  by  endur- 
ing with  much  long-suffering  the  vessels  of  wrath 
fitted  to  destruction,  that  lie  might  make  known  the 
riches  of  His  glory  on  the  vessels  of  mercy,  which 
He  had  afore  prepared  unto  i\()tn — how  does  the 
case  stand  with  the  compkiint  that  He  makes  an 
unrigliteous  use  of  His  power  ?  It  is  evident  that 
the  thought  is  presented  here  which  is  claliorated  in 
chap.  xi.  In  God's  exercise  of  authority,  judgment 
and  long-suffering  are  tmited.  His  judgments  are 
interpositions  of  long-su fieri ng.  In  this  sense  God 
rules  freely  in  His  call,  just  as  He  has  rided  freely 
in  His  election  and  ordination.  With  the  explana- 
tion of  the  divine  economy  of  the  call,  in  vers. 
21-24,  the  Apostle  has  also  now  refuted  (in  ver.  20) 
the  charge  that  (lod  is  represented  as  an  unrighteous 
God.  He  has  therefore  now  proved  the  righteous- 
ness of  divine  ordination,  vers.  15-18,  from  the 
righteousness  of  tiie  divine  call  in  ver.  20 ;  just  as 
he  liad  already  proved  the  righteousness  of  divine 
election  (vers.  9-13)  from  the  righteousness  of  di- 
vine ordination.  The  proof  of  the  freedom  of  <>/»■«- 
tioti  lies  in  the  fact  that  God  is  still  free  also  in  His 
ordin  ition,  and  the  proof  of  the  freedom  of  His 
ordination  lies  in  the  fact  that  He  is  still  free  in  His 
call. 

But  God's  manner  of  using  His  freedom  in  these 
thre»>  stages  testifies  to  the  righteousness  of  Hifl 
dealing'- 

1.  His  exclusion  of  Ishmael,  gives  an  ethical 
character  to  the  whole  series  of  God  s  acta  of  free- 
dom. 

2.  Ilis  hatreil  of  Esau  is  only  relative ;  it  de- 
notes tho  infinite  difference  between  the  two,  lij 
making  the  first-born  theocratically  sulyect  to  th< 
younger. 


CHAPTER   IX.    1-33. 


319 


8.  It  is  plain,  to  one  acquainted  with  the  Scrip- 
tures, that  God's  hardening  of  Pharaoh  resulted 
from  Pharaoh's  having  hardened  himself;  and  be- 
eides  tliis,  there  is  connected  with  this  the  additional 
fact  that,  even  though  Pharaoh  was  ripe  for  the 
judgment  of  destruction,  God  maijves  tlie  useless 
man  still  useful  by  allowing  him  to  exist  longer,  and 
t  by  raising  him  up,  in  order,  tlirough  him,  to  declare 
His  power  and  His  mercy.  With  the  same  consist- 
ency. He  goes  so  far  on  the  side  of  His  exercise  of 
mercy  toward  Moses,  whose  fidelity  is  well  known  to 
Israel,  that  He  can  reveal  to  him  His  glory,  though 
it  is  in  only  a  qualified  manner. 

4.  He  finally  stood  with  the  formative  power  of 
flis  call  to  salvation  over  the  ifVQafia  of  Israel  pre- 
pared in  the  Old  Testament,  and  could  exercise  His 
freedom  by  immediately  allowing  a  Christianity  to 
come  from  it,  by  virtue  of  which  the  whole  qr^afia 
crumbled  into  vessels  of  honor  and  dishonor,  if 
peradventure  He  allowed  new  wine  to  be  poured 
into  the  old  bottles,  or  the  new  cloth  to  be  sewed 
into  the  old  garment.  But  then  it  came  to  pass  that 
another  antithesis  was  prepared  in  the  Israel  of  the 
apostolic  age.  The  representatives  of  the  ifvfjafia 
(not  this  merely)  living  at  that  time,  had  already 
transformed  themselves  in  part  into  vessels  of 
wrath,  fitted  to  destruction  ;  that  is,  to  be  broken  to 
pieces  (see  Ps.  ii.),  but  not  to  be  worn  out  as  vessels 
of  dishonor  ;  and  the  blessing  of  the  Old  Testament 
in  part  exhibited  itself  in  them  by  their  allowing 
themselves  to  be  prepared  by  God  as  vessels  of  glory. 
And  He  w;is  already  about  to  break  those  vessels  of 
wrath  ;  but  as  He  had  once  patiently  made  use  of 
Pharaoh  as  a  means  of  revealing  His  majesty  and 
of  declaring  the  glory  of  His  name,  so  did  He  now 
endure  in  great  long-suffering  the  vessels  of  wrath  ; 
and  for  this  purpose,  that  their  contradiction  might 
be  the  means  for  the  transt'errence  of  salvation  to 
the  Gentiles,  and  for  making  known  the  riches  of 
His  glory  on  the  vessels  of  His  mercy.  In  brief, 
the  turning-point  was  this:  Instead  of  a  qvQana, 
which  could  have  been  simply  used  in  the  antithesis 
of  vessels  of  honor  and  dishonor.  He  found  tliat  the 
developing  process  of  the  covenant  people  of  the 
Old  Testament  had  gone  to  such  an  extreme,  that 
the  people  were  divided  into  vessels  of  wrath  and 
vessels  of  mercy ;  and  instead  of  now  making  a 
stunted  Jewish  Christianity  from  the  whole  sub- 
stance of  the  people,  He  established  that  economy 
of  saving  interposition  explained  by  the  Apostle  in 
chaps.  X.  and  xv. 

Though  Paul  has  principally  allowed  only  the 
factors  of  the  divine  exercise  of  authority  to  appear, 
the  ground  for  this  was,  that  he  had  to  establish  the 
freedom  of  God's  grace  in  relation  to  Judaism.  But 
afterward  he  shows  the  righteousness  of  God  in  re- 
lation to  the  unbelief  of  most  Israelites  and  the  faith 
of  the  Gentiles. 

Meyer  remarks,  in  reference  to  the  idea  avifvoq 
ftq  ru/cTiv  :  "  It  shall  be  either  honored,  so  that  it 
has  Ti/.trjv  (as,  for  for  example,  a  sacred  vase);  or 
else  it  shall  experience  the  opposite,  so  that  arvftla 
adheres  to  it  (as,  for  example,  a  vessel  des'gned  for 
a  low  and  filthy  use)."  According  to  2  Tim.  ii.  20, 
the  difference  in  material  comes  most  prominently 
into  consideration  ;  but  as  far  as  the  use  is  con- 
cerned, the  antithesis  of  sacred  and  uvclean  will 
BufBce.  Tholuck  emphasizes  principally  the  antithe- 
sis :  held  in  honor  and  in  dishonor,  but  maintains 
that  the  simile  is  not  adequate  in  the  very  chief 
point  of  comparison ;   the  potter  moulds  the  clay. 


but  God  is  the  Creator  of  the  creature,  therefor* 
Parens  also  speaks  of  a  comparaiio  a  minori  ad 
majus.  Yet  it  is  incorrectly  assumed  here  that  the 
creation  is  spoken  of. 

The  passage  undoubtedly  cited  by  Paul,*  Isa, 
xxix.  16,  refers  to  a  people  relying  upon  the  right- 
eousness of  their  works  (ver.  13),  on  whom  judg 
ment  is  about  to  be  visited  (ver.  14),  because  they 
claim  a  false  independence  toward  God  in  return  fot 
their  service,  as  if  God  was  related  to  them,  as  an 
equal — as  if  the  potter  were  equal  with  the  clay,  and 
the  clay  could  say :  "  He  has  not  made  me,"  or, 
"  He  does  not  understand  the  matter."  Besides,  the 
vessels  unto  honor  and  unto  dishonor  must  by  dc 
means  be  identified  with  the  vessels  of  wrath  and 
of  mercy,  which  error  has  been  committed  by  De 
Wette,  Tholuck,  Meyer,  and  others. 

Ver  22.  But  what  if  God,  although  willing 
to  show,  &c.  El  dk  Qikwv  6  &f6q,  k.t.X. 
[See  Textual  Note  ".  The  question  as  to  what 
should  be  supplied  with  ft  di,  is  discussed  below. 
Meyer  suggests :  "  Wilt  thou  still  venture  this  re- 
plying against  God  "  (ver.  20). — R.]  Two  opposite 
explanations  here  present  themselves :  because  God 
zvould,  and  although  God  would.  The  sense  in  the 
fomier  case  would  be  tiiis :  the  /naxfJoOv/ila  was 
also  designed  to  enhance  the  penal  judgment  (De 
Wette,  Riickert,  [Calvin],  and  most  commentators). 
But  this  cannot  be  the  purpose  of  the  fiay.QoSt'fiia, 
Though  the  result  is,  that  the  judgment  is  enhanced 
(chap.  ii.  4)  by  the  abuse  of  the  fia/.(j.,  yet  this 
abuse  must  by  no  means  be  referred  to  the  fiaxfjo- 
Ov/iia.  The  translation  although  G^d  would,  adopt- 
ed by  Fritzsclie,  Philippi,  and  Meyer,  is  therefore 
preferable.  [It  may  be  added  in  favor  of  this  view, 
that  it  gives  to  0  eJ.tnv  the  meaning  of  willing— 
i.  e.,  spontaneous  will.  It  was  the  will  of  God, 
growing  out  of  His  character,  to  show  His  wrath, 
&e.,  but  He  endured  notwithstanding,  &c.  The  oth- 
er view  takes  the  participle  in  the  sense  of  purpos- 
ing, which  is  too  strong.  The  passage  then  presents 
another  answer  to  the  objection  of  injustice,  by 
showing  how  the  sovereign  God  had  withheld  the 
exercise  of  a  power  in  accordance  with  His  holy 
will.  The  position  of  Q-U.mv,  as  Meyer  remarks, 
prepares  the  way  for  the  strong  contrast  with  "  long- 
suffering." — R.]  If  we  look  at  the  explanatory  par- 
allels in  Pharaoh's  history,  the  meaning  becomes 
more  definite  :  although,  and  since  alrcadg  ;  as  God 
was  already  about  to  do.  In  Exod.  ix.  15,  God  said 
to  Pharaoh  :  "  For  now  I  will  stretch  out  my  hand." 
Likewise  the  aorists  ivdilSacrOai,  yvm^laat, 
indicate  this  readiness  of  judgment,  not  less  than 
the  expression  a/.tvij  oQyT/q,  and  especially  xa 
r  Vj  Q  TOG  i-iiv  a.  The  expression:  trdi  iiaaOat 
r  ij  V  0  Q  y  ij  V  aai  yv«)(ji(Tce.i,  to  ()  i<  v  ar  6  v  ,}^ 
in  connection  with  the  foregoing,  forcibly  calls  to 
mind  the  declaration  to  Pharaoh. 

Endured  [  JJ  r  f  y  x  f  r  ].  Chrysostom,  De  Wette, 
and  others,  have  referred  this  to  the  lonir-forbearing 
with  Pharaoh  ;  but  Meyer,  on  the  other  hand,  is  of 
the  opinion  that  Paul  means  the  previous  time  in 
general  (which  shall  thus  continue  under  this  divine 

*  [It  is  more  of  an  echo  than  a  citation ;  hencfi  there 
cannot  be  much  stress  laid  upon  the  context  in  Isa.  xxix. 
Certainly  Paul,  who  is  one  of  the  freest  gcneralizers  from 
the  Scripture  texts  he  refers  to,  must  not  be  limited  here, 
where  he  has  introduced  such  a  variety  of  persons  into  hia 
discussion. — K.] 

t  [to  SvvaTov  avTov,  what  was  posnibl'-  for  Him, 
what  He  was  in  a  condition  to  do,    Comp.  chap.  viid.  3 
Meyer-— E.] 


320 


THE   EPISTLE   OF   PAUL   TO   THE   ROMANS. 


forbearance  until  the  second  coming  of  Christ).  But 
it  is  eviilent  from  the  coiuu'Ctioii,  that  the  Apostle 
means  the  hariieneil  portion  of  tiie  Isiaeiiti?h  peo- 
ple. This  is  the  view  of  Tholiick,  with  others ; 
"  The  unbelieving  Jews  at  Christ's  time  ;  there  can 
only  be  a  mere  allusion  to  Pharaoh."  For  other 
TJews,  see  Tholuck.* 

The  whole  passage  in  vers.  '22,  23  has  occasioned 
very  great  difficulty.  The  princi|)al  dilliculty  lies  in 
the  fiet  that  it  is  not  fully  carrieil  out;  that  is,  that 
it  is  an  aposiopesis.  Augustine  [so  Stuart]  oiiserved 
this,  and  siij)plied  a  av  ti's  ti  from  ver.  20  ;  but 
the  better  supplement  would  be:  /(/}  ctAixiu  Tiaon 
tut  Onjt;  /itj  j'f  roiTo  !  in  ver.  14;  but  the  best  of 
all  would  be  chap.  xi.  33. 

The  second  difficulty  lies  in  the  brief  expression 
ttai  'iva,  which  at  once  becomes  clear  by  liringing 
over  once  more  the  »/i'fyzf  r  :  has  also  endured  in 
order  to.  For  the  dirterent  attempts  at  construction, 
Bee  Tholuck  (p.  535). 

1.  /vat  Y  V 10  o  i  a  a  I ,  xal  'iva  yrM()t<T'»]; 
the  xai — xal  just  as  well — as  also  (Nosselt,  Bauin- 
garten-Crusius).  Tholuck  says,  on  the  contrary,  that 
in  that  case  it  must  read  &i).mv  /Jr. 

2.  Our  own  construction.  The  xai  'iva,  is  con- 
nected to  ;,' r  f  J' z  f )',  so  that  the  latter  expresses  a 
double  i)urpose  (thus  Calvin,  Grotiu.s,  Winer,  Meyer, 
and  others).f  Tholuck  does  not  regard  the  connec- 
tion by  the  mere  xai  as  sufficient,  and  thinks,  with 
Baumgarten-Crusius,  that  this  construction  does  not 
present  any  clear  thought.  But  the  previous  for- 
mation of  this  clear  thought  is  already  contained  in 
Exod.  ix.  15,  16. 

3.  Beza,  lliickert,  and  Fritzsche,  have  connected 
nai  'iva  to  the  participial  y.  ar  rj  (>  t  iff /i  iva  : 
"  those  who  are  originally  (!)  appointed  to  destruc- 
tion,,for //«*?  purpose,"  &c.  The  xai  would  thus  be 
epexegetical,  which  iS  Calvin's  view  of  the  thought ; 
but  the  xatt](>ri'<Tft.  is  totally  misconstrued. 
Tholuck  proceeds,  with  Philippi,  from  the  unwar- 
ranted supposition,  that  the  Apostle  is  expected  to 
treat  uniformly  of  liod's  dealings  in  relation  to  the 
axtiri  fu  ciTi-iitav  and  to  the  fit;  niiijv;  he  re- 
quires, accordingly,  the  acceptation  of  a  double  ana- 
coluthon.  "  .M<'ntally,  the  Apostle  must  have  writ- 
ten," &c.  Philippi  interprets  similarly.  (See  Meyer 
[p.  380,  4th  ed.],  on  the  contrary).  On  the  con- 
structions of  Ilofiiiann,  Bengcl,  SchiJttgen,  and  Beck, 
see  Tholuck,  p.  533  If. 

With  much  long-suffering  [iv  nof.Xii  fia- 
K()  o  i>  i'/(  t  «  ].  On  the;  olj-curity  of  the  i^ea  of 
ft  •ix()o  ft  I'll  ia  in  Calvin,  ilofmann,  and  others  (as 
only   mi.'aning  wailing  /or),  see   Tholuck,  p.   530. 

•  [The  more  general  reference  is  to  he  T>rcferre4,  and,  in 
any  o-'ise,  il  is  Implietl ;  for  nil  anto-Chri!<tian  historj'  innst 
bo  viewed  a^  loiij^-sufforin;?  forbcaraune  in  prcpiinition  for 
the  great  revelation  of  mercy.  Uoinp.  all  the  more  modern 
conceptions  of  nnciont  lil-tory. — H.] 

t  [Alford  ai,'rc'-»  siilist.nntially  with  this  view,  but  pre- 
fers to  supply  :  "what  if  this  took  place,"  this  hv  0i\ti, 
i\tti.  Ho  Kwald.  Dr.  IIodKc  join-*  thi-  clausie  with 
ftAatf,   or  rather  supplies  dcAuc,   which  is  not  only  ol>- 

J'ecfionablc  on  the  tfrounOs  he  statcn  him-^elf,  but  untenable, 
f  the  8en.se  bo  :  ulUvnigh  willing.  Stiuirt  takes  ft  somewhat 
diffc'cnt  view  of  tin-  synt.ix  of  the  piissnpe,  and  para- 
rl.r.-.iea  the  whole:  "If  Ood,  in  order  that  lie  miifht  e.\- 
nibil  IIi»  primitive  justice  and  sovcreiRn  power,  endures 
iritli  m«:h  jonif-sutfc'rinj^  the  wickeilness  of  the  impenitent 
And  rebellious  who  are  worthy  of  Itis  divine  inditrnation  ; 
anri  if  He  has  detennined  to  exhibit  His  rich  (jrace  toward 
the  subji'cts  of  His  meicy  whom  Ho  has  prepared  for 
glorv,  even  toward  us  whom  He  has  called,  Oentiles  a»  well 
as  Jews;  who  art  thou,"  &c.  This  gives  too  strong  a 
meaning  to  Oikutv,  and  Is  nut  so  justifiiible  grammatioully 
lu  the  view  of  Moyer  and  Lange. — K.J 


[The  immediate  end  of  the  long-.sufferng  is  un 
doubtedly  to  lead  to  repentance  (comp.  chap.  ii.  4 ; 
2  Peter  iii.  9,  15).  But,  as  Alford  intimates,  thi.i  ii 
a  mystery  we  cannot  fathom. — R.] 

Vessels  of  vrrath  {axtvrj  oQyTjq.  "Without 
the  article.  Not  some,  but  these  in  general,  limited, 
however,  by  the  clause  immediately  following.  The 
absence  of  the  article  seems  also  to  favor  Lange'a 
distinction  between  "  vessels  unto  dishonor "  and 
"vessels  of  wrath." — R.]  Meyer:  Visseli  full  of 
Di'iue  irrnth.  Totally  foreign  to  the  figure  !  Ves 
sels  filled  with  Divine  wrath  would  be  very  holy  and 
honorable,  as  is  the  case  with  the  vials  of  wrath  in 
the  hand  of  the  angels,  in  John's  Revehition.  De 
Wette  and  Tholuck  correctly  expain :  Objects  of 
divine  wrath.  [So  Stuart,  Hodge.  The  latter  taketi 
the  phrase  as  a  modification  of  "  vessels  unto  dis- 
honor "  (ver.  21). — R.]  Tiie  figure  in  Ps.  ii.  9  ia 
undoubtedly  closely  connected  with  the  Apostle's 
thought. 

Fitted  for  destruction  [  x  «  t  i/  ^  t  t  ff  /i  t  r  a 
lit;  aniii/.nav.  This  is  the  end  for  which  they 
are  fitted ;  the  divine  oQyi^  is  accomplished  in  the 
aniithux. — R.]  Meyer :  "  But  the  subject  who  has 
fitted  them  for  the  anuihia  is  God  (see  ver.  20  f.), 
and  the  insertion  of  any  clause  by  which  it  should 
follow  that  they  had  fitted  them.^elves  for  destruc- 
tion (see  Chrysostom,  Theodoret,  GCcumenius,  and 
Theophylaet)  is  contrary  to  both  the  word  and  the 
context'  (likewise  Tholuck  and  De  Wette)."  But 
apart  from  the  fact  that,  according  to  Ps.  ii.,  God 
breaks  the  vessels  of  wrath,  but  does  not  tnake  them, 
the  very  decided  change  of  the  verb  as  well  as  of 
the  tense  (xar  ^j (JTi^rr/i  iva  ;  a  tt/j  o  >;to «'/»  a- 
(Ttr)  should  guard  the  exegetical  author,  who  usu- 
ally holds  so  tenaciously  to  the  letter,  against  this  con- 
clusicm.  It  is  a  much  bolder  leap  from  the  thought : 
God  has  {hcp'iu'/r  to  make  vessels  unto  dishonor,  to 
the  thought  that  He  has  made  the  vessels  of  wroth. 
In  the  Apostle's  choice  of  verbs  he  presents  three 
antitheses,  which  may  well  serve  as  a  warning  to  the 
expositor. 

1.  The  verbs  themselves  are  different :  in  xw- 
Ta^jTi'-m',  the  idea  of  making  read;/  predominates 
(to  make  fitting,  to  prepare  fully) ;  but  in  the  ex- 
pression nnntToi/nxCuv,  on  the  contrary,  the  idea 
of  the  previous  preparaticm  predominates. 

2.  The  former  word  is  put  in  the  perfect,  and 
(which  strengthens  the  matter)  also  in  the  participle; 
but  the  Litter,  being  in  the  form  of  the  aorist,  is 
much  less  conclusive. 

3.  The  former  stands  irrelatively  in  the  pa.«sive  ; 
but  the  latter,  as  activity,  is  referred  definitely  to 
Ood.  Such  antitheses  as  these  cannot  be  dusteil  off 
by  the  brusii  of  n)ere  assurance.  Therefore  a  third 
explanation  takes  its  place  beside  the  two  foregoing 
ones.  According  to  this  last,  the  perfect  passive 
participle  must  be  read  as  a  verl>al  adjective  :  pre- 
pared, ready,  as  in  Luke  vi.  40,  kc  (Grotius,  Calo« 
vius.  Beck).  The  Ajjostle  has  probably  chosen  tliia 
form,  because  this  beinff  read;/  ccrUiinly  arises  from 
a  continual  reciprocal  action  between  himiaii  sin  and 
the  Divine  judgment  of  blindness  and  hardness.  De 
Wette  has  an  uncertain  stninise  of  this  relation : 
"  The  mixture  of  two  diflerent  modes  of  view — the 
moral  and  the  absolute — undoubletlly  occurs  hero. 
It  must  also  be  granted  that  the  Apostle  avoids  say- 
ing:  it  xarijQTiiTf  »i's  a;rr/»/.fi.«i'  (Hengel)."  The 
"  two  <iifTerent  modes  of  view  "  are  reduced  to  one, 
according  to  which  every  development  of  sin  is  a 
network  of  huiuaii  oQ'ences  and   Divine  judgmentd| 


CHAPTER  IX.   1-38. 


321 


tliat  art>  related  to  each  other  as  chain  and  clasp.* 
The  poet  know  so  nething  more  of  the  matter  than 
many  theologians,  when  he  wrote:  "This  is  the  very 
curse  of  evil  deed,"  &c. ;  f  provided  the  curse  is  not 
taken  as  a  niere  phrase. 

Ver.  2.>.  And  that  he  might  make  knotinj 
the  riches,  kc.  [  z  a  t  i  r  a  y  v  to  (>  I  a  >>]  t  6  v 
7T/.o7<rov,  x.rJ..  As  intimated  above,  this  clause 
filiould  be  connected  (Winer,  p.  530)  with  endured. 
Kai,  also.  This  was  a  second  purpose  of  God's 
endurance,  undoubtedly  the  more  important  one. 
*7»'a  is  of  course  telic. — TT^;  So^rjt;  avrov. 
The  divine  majesty  in  its  beneficent  glory.  Bengel : 
Bonitatix^  (/ratke,  misericordice,  sap  eniia;,  omvipo- 
ierUice. — R.]  The  riches  of  glory  form  the  antithe- 
sis to  another  miserable  train  of  development  which 
Christanity  could  conceivably  have  taken  withhi  the 
Jewish  nationality.  The  riches  of  glory  are  tlie  train 
of  development  which  God  has  actually  taken,  the 
course  of  the  unlimited  universality  of  evangeliza- 
tion, to  the  wonderful  blessing  of  which,  in  the  con 
version  of  the  Gentiles,  the  Apostle  ever  reverts 
with  rapt  adoration  (chap.  x.  11 ;  Eph.  iii.  5-10 ; 
Col.  i.  6,  20  ff.). 

According  to  Calvin,  the  ;tAo(*to?  t^?  Soir/c 
should  be  so  regarded  that  by  the  inieritus  ivipro- 
borum  eo  lucufentius  divince  bonitatis,  erga  eledos 
ampTdudo,  should  be  strengthened.  According  to 
the  explanation  of  the  Remonstrants,  the  liberalitas 
of  God  should  be  made  known  on  the  vessels  of 
mercy,  by  the  comparison  of  this  mercy  with  the 
patient  endurance  with  the  vessels  of  wrath.  Ac- 
cording to  Fritzsche,  the  purpose  of  sparing  the  Jews 
was,  that  many  of  them  might  be  converted  before 
the  second  coming  of  Christ.  But  this  overlooks 
ver.  24,  according  to  wliieh  the  vessels  of  mercy  are 
only  partly  among  the  Jews.:t^  Meyer  must  also  here 
mix  up  the  second  coming  of  Christ,  which  he  every- 
where brings  in,  just  as  Dr.  Baur  does  Clemens  Ro- 
manus.  "  If,  namely,  God  had  not  so  patiently  en- 
dured the  (T/.ivr]  6()yrc,  but  had  already  permitted 
His  penal  judgment  to  be  inflicted  upon  them  (which 
must  be  regarded  together  with  the  second  coming). 
He  would  have  had  no  period  to  declare  His  glory 
to  a/.tvf(n  ulorq?''  That  is,  the  final  judgment,  as 
the  end  of  the  period  of  mercy,  would  have  been 
present  with  the  complete  penal  judgment  of  Israel. 
The  destruction  of  Jerusalem  has  certainly  become 
a  type  of  the  end  of  the  world,  but  not  the  end  of 
the  world  itself.  The  Apostle  presents  us  with  an 
excellent  exegesis  of  his  own  language,  in  chap.  xi. 
11,  25  ;  Acts  xiii.  46,  and  also  in  other  passages. 

[On  vessels  of  mercy,  tni  ffxfvrj  i/.iovq. 
Not  to  (De  Wette),  but  toicard,  with  rec/ard  to,  de- 
pending on  TT  A  0  r  T  o  V  ( Alford).  The  making  known 
is  represen  ;d  by  the  preposition  as  stretching  itself 

*  [Stuart  and  Alford  adop  the  stronger  view  as  inherent 
"in  cny  consiflent  bi'tief  of  an  oinnipot'nt  and  nmnisci':»f 
G'd ;"  Dr.  Hodse  gives  both,  without  deflnitu'y  accepting 
either.  Schaff  deems- the  stronger  view  the  more  natural 
one,  but  guards  it,  as  must  he  done,  against  supra-hip- 
B.irianism,  &c.  But  the  differences  noted  by  Dr.  Lange 
must  be  carefully  kept  in  view,  as  themselves  guarding 
against  en-oneous  inferences. — B..] 

t  ["  Dax  EBEN  ist  der  F.  uch  der  hosun  TJiat 

Dis  sii>,,forlzrugi'nd,  immer  Boses  mu-ts  gebaren.'" 
This  quotation,   almost  a  provf.rb  in   German   literature, 
is  from  Schiller,  Die  Piccolomini.  V.  Aufg.,  I  Auflr.    Cole- 
ridge, who  has  taken  some  libirties  in  arrangement,  puts  it 
in  Act  iii.  Scone  1.— B.] 

X  [The  advantage  of  a  general  reference  throughout  the 
passage  is  apparent  here.  The  making  knoion  is  Bi)U\i.ih\n^ 
which  occurs  not  once,  but  throuahout  the  whole  gospel 
dispensation,  as  ver.  24  requires. — £.] 

21 


over  the  men  who  are  its  objects  (Meyer).  The  lat- 
ter is  preferable.  We  have  no  right  to  limit  th» 
"  vessels  of  mercy  "  to  any  period.  The  preceding 
context  would  extend  the  reference  to  the  times  of 
Pharaoh  ;  ver.  24  extends  it  indefinitely  into  the 
Christian  dispensation. — R.] 

Which  he  before  prepared  for  glory  [a 
TZQotjrolfiaaiv  fl(;  doJar.  The  verb  is  aoriat, 
and  refers  to  a  definite  past  apt.  The  two  mean- 
ings suggested  by  Hodge :  (1.)  predestined ;  (2.) 
prepared  by  providence  and  grace  (also  that  of  Ols- 
hausen),  are  both  objectionable  (1.)  Because  it  ii 
not  the  proper  meaning  of  the  word  ;  (2.)  because 
this  is  a  continued  work,  and  would  be  indicated  by 
the  perfect,  as  was  the  "  fitted  "  of  ver.  22.  It 
probably  refers  to  the  actual  constitution  of  the  in- 
dividual, as  clay  in  the  hands  of  the  potter,  the  re- 
sult of  election,  yet  distinct  from  it. — There  is  no 
necessity  for  limiting  doia  to  "the  glory  of  the  new 
covenant."  Its  antithesis,  "  destruction,"  shows  that 
it  means  the  full  and  eternal  glory  of  the  kingdom 
of  heaven. — R.]  Tholuck  translates,  "which  he  had 
prepared  unto  glory  from  eternity,"  and  remarks 
thereon,  that,  from  the  circumstance  that  the  xa- 
rrj(JTi(Tfnva  does  not  have  the  n(io  before  it,  it  fol- 
lows that  Paul  could  have  thought  only  of  a  decretum 
eleciionh,  but  not  reprohationis.  [So  Schaff]  Tho- 
luck cites,  in  favor  of  this  explanation,  Eph.  ii.  10  ; 
Matt.  xxiv.  34  ;  Book  of  Wisdom  viii.  9. 

We  must  remark,  in  relation  to  the  middle  pas- 
sage, that  the  expression :  Baavhia  npofroiftaa- 
/itvt]  anb  y.arapolTji;  y.oa'/iov  must  not  be  con- 
founded with  n(t'o  y.araiiolTji;  y.odfi.  From  the 
foundation  of  the  world,  through  all  time,  God  has 
labored  for  the  preparation  of  the  paaihla.  The 
thought,  God  has  ehoien  us  before  the  foimdation  of 
the  world,  is  also  totally  different  from  the  infeasible 
thought,  that  He  prepared  us  foi"  glory  before  the 
foundation  of  the  world.  The  two  other  passages 
are  equally  undemonstrative.  Meyer  explains,  more 
correctly,  thus:  God  formed  the  a/.ivii  l/foi?  there- 
for beforehand,  before  He  declared  His  glory  on 
them.  But  the  general  statement  has  also  its  his- 
torical relation  on  this  side.  As  the  true  children 
of  faith  among  the  Jews  came  out  from  the  peda- 
gogical exclusion  under  the  law  (Gal.  iii.  23),  they 
found  themselves  already  prepared  for  the  glory  of 
the  new  covenant,  and  the  preparatory  mercy  had 
operated  in  this  direction  on  even  many  of  the  Gen- 
tiles (chap.  ii.  14,  15).  The  TTloTnoq  Ttj(;  66it]q 
came  over  them  like  the  rising  of  a  spiritual  sun — 
inl  ay.fvt]  iXeovi;,  the  vessels  which  were  sub- 
jects of  mercy — and  went  far  beyond  them  in  the 
evangelization  of  the  Gentile  world  (see  Isa.  ix.  2). 

[The  paraphrase  of  Meyer  (vers.  22,  23)  is  ap- 
pended, as  a  clear  resume  of  the  exegesis,  for  the 
most  part  supported  in  the  notes  above.  "  But  if 
God,  notwithstanding  His  holy  will  leads  Him,  not 
to  allow  His  anger  and  His  power  to  remain  un 
proven,  but  to  make  it  known  in  act,  has  yet,  with 
great  long-suffering,  endured  such  as  were  objects 
of  His  wi'ath,  and  spared  them  the  destruction,  into 
which  they  are,  however,  fitted  and  prepared  to  fall, 
as  a  vessel  from  the  potter — endured  and  spared  not 
merely  as  a  proof  of  such  great  long-suffering  toward 
them,  but  also  with  the  purpose  of  making  known, 
during  the  continuance  of  this  forbearance,  the  ful 
ness  of  His  glorious  perfection  upon  such  as  are  ob- 
jects of  His  mercy,  whom  He  had  before  prepared, 
as  a  potter  a  Tessel,  and  enabled  for  eternal  glory." 

R.] 


322 


THE    EPISTLE    OF   PAUL    TO    THE    ROMANS. 


Ver.  24.   As   such  he    also    called    us,  &c. 

fo"?  xat  ixa/.  ffffi'  »}.i(«s,  K.r.)..  Ovi;,  of 
which  kifd,  (jualex  (Alfbi<l).  yl.s  such  vessels  of 
mercy,  //(-  aho,  bosiiles  preparing,  called  us.  He 
prepared  ns  among  these  vessels  of  mercy,  and,  as 
Buei),  lia.-!  :il.-o  called  us,  Jews  and  Gentiles.  Stuart 
would  supply  here  tj/.i^at,  lie  showed  mercy  to  us ; 
but  this  is  unnecessary  in  our  view  of  the  passage. 
— B.j  Wo  have  already  brought  out  the  meaning 
of  ilie  i/.d).nTtv  iu  this  passage.  It  denotes  the 
fundamental  thought  of  vers.  21-23,  God's  freedom 
in  the  economy  of  His  call.  Even  us  lohom ;  namely, 
even  such  vessels  of  mercy ;  or  theij^  even  whom. 
That  is,  in  tiiia  characteristic  He  has  also  called  us 
(not  us  also)  as  vessels  of  mercy.  Because  He  had 
in  mind  only  objects  of  mercy,  but  not  the  probable 
legitimate  heirs,  He  could,  consistently  with  His 
mercy,  conformably  to  His  preparatory  mercy,  really 
call  us : 

Not  from  amiong  the  Jews  only,  but  also 
from  among  the  Gentiles.  \_Ei,  from  among. 
Bengtl  notes  the  reference  to  the  call  of  the  Jew 
as  :  "  No;i  eo  ipso  vocotm,  quod  JiuIcbhs  est,  sed  ex 
Judeeis."  Hodge  :  "  How  miturally  does  the  Apos- 
tle here  return  to  the  main  subject  of  discussion  ! 
How  skilfully  is  the  conclusion  brought  out  at  which 
he  has  continually  aimed  !  " — K.] 

B.  The  third  proof,  corrohoraf^d  by  witnesses 
of  the  Old  Testament  (vers.  25-29).* 

Ver.  25.  As  he  saith  also  in  Hosea  [ox; 
*ai  iv,  x.r.?..  See  Textual  X"te  ^',  for  the  He- 
brew text.  Alford  suggests,  very  properly,  that 
xai  implies  "that  the  matter  in  hand  was  not  that 
directly  prophesied  in  the  citation,  but  one  analo- 
gous to  it."  See  below. — R.]  The  call  of  believ- 
ing Gentiles  is  not  only  a  A'ew  Testament  fact,  but  is 
also  attested  previously  in  the  Old  Testament. — In 
Hosea  ;  that  is,  in  the  Book  of  Hosea. — The  first 
quotation  is  Hosea  ii.  23  :  "  And  I  will  say  to  them 
which  were  not  my  people  (see  Hosea  i.  9),  Thott 
art  my  people ;  and  they  shall  say,  Thou  art  my 
Oody  I'aul  has  clianged  the  foro  of  the  original 
text  anil  the  LXX.  into  z«/.  taoi,  which,  accord- 
ing to  Kritzsche  and  Meyer,  should  mean,  /  will  call. 
Tholuek,  on  the  contrary,  properly  observes  tliat  the 
laming  of  them  already  comprises  the  call.  Paul 
has  also  left  out  the  aildition,  irrelevant  in  this  con- 
nection: "And  they  shall  .say,  'Thou  art  my  God;'" 
while,  oil  the  other  hand,  he  has,  in  conformity  with 
the  sense,  correctly  supjjlied  the  clause  y.ai  Tfjv 
o  I'l  y.  rj  yet  71  >j  /i  i  v  tjv ,  k.t.)..,  in  harmony  with 
Hosea  i.  0,  referred  to  Hosea  ii.  23. | 

Ver.  2C>.  And  it  shall  come  to  pass,  that  in 
the  place.     [See   Textual  JS'ote  •'\]     In  order  to 


*  The  reference  is  undonbtedlv  to  the  symbolical  names 
pvcn  by  the  prophet  lo  a  son  nncl  dauglitiT  (chiip.  i.  (5,  i))  : 
IiO-Ammi  (imt  my  people)  and  Li-Ruliamnh  (not  havinpr 
obta  ned  mercy),  "in  order  of  birt'i  the  latter  stands  first, 
asWQll  a"  in  til''  pn.'isnpe  cittd.  This  is  natural,  as  visible 
deprlvr.tiiin  of  meri'y  prceedes  visilile  rojection  ns  n  people. 
The  ApoHtlc  inverts  the  order,  however,  perhaps  beciiuso 
the  pnimimnt  thought  for  his  purpose  was  :  not  my  peo- 
plf,  dfn.— U.l 

f  (Dr.  Hod;;*  makes  of  vero.  25-33  a  distinct  section,  in 
which  the  AjK)sile  eoiifirms  the  nosition  of  the  preceding 
section  (the  freedom  of  God  in  selectinif  tho  idijeets  of  His 
morcj')  by  deolarntions  of  the  Old  Test-iment  (1.)  vers.  'i\ 
26.  Aiii'iis  were  to  be  included  in  the  kin^'dom  of  (lod ; 
(•.'.)  Only  a  small  portion  of  the  Israelites  should  attnin  to 
these  ble>-in(;s  ;  vers.  27-29;  hinee  the  Oentiles  are  &-dled, 
knd  the  .Jews  ns  Jews  rejei'ted ;  vers.  30,  31.  The  ronMon 
of  their  rejection  wiis  refusal  to  suliinit  to  gospel  terms  of 
salvntlivTi  ;  ver.  32.  As  predicted,  they  were  offended  at 
their  Messiah  ;  ver.  33.— U.) 


understand  the  whole  argumentative  force  of  thia 
citation,  we  must,  like  the  Apostle,  eoimeet  the  sec- 
ond citation,  Hosea  ii.  1  (LXX.  i.  10),  with  the  first 
(and  this  is  simjjly  an  exegesis  according  to  tin  an 
alogy  of  Scripture,  as  we  frequently  find  in  Paul). 
The  Apostle,  designing  to  emphasize  the  word 
C1~td2  ,  brings  it  out  once  more  in  his  conclusion  : 
I/. (I  xXtj  0  t'l (TO vrai,,  x.r.L  Uitzig  explaiivs  the 
expression  :  hi  the  place,  by  imtead  of.  According 
to  Meyer,  the  prophet  meant  by  this  expression  the 
locality  of  the  Gentiles,  the  Gentile  lantis ;  but  Paul 
understood  by  it,  Palestine.  That  the  expression 
denotes  the  stay  of  the  Jews  in  the  Gentile  world, 
is  proved  by  Hosea  i.  11  :  "  Then  shall  the  children 
of  Judah  and  the  children  of  Israel  be  gathered  to- 
gether, and  appoint  themselves  one  head,  and  they 
shall  come  up  out  of  the  land."  It  is  just  on  this 
point  that  the  weiglit  of  the  proof  rests.  The  call 
will  be  published  to  them  among  the  (Jentiles,  there- 
fore among  the  ^^  no-people,"  among  whom  they  them- 
selves are  scattered  as  "  no-people." 

According  to  Meyer,  Paul  finds  the  demonstra- 
tive force  of  the  two  passages  in  the  fact,  that  he 
perceives  the  mercy  shown  to  the  ten  tribes  as  a 
type  of  the  reception  of  the  Gentiles  to  salvation. 
According  to  Tholuek,  his  proof  rests  u])on  the  her- 
meneutics  of  the  Jewish  exposition.  This  "  was  ac- 
customed to  refer  biblical  declarations,  according  to 
the  law  of  ideal  analogy,  to  such  subjects  also  as  are 
comprehended  in  the  same  category  "  (see  p.  641).* 
It  nmst  be  assumed  that  the  decision  :  "  not  my 
people"  has  placed  the  Jews  among  the  Gentiles, 
and  that  the  decision :  Lo-Ruharnuh,  has  adjudged 
them  to  be  a  very  intractable  people  even  among 
the  Gentiles  themselves.  If,  now,  tlie  call  to  salva- 
tion is  published  to  this  not  my  people,  in  the  midst 
of  the  Jews,  then  it  has  a  creative,  original  mean- 
ing ;  it  is  not  publislied  to  Israel  as  God's  people, 
but  it  creates  for  itself  a  people  of  God  from  the 
mixed  '■^no-people"  of  the  Jews  and  of  the  Gentiles. 
According  to  the  typical  construction,  De  Wette  has 
referred  tiic  to/To^-  to  the  ideal  state  or  divine  king- 
dom, and  Fritzsche  to  the  c<rtus  Crixtianorum.  Yet, 
according  to  tiie  coimection,  this  locality  means  the 
etiualization  of  Jews  and  Gentiles  in  one  conmion 
need  of  mercy. 

Ver.  27.  And  Isaiah  cries  also  concerning 
Israel,  Though  the  number  of  the  children  of 
Israel  be  as  the  sand  of  the  sea,  a  remnant 
shall  be  .faved.  [Vers.  27  and  2.S  contain  a  (pio- 
tation  from  Isa.  x.  22,  23  ;  the  verses  being  divided 
dill'erently,  however.  The  original  reference  was 
undoubteiily  to  the  return  from  Babylon.  Here, 
however,  the  emphasis  is  laid  on  rununnt,  mainly 
with  reference  to  the  call  of  the  Gentiles,  though 
perhaps  not  without  a  secondary  reference  to  the 
future  salvation  of  Israel — a  premonition  of  chap, 
xi. — H.l  That  the  (piestion  in  tiie  I'oregoing  was 
the  call  of  the  Gentiles  (the  Jews,  of  course,  in- 
clu<led,  in  so  far  as  they  have  sunk  into  heathen- 
dom), and  not  the  call  of  the  Jewish  people,  as 
Hofmann  holds,  is  pnjved  by  the  verse  which  now 
follows — a  ((uotation  from  Isa.  x.  22,  nearly  accord- 
ing to  the  L.XX.  The  Apostle  here  emphsisizcH  tlie 
remnant,  as  he  has  emphasized  t/ie  Gentile  lanA  in 
the  foregoing  passage.     Only  a  remnant  of  Israel^ 

•  (So  ITodRe,  Stuart,  substantially.  For  a  discussion 
of  Tuul's  analogical  use  of  Old  T"stnmeiit  events  ainl  cit»« 
tlons,  the  reader  is  referred  to  Lunge's  Comtix,  Oal.  pp. 
113  ir.,  120ir.— U] 


CHAPTER  IX.   1-33. 


823 


TO  vTioJif  I.  ft  fin,  will  be  saved.  The  LXX.  trans- 
lated the  original  ZA'C^  :  mil  return,  be  converted, 
by  aiD&tj (J fzai-f  in  the  sense  of  will  be  saved, 
tliough  in  a  more  restricted  sense  than  Paul  intends. 
The  term  remnant  is  of  all  the  more  weight,  as  it 
stands  in  contrast  with  the  declaration,  "  though  thy 
people  Israel  be  as  the  sand  of  the  sea."  Similar 
passages :  Isa.  Ixv.  8,  9  ;  Mai.  iii.  2 ;  iv.  1. — Ti)e 
cning,  x^wvfi-,  describes  the  bold  declaration  of 
i  truth  very  offensive  to  the  people. 

Yer.  28.  [For  he  is  finishing  the  word,  and 
cutting  it  short  in  righteousness  ;  because  a 
ghort  Tvord  wrill  the  Lord  make  upon  the 
earth.  Aoyov  ya(j  avvrikHiv  xai  avvri- 
fiVMi'  iv  dixaioa vvtj'  on  ).oyov  ativTfT- 
ft  tj  f(  ivo  V  no  If  t]  a  (k  xv  ^  toi;  t  ni  r  ^  q  y  V  'i ' 
See  Textual  Notes  °*»  ^^'  ^^.  Lange  renders :  J^'or 
He  who  consummates  the  reckoning,  is  also  he  who 
limits  it  in  righteoiisness.  Yea,  a  restrained  work 
will  the  Lord  carry  out  on  the  earth.  Against  this 
view,  see  below. — R.]  Zunz  translates  the  follow- 
ing words  of  the  same  quotation,  j'l^n  "|i''23 ,  &c,, 
thus:  "The  ruin  is  decreed,  righteousness  overflows. 
For  the  Lord,  the  God  of  Hosts,  executes  a  firmly 
determined  desolation  in  the  midst  of  all  the  land." 
The  LXX.  has  translated  :  ).6yov  ativrf'/Mtv  y.ai  avv- 
rtiivoyv  i%'  di,y.ai,o(Jvvr^,  brt  ).6yov  (Tt'VT ft /itjfiivov 
y.i'(jio<;  Ttoit'jdfi'  tv  rfi  oiy.ovfiiv7\  oAt],  Paul  follows 
this  in  the  main,  with  the  exception  of  the  last  words. 

It  may  now  be  asked,  Has  the  LXX.  translated 
incorrectly,  and  has  Paul  incorrectly  quoted  from  it, 
under  tiie  supposition  that  this  translation  corre- 
sponds better  to  his  purpose  ?  (see  Tholuck,  pp.  542 
fl".)  nbs  means,  first  of  all,  completion,  consum- 
mation, and  concurs  with  the  ).6yo<;  in  the  idea  of 
settlement  (see  the  LXX.,  1  Mace.  x.  40,  42,  44). 
Accordingly,  ""i'^^S  also  means  the  judgment  of 
destruction  in  the  sense  of  settlement.  Now  the 
LXX.  translates  the  first  clause  thus  :  "  He  who  has 
determined  the  settlement  (the  same  as  the  final  judg- 
ment) is  the  name  who  limits  it,  cuts  it  short  in  right- 
eousness ;  so  that  a  remnant  can  be  left  from  the 
destruction."  We  read  the  y.ai  a vvrifiviov  as 
a  conclusion  with  taxi,  and  understand  by  right- 
eousness, not  penal  righteousness,  but  righteous  re- 
straint in  punishing,  according  to  the  saving  purpose 
of  rigiiteousness,  whose  highest  glory  does  not  con- 
sist in  inexorable  rigor. 

This  translation  is  undoubtedly  exegetical.  First, 
it  takes  over  Adonai,  the  subject  of  the  following 
clause,  in  order  to  bring  back  the  definition  of  the 
first  clause  to  the  defining  clause.  Then  it  does  not 
explain  the  I^i^^^  ~^^  as  a  higher  degree  of  the 
first  term  y~n  "p"'^3,  but,  antithetically,  as  a 
mitigation,  which  is  even  already  indicated  in  the 
"^'i^n .  This  exegesis  will  be  perceived  from  the 
sense,  also,  to  be  altogether  correct.  Drstrttction  is 
defined  as  settlement,  but  therewith  also  cut  short ; 
overflowing  (restraining  itself)  with  righteous  mild- 
n\<!s,  deliverance.  The  word  H]:;'!:!  frequently  has 
tie  sense  of  mildness,  of  righteousness,  as  fairness 
in  its  saving  effect.  The  verb  ~od  is  here  transi- 
tive. See  Gesenius,  Lexicon.  On  (n<vrtfivfi,v,  sec 
the  Lexicon.  This  translation  is  further  in  harmony 
with  the  connection  which  gives  prominence  to  ^.re- 
clsely  this  thought,  that  a  remnant  shall  be  saved 
from    the    decreed    judgment.*      The    "  shortened 

*  [Yet  the  emphasis,  as  will  appear  from  the  notes  on 


days,"  in  Matt  xxiv.  22,  denote  the  same  thing.  Se« 
the  Commentary  on  Matthew  [Amer.  ed.,  pp.  425, 
426]. 

The  second  clause  changes  the  maxim  of  divine 
government  declared  in  the  first  clause,  according 
to  which,  judgment  always  brings  a  deliverance, 
into  a  declaration ;  here  the  word  of  the  LXX.  is 
explained  of  itself  by  the  foregoing ;  for  the  Lord 
will  effect  a  shortened,  that  is,  a  moderated  settle, 
ment  in  the  whole  world,  or,  as  Paul  says  in  a  more 
general  way,  upon  the  earth.  Now  there  seems  to 
be  no  support  for  the  a wxtT fiijfiivov  in  the 
original  text.  But  the  niphal  participle  HS'^nj, 
like  tiie  substantive  r2"in: ,  does  not  by  any  means 
denote  in  turn,  like  nbs ,  the  penal  judgment  in  it- 
self, but  the  definiteness  and  fixed  limitation  of  the 
penal  judgment.  Thus  the  word  n:i~iri;i  after  nb^, 
in  Isa.  xxviii.  22,  evidently  serves  to  express  the 
limitation  of  the  judgment,  as  is  plain  from  the  ex- 
planation in  vers.  23-29.  (Ver.  28  :  He  will  not 
ever  be  threshing  it.)  Therefore  the  Vulgate  prop- 
erly translates  consnmynationem  et  abbreviationem 
audivi;  according  to  the  Septuagint,  (nvrtrehaftiva 
xai  avvtirfirjfiiva  n^ciyfiara.  i'jxoiaa.  Comp.  also 
Dan.  ix.  27 ;  xi.  36.  From  this  it  follows  that  in  the 
"I'l^n,  in  the  first  member  of  Paul's  citation,  there 
is  comprised  not  merely  the  close,  but  also  the  limit- 
ing conclusion  of  the  judgment  of  destruction. 

According  to  Meyer  (and  Fritzsche),  the  LXX. 
exhibits  an  ignorance  of  the  passage,  yet  Paul  found 
the  sense  of  the  translation  suited  for  his  purpose. 
In  consequence  of  a  defective  construction,  the  word 
?.6yo<;  has  been  diflferentiy  explained:  purpose;  fact; 
dictum.  According  to  Meyer,  the  ).6yov  aw- 
rttfi.  signifies  the  shortest  possible  consummation 
of  the  }.6yoc.  Tholuck  :  "  The  Lord  will  execute  an 
exactly  defined  declaration."  (On  the  usual  opin- 
ions on  Paul's  quotations,  see  Tholuck's  Xote  on  p. 
543.  See  also  the  account  of  the  different  exposi- 
tions of  the  present  passage ;  for  example,  the  pa- 
tristic one  of  Chrysostom,  Augustine,  and  others, 
that  ?.6yo(;  (TrvrfTfi.  is  the  gospel  as  an  abridged 
doctrine  of  salvation,  in  antithesis  to  the  elaborate- 
ness of  the  Old  Testament).*  Luther's  translation 
of  the  present  passage  is  very  inexact,,f  but  it  ia 

ver.  27,  is  not  upon  the  snlvalion  of  the  remnant,  but  upon 
the  fact  that  only  a  remnant  ■will  be  saved.  Nor  does  the 
remoter  context  favor  such  a  mitigated  view.  It  is  not  in 
accordance  with  tlie  passage  cited  from  Hosea,  nor  with 
ver.  24,  &till  less  with  vers.  30-33.— R.] 

*  [Alford  seems  to  include  both  promise  and  threaten- 
ing in  Adyos,  and  makes  the  object  of  the  citation  a  con* 
fiimation  of  "the  certainty  of  the  salvation  of  the  rt-Tnnant 
of  Israel,  see'ng  that  now,  as  then.  He,  with  whom  a  thou- 
sand years  are  as  a  day,  will  swiftly  accomplish  His  pro- 
phetic word  in  righteousness." 

As  a  curious  t^pecinien  of  interpretation,  that  of  Words- 
worth is  appended  :  "  There  seims  to  be  here  in  the  mind 
of  the  prophet  a  contrast  between  the  paucity  of  the  num- 
h'Ts  to  which  the  Israelites  are  to  be  reduced,  and  the 
nbutidiiiici:  uf  rightiniisness  vouchsafid  to  them.  The  quan- 
tity will  be  small,  but  the  quality  will  be  good.  The  LXX. 
gives  a  paraphrase  (not  a  literal  translation)  which  em- 
bodies this  sense,  and  which  is  adopted  by  the  Apostle. 

"The  word  Aoyos,  as  used  by  them,  appears  to  signify 
an  account  or  recknuivg,  and,  derivatively,  a  sum  or  cata- 
logue of  people.  The  sense,  therefore,  is  :  'Summing  up 
and  cutting  short  the  rcrlconing.'  The  Adyo?  is  the  ao 
count  or  muster-roll  of  the  people.  The  census  of  tha 
Israelites  will  be  cid  ^hnrt  to  a  sunall  niimbir,  but  the  small- 
ness  of  the  number  will  be  amply  compensated  by  tha 
rightiousnrss  with  which  God  will  endue  it  by  virtue  of  ita 
faith  in  Christ."  A  method  of  esegefis  like  this  compen* 
sates  for  the  discovery  of  so  manj'  things  not  in  the  text, 
by  omitting  so  much  that  is  there. — K.] 

t  ["i?en»  es  xoird  ein  Verderben  und  Sleuren  geschehen 


524 


THE    EPISTLE    OF   PAUL   TO   THE    ROMANS. 


>iore  in  Imrmony  with  the  sense  than  the  more  re- 
cent I'xphmalions, 

[Few  verses  present  such  a  combhiation  of  diffi- 
culties iis  this  one. 

(1.)  Cridca/li/,  the  text  is  in  doubt.  See  Textual 
yote  "",  where  the  h)nger  reading  of  tlie  liec.  is  ac- 
cepted (against  such  careful  critics  as  Lachnianu, 
Alford,  Tregelk's). 

(2.)  Tiie  LXX.  seems  to  have  departed  from  the 
sense  of  llie  Hebrew  original.  Paul  varies  from  tiie 
former,  but  not  materially ;  thus  endorsing  what  is 
deemed  by  many  an  incorrect  rendering  of  llie  Word 
of  God.  Out  of  tills  grows  the  ditlieult  exegetical 
probk'Hi  of  getting  the  sense  of  the  Hebrew  out  of 
the  Greek  words  (which  seems  to  be  Dr.  Lange's 
endeavor),  or  the  equally  ditKcult  solution  of  tiie 
strange  fact,  tliat  an  apostle  would  choose  such  an 
altered  version  of  the  Helirew. 

(3.)  This  state  of  tilings  has  encouraged  exposi- 
tors in  departing  almost  at  pleasure  from  the  obvious 
meaning  of  Paul's  words,  while  it  has  not  led  them 
to  adopt  the  obvious  meaning  of  the  words  of  the 
prophet.  Dr.  Lange  has  chosen  an  ingenious  inter- 
pretation, witli  a  view  of  discovering  in  the  passage 
a  declaration  of  forbearance  on  the  part  of  God.  It 
is  o[)en  to  lexical  objections  (see  below),  and  is  not 
in  aeconlaiice  with  tlie  context ;  since  the  only  verse 
which  intimates  a  kindred  thought  is  ver.  22,  while 
the  immediate  connection  is  rendering  the  opposite 
thought  very  prominent. 

The  only  method  which  seems  fair  in  dealing 
with  any  author  when  he  quotes,  is  to  take  it  for 
granted  tliat  he  quotes  wittingly,  and  then  to  inter- 
pret his  citation,  making  the  original  passage,  espe- 
cially when  used  through  the  medium  of  a  transla- 
tion, entirely  subordinate.  The  inteipretation  then 
becomes  a  simple  exegQtical  question.  What,  then, 
does  Paul  say  here,  as  his  view  of  the  meaning  of 
the  prophet's  words  ? 

(«.)  Aoyov,  word,  sayincf.  It  does  not  mean 
work  {E.  v.).  Many  render:  (Zfcree.  Doubtless  this 
idea  underlies  the  passage,  and  is  found  in  the  He- 
brew, but  the  Greek  word  never  means  this.  It  is 
better,  then,  to  render  word  {i.  c,  of  promise  or 
threatening,  probably  both — threatening  to  the  mass 
of  the  people,  promise  to  the  remnant).  Tliis  is  the 
view  of  many  of  the  best  modern  commentators,  al- 
though they  differ  as  to  the  {)i'ecise  reference. 

(6.)  ^' I'yriii  vior.  a  t<  vr  tr  ft  tj  n  ivov.  The 
vcrl)  (only  here  in  the  New  Testament)  means  to  cut 
nhort,  tit  finish  rapit//j/.  It  obviously  refers  to  the 
rapid  accomplishment  of  what  God  has  said.  It 
seems,  then,  altfogether  unnecessary  to  find  in  the 
rapid  accomplishment  of  what  God  says,  an  indica- 
tion of  something  dilferent  from  what  He  says — /.  c, 
tliiit  this  quick  fulfilment  of  wrath  is  an  exhibition 
of  mercy  to  those  wlio  are  its  objects.  This  is  Dr. 
Lange's  position.  Aihnittiiig  tliat  "  in  righteous- 
ness "  includes  God's  mercy  to  tiie  chosen  remnant, 
that  does  not  imi)ly  "  mitigation  of  judgment "  to 
the  apostate  nia-ss.  Nor  is  it  necessary  to  find  a 
diffen^nt  meaning  for  the  word  in  the  second  clause, 
though  such  a  variation  can  be  justified.  We  ren- 
der, theiefore :  «  cutting  a/iort,  and  cut  shoit,  sup- 
plying t'fTTi.  (with  the  present  participles ;  Meyer, 
and  others). 

(c.)  ^Ev  (Vixatoffi'rTj  is  referred  most  natu- 
rally to  tiie  judicial  justice  of  God,  which  punishes. 


tur  O'vei-htifjlcfil,  und  dtr  Herr  wind  d-itt'lbige  Sleuriii  Ihiin 
■xuf  Erden."—li.] 


in  order  to  save  the  remnant.  The  former  thought 
is  the  prominent  one,  as  we  infer  both  from  the  coi> 
text  here,  and  from  the  original.  The  sense  of  the 
whole  verse  then  is:  lie  [i.  e.,  the  Lord)  is  Jinish- 
iiiff  and  cuttinfj  tihori  the  word  (making  it  a  fact  by 
rapid  accomplishment)  iii  ri(/hlvou.s>tess,  for  a  cut' 
short  word  (one  rapidly  accompli-sLrd)  wiJ/  the  Lord 
via/if  (execute,  render  actual)  itpnu  the  earth.  This 
is,  in  the  main,  Meyer's  reijderiiig.  While  the  orig. 
inal  reference  was  to  the  Jews  in  the  times  of  laaiab, 
the  Apostle  here  niakes  the  propiiecy  of  more  ge:- 
eral  validity,  referring  it  to  the  sad  fact  that  most  of 
the  Jews  were  cut  ofi'  (so  Hodge),  though  including 
the  other  fact,  that  the  remnant  should  be  saved, 
both  sides  supporting  the  general  thought  of  the 
chapter.  Dr.  Lange  at  last  comes  to  nearly  tlie 
same  view.  The  question  then  arises,  Is  this  at  all 
in  keeping  witli  the  words  of  the  prophet  himself? 
A  comparison  will  show  that  it  preserves  the  spirit 
of  Isaiah's  language  most  fully,  and  actually  conveys 
to  the  reader's  mind  a  clearer  sense  than  a  literal 
rendering  of  the  Hebrew  would  do.  Hence  he  used 
the  LXX.,  and  (as  all  authors  do)  inserted  such  un- 
important words  as  would  make  its  language  conform 
to  the  use  for  which  he  designed  it. — K.] 

The  prophet  has  uttered  a  twofold  truth  in  the 
quotation  ;  first,  that  onli/  a  remnant  will  be  left 
from  the  great  judgment  of  destruction,  but  then 
that  this  remnant  shall  be  preserved  in  security. 
The  Apostle,  in  vers.  27  and  28,  has  brought  into 
prominence  this  first  feature,  but  without  altogether 
excluding  the  second.  This  latter  is  proved  by  the 
remaining  part  of  his  citation. 

Ver.  29.  And,  as  Isaiah  hath  said,  or  proph- 
esied (Isa.  i.  9),  &c.  [y.  at ,  v.  «  i>  u)  ^  n  iJOt'i  (i  >;  xiv 
' Htraiai;,  x.t.L  We  give  the  pointing  of  Meyer 
(a  comma  after  xai).  The  meaning  then  is  :  And, 
as  Isaiah  has  already  said  (so  I  appropriate  his 
words).  Except,  kc.  See  below,  however.  If  it  be 
objected,  that  this  gives  to  the  verb  the  unusual 
sense  of  firophesii,  it  will  be  seen  that  this  is  not 
the  necessary  meaning  of  has  a/rradi/  sai<l.  The 
introduction  of  y.aOois;  calls  for  some  such  para- 
phrase, and  the  rnio  seems  to  refer  to  the  time  of 
the  Apostle,  rather  than  to  the  place  of  the  last 
citation.  Besides,  the  propriety  of  a  direct  adoption 
by  the  Apostle  apjjcars  both  from  the  use  of  the  first 
person,  and  the  (iiiasi-i)ro])lietic  character  of  the  ap- 
plication Paul  makes  of  the  passage  here. — K.]  The 
explanation :  he  has  already  said,  namely,  in  an 
earlier  chapter  (Erasmus,  Calvin,  Grotius,  and  oth- 
ers), is  o|iposed  by  Tholuck,  and  others,  with  the 
remark,  tiiat  such  a  reference  to  earlier  |)a.<sages  is 
without  an  analogy  in  the  Apostle's  constant  quo- 
tation meinoriter.  Against  this  exjdanation,  at  all 
events,  is  the  Apostle's  design  of  returning  to  the 
fict  of  the  present  condition  of  believing  Israel  ;  so 
that  he  seems  to  construe  the  pro])het's  declaration 
chiefly  as  a  typical  prophecy.  But  that  passage  is 
immediately  more  than  a  description  of  an  existing 
condition  ;  it  is  a  vision  of  an  immeasurable  ruin 
extending  to  the  future,*  as  the  passage,  Isa.  vi.  9  ; 


•  [Dr.  Drpscliler  rcmarkson  Isa.  i.  9  (Der  Prrfhrt  J'fnja, 
i.  p.  81)  :  "  The  pmiihot  with  a  fow  (rround-strokes  pnfhors 
up  the  whole  future  of  the  peoph'  of  Isniel.  lie  announce* 
II  period  of  juilpmeiit  ng  nn  umivoldnble  pas-sapp-wuy  ;  then, 
iiKiiin,  11  liiiie  of  salvation.  But  the  period  of  jud(rtnent 
coniprehenda  in  itself  nil  the  judKroents  then  standing 
without  no  yet  :  eveiy  visitation,  of  wliicli  history  from 
that  lime  on"know8  nught,  isa  proof  of  this  word  of  proph- 
ecy, a  fulfllmeiil  of  it.  .  .  .  Just  so  is  the  period  of  salvii- 
tlou  concoivud  ua  tLo  sum-totul  of  all  fullUn^uul  in  guaenilt 


CHAPTER  IX.    1-33. 


325 


conip.  Matt.  xiii.  15  ;  John  xii.  39  ff.  ;  Acts  xxviii. 
2G,  27 ;  "i  Cor.  iii.,  xiv.  ft".  It  may  be  asked,  whether 
ire  wouhl  read  /.a I  tcm  xaQoK;  'Ha.  &c. :  It 
stands  thus,  ns  Isiiiali  has  prophesied,  or :  jUul — as 
Isaiah  has  prophesied — Except,  &c.  Mej^er  defends 
the  latter  construction ;  but  we  prefer  the  former, 
because  the  Apostle  designs  to  adduce  tiiis  quoted 
txpression,  like  the  former  and  the  following  one, 
lus  rtn  expressive  prophetical  declaration.  The  term 
ani(>/ici  means  the  /.aTcUn/i/ia,  as  well  in  its  ex- 
ternal smalliTess  as  in  its  inward  importance  for  the 
future.  The  Septuagint  has  translated  the  "'^"'ii)  of 
the  original  text  by  antQua.*  Compare  Isa. 
Ixv.  8. 

Fourth  Proof  :  The  correspondence  between 
God'^s  freedom  in  His  government  with  the  freedom 
of  men  in  tlieir  faith  or  unbd  ef.  The  stability  of 
the  fact  thtit  the  Gentiles  believe,  and  Israel,  iit  its 
popu  ar  totality,  does  not  believe  (vers.  30-33). 
Meyer  says,  on  this  section :  "  The  Jews  them- 
selves bear  the  guilt  of  their  own  exclusion,  because 
tiiey  obtained  it  not  by  faith,  but  by  works  of 
righteousness,  for  they  were  offended  at  Cluist." 

[A  new  chapter  should  begin  liere.  For,  having 
already  stated  the  objective,  Divine  ground  of  the 
rejection  of  the  Jews,  Paul  now  passes  to  the  sub- 
jective or  human  cause,  hinted  at  frequently  before, 
viz.,  their  unbelef.  They  were  rejected  by  God, 
because,  in  spite  of  the  many  warnings  of  tiieir  own 
prophets,  tliey  sought  their  own  righteousness,  spring- 
ing from  an  external  view  of  the  law,  and  were  of- 
fended at  the  promised  Messiah,  when  He  actually 
appeared,  instead  of  seeking  salvation  through  vital 
faith  in  the  grace  of  God  in  Christ.  This  mode  of 
view,  wliich  is  carried  out  further  in  chap,  x.,  solves 
in  part  the  enigma  of  the  preceding  discussion  ;  yet 
it  cannot  be  denied  that,  in  the  Divine  predestina- 
tion, there  ever  remains  an  obscure  background, 
■which  reason  is  not  in  a  condition  to  fully  compre- 
hend, and  should  humbly  adore. — P.  S.] 

Ver.  30.  What  shaU  we  say  then?  [7'i 
ot'v  iQo'i,ufv;  Precisely  as  in  ver.  14,  where  it 
introduces  an  objection. — K.]  We  may  ask,  whether 
the  Apostle  again  uses  this  expression  here  in  order 
to  avoid  a  false  conclusion,  or  whether  he  merely 
"  deduces  the  historical  result  from  the  foregoing 
prophecies"  (Meyer),|  Evidently,  this  passage  is 
a  turning-point  of  the  greatest  importance.  The 
Apostle  lias  heretofore  described  God's  freedom,  and 
finally  His  freedom  even  in  rejecting  the  greater  part 
of  Israel  in  contrast  to  His  call  of  the  Gentiles,  and 
has  strengthened  his  dp(.laration  by  appealing  to  the 
prophecy  of  the  Old  Testament.  This  is  now  the 
place  where  this  question  arises :  From  all  this,  does 
tliere  not  follow  fatalism,  or  a  simple  absolute  au- 
thority of  Divine  freedom  V  He  does  not  absolutely 
express  this  false  conclusion,  in  order  to  make  short 


nince  the  complete  realization  of  all  God's  promises  will 
brin?  what  will  still  all  the  Inngiup;  and  the  thirsting  of  the 
human  ht'tirt  fiom  thenceforth  and  forever." — P.  S.) 

•  [The  resf-ued  Israelites  are  called,  Isa.  vi.  1.3  (pomp. 
Ezra  ix.  2),  "a  holy  seed,"  because  out  of  them,  as  a  small 
beginning:,  at  the  sime  time  the  nation  shall  rejuvenate 
Itself,  and  the  true  spiiitual  Israel  shall  proceed.  I'be  Jew- 
ish Chris-ti:ins,  who  escaped  the  terrible  judgement  of  God 
apdn  the  mass  of  ihc  unhuppy  nation  at  "the  de-truct  on  of 
Jeru-alem,  fonnod  the  pith  of  the  Christian  Church.— P.  S.] 

r  [Alford  answers  thus  :  "  This  question,  when  followed 
lij  a  quis/ioii,  implies,  of  course,  a  n-iection  of  the  tliought 
thus  sufirgested  ;  but  when,  as  here,  by  an  a.<sertio>i,  intro- 
duces a  lurtber  unfolding  of  the  argument  ti-cm  what  has 
»receded."  What  follows  ig  not  a  Question.  See  below. 
-E.] 


work  of  it  by  a  f^ij  yeVotro,  because  ho  has  really 
anticipated  it  alreadj'.  But  he  actually  removes  it. 
The  Gentiles  have  not  first  attained  to  salvation  from 
an  exercise  of  absolute  authority;  they  have  attained 
to  righteousness,  the  righteousness  of  faithj  which 
can  only  oe  obtained  from  the  source  of  righteous 
ness. 

Some  expositors  (Pelagius,  Cyril,  Theodore  of 
Mopsvestia,  Flatt,  Olshausen)  have  not  understood 
the  expression  from  on.  to  iqOaat  as  an  answer, 
but  as  the  real  import  and  continuation  of  the  pend- 
ing question,  under  different  modifications  (on  as 
bi  cause,  that,  so7iiehow  that).  This  is  opposed  by  the 
following:  1.  The  statement  in  vers.  30  and  31  can 
by  no  means  be  regarded  as  a  summary  of  the  fore- 
going;  2.  It  has  not  been  at  all  present  as  yet  in 
this  definite  deduction  of  the  antithesis.  It  contains 
sonjcthing  new,  which  only  arises  as  a  conclusion 
from  what  has  preceded.  Chrysostom  says  th;it  this 
passage  is  the  aacfKirdrtj  ?.i'(ni;  of  the  chajiter. 
Baur,  and  others :  The  Aposcle  here  first  becomes 
conscious  of  the  subjictive  poinf  of  view.  Tholuck, 
correcting  this  view,  says  that  the  Apostle  here  first 
brings  it  out  to  prominence.  On  the  discussions  of 
the  Predestinarians  and  the  Remonstrants  concern- 
ing the   t/   ovv   tsJoT'/tfv,  see  Tholuck,  p.  54(j. 

That  the  Gentiles.  "EO  vij ;  not  merely  Gen- 
tiles. [Against  Meyer,  who  says:  "Not  the  Gentiles 
as  a  whole.  On  the  Gentile  side  was  righteousness," 
&c.— R.] 

Who  were  not  following  after  righteous- 
ness, attained.  To,  fi  tj  <)i,c')x.  The  Apostle 
uses  the  duo/.nv  with  especial  reference  to  the 
races  (see  Meyer  on  Phil.  iii.  12,  14),  and  thus 
y.ar  a ).a  II  p .  means  not  merely  the  reaching,  but 
also  grasping ;  in  this  case  it  is  especially  the  grasp- 
ing of  the  prize  (see  1  Cor.  ix.  24).  This  consti- 
tutes a  double  antithetical  oxymoron.  The  Gentiles 
did  not  run  after  righteousness,  and  yet  even  they 
grasped  righteousness  at  the  goal  of  the  race-course.* 
But  the  Jews,  who  ran,  or  so  fir  as  they  were  run- 
ners after  the  law  of  righteousness,  never  reached 
the  proper  terminal  point  of  the  race — the  well- 
understood  law.  The  Apostle  does  not  design  to 
say  that  the  Gentiles  in  general  had  known  no  high- 
er pursuit ;  for  he  has  already  referred  to  the  Gen- 
tiles in  his  expression  concerning  preparatory  grace: 
ct  7T(JO?]Tol/iaafv  ftc  f)6Jai'.f  But  the  Gentiles  were 
not  only  not  companions  with  the  Jews  in  the  course 
in  which  the  latter  ran  after  the  law  of  righteous, 
ness  ;  righteousness,  as  an  exi)licit  moral  law,  was 
not  the  fundamental  idea  of  their  pursuit  (although 
it  constituted  the  unity  of  the  platonic  virtues). 
The  Greek  •  struggled  for  ideality,  or  wisdom,  while 
the  Roman  struggled  for  an  iiniocent  legal  order,  or 
for  power.  Thus  it  came  that  they  did  not  run 
astray  by  looking  at  an  analytical  phantom  of  right- 
eousness, like  the  majority  of  the  Jew?  ;  and  hence 
that  they  could  be  subjected  (that  is,  for  a  prelimi- 
nary condition  of  faith)  to  the  curse  of  their  ideals, 
to  I  profound  despair  in  themselves  and  in  the  glory 


•  [It  seems  best  (with  Meyer)  to  coneider  rightronsness 
as  used,  in  this  part  nf  our  verpp,  without  special  roferenca 
to  the  Christian  standpoint.  Dr.  Hodge  really  advcicaleg 
this  view,  but  is  h.ampered  in  reaching  it  by  the  limited 
meaning  he  places  upon  the  word  as  used  by  Paul.  Stuart 
renders  Six.,  juHificntimi  in  each  case,  which  is  altogether 
untenable.    Sec  p.  74  ff.,  &c.— R.l 

t  [See  ver.  23.  It  is  doubtful  whether  .'-uch  preparation 
as  is  there  referred  to,  includes,  in  any  sense,  the  pioi)se» 
dcu'ic  relation  of  the  Gentile  world  to  Christianity,  how- 
ever extensi"e  that  relation  was.— R.l 


326 


THE   EPISTLE   OF  PAUL   TO   THE   ROMANS. 


of  the  world  (see  chap.  iv. ;  Acts  xvi.  9 ;  Rom.  ix. 

27-0O).* 

Even  the  righteousness  •which  is  of  faith 
[Ji./.cci.ofTivr;v  di,  /..t1.  Tliut  is,  precisely  the 
.true  rigiiteousiiess.  On  the  delicate  iiicaiiiiig  of  di, 
see  Altord  in  loro  ;  Winer,  ]i.  412. — U.] 

Vrr.  31.  But  Israel,  follovring  after  the 
law  of  righteousness,  attained  not  to  the  law^ 
'[V  fff  «// /.  i)t  d  t  <i')  ii  ut  V  vofiov  du/.cti-off  I' v  ijc;, 
nil,-  voiiov  oh/.  tipi>a(Tfv.  On  the  reading,  see 
Textual  Not.'  ■",  and  below. — R.]  It  is  not :  the 
rnghteousness  of  the  lair,  but,  more  strongly:  the 
■  law  of  i-irfhtco>ii^ne.is.  This  would  mean,  in  the  fig- 
ure of  the  race,  tliat  Israel  has  by  no  means  ad- 
vanced so  far  as  lo  run  after  righteousness  itself; 
,the  f>rogrannue  of  the  race  became  its  goal ;  in 
striving  after  an  endle8.s  analysis  of  the  law,  it  has 
run  astray  in  statutes  of  external  legality.  Tiiere- 
fore  it  has  come  to  pass  that  it  has  not  reached 
voiioi;  in  its  truth — that  is,  in  its  real  inward  character 
— and  that,  after  all  its  running,  it  has  never  attained 
to  the  true  beginning,  the  principle  of  the  running. 
Tliis  antithesis  is  in  harmony  with  the  .subject-matter 
(see  Rom.  vii.  7  ft".),  and  is  much  stronger  than  if 
the  Apostle  had  said  :  It  has  not  attained  to  the  law 
of  tlie  righteousness  of  faith,  which  would  be  self- 
. evident ;  or  even  if  he  had  said  :  It  has  not  atta'.ned 
to  the  lighteousness  of  the  law  according  to  the  let- 
ter— which  charge  lie  could  not  bring  against  them. 
Therefore  we  prefer  the  reading  of  Codd.  A.  B.  D., 
given  in  the  text.  [The  briefer  reading  is  quite  well 
supported,  and  certainly,  when  rightly  understood, 
adds  to  the  force  of  the  psissage.  They  did  not  even 
attain  to  the  law.  Conip.  Alford  in  loco.  —  R.] 
It  hardly  needs  to  be  called  to  mind,  that  the  ques- 
.tion  here  is  relatively  concerning  the  Gentiles  and 
Israel ;  that  is,  concerning  the  antithesis  between  the 
believing  Gentile  world  and  unbelieving  Israel.  This 
limitation  in  reference  to  Israel  lies  in  the  duoxutv 

The  law  of  righteouxncHS.  The  expression  lias 
been  regarded  by  many  as  an  exchange  for  t)i- 
xai,oiTi'vtjV  VOIIOI'  (Chrysostom,  Calvin,  Bengel,  and 
Others).  Undoubtedly  this  wius  the  l)asis  of  the 
effort  of  the  Jews,  but  their  real  following  extended, 
in  Pharisaism,  far  beyond,  to  the  amplification  of 
the  law  into  an  endless  series  of  ordinances.  The 
view :  77ie  jmslifjiing  law  (Meyer),  obscures  the 
Strong  emphasis  of  the  t-ohoi;  itself,  when  this  vonoi; 
is  subsefjuently  explained  thus  :  "  The  law  was  an 
ideal,  whose  realization  the  Israelites  strove  to  ex- 
perience by  their  legalness."  Conip.  chap.  ii.  17-2-t. 
The  theoretical,  lnjal  in-thodiix)/  of  tlic  Jews  was  the 
perfect  development  of  their  rightitousness  of  work.s, 
according,  also,  to  the  Epistle  of  James.f 

Most  of  the  early  expf>sitors  (Chrysostom,  Theo- 
doret,  and  others)  hold  that  Paul  meant  the  Mosaic 
law  in  l)oth  cases  in  V(!r.  31.  Others,  on  the  con- 
trary (Theodore  of  Mopsvestia,  Bengel,  and  De 
Wette  [llodge]  ),  have  under.stood,  by  the  second 

•  [On  tliifl  thouRlit,  seo  especinlly  On'rchcnlhiim  vnd 
OhriS'nihiiin,  by  Dr.  O.  C.  Soil)ert,  1857,  referred  to  in  tho 
Ofnonl  Introd.  M'll'lf  m,  p.  6.  Tho  iiuthnr  Is  now  a  pastor 
In  N.w.irU.  \.  .I.-U.) 

t  ( l)r.  llodge  soumi  to  prefer  the  following  view  :  "The 
word  law  itay  Ix;  reduiidiint,  and  Paul  miiy  mean  to  say 
nothlni!  more  than  thiit  '  the  .Tews  8i>u>fht  riphteoiisness,  or 
jUstifi.T.ition,  l)ui  <lid  not  ntiiiin  it.'  Tlii.-<,  no  douht,  is  tlio 
Buhstano.-,  Mioiii^ii  it  m:iy  not  lie  tho  prori.^o  form  of  tho 
thought."  This  is  l)\il  .'ivoiiliiiij;  un  iiiterpret.-ition,  and  in  a 
way  whieh  the  learned  comment. itor  would  deoni  unjnstifl- 
Bble  if  applied  to  less  Hacred  tovms  tl"in  those  writion  by 
in  Apostle. — K.] 


law,  the  Christian  Si^navoavvtj.  These  two  coLstruo 
tions  are  opposed  not  only  by  the  i)i.i!r/.i>iv  (Meyer: 
it  does  not  express  the  effort  to  fulfil  the  law,  l)ut 
to  possess  the  law),  but  also  by  the  consideration 
that  a  true  following  after  the  Mosaic  law — tliat  is, 
after  its  fulfilment — must  not  only  lead  to  it,  but 
even  to  Christiauity  (see  chap.  vii.).  Tholuck  (with 
Calovius,  Pliilippi,  and  others)  takes  r6,iio<i  in  the 
wider  sense,  as  via,  disciplitvi  of  righteousnes.** : 
"  They  strove  for  the  means  which  furnished  justifi- 
cation." But  this  striving,  construed  in  a  general 
sense,  cannot  be  regarded  as  fruitless.  The  law,  in 
the  former  case,  can  only  mean  their  illusive  image 
of  Jhe  law,  according  to  which  the  law,  in  its  exter- 
nal shape,  should  become  to  tiieni  a  real  means  of 
justification,  and  would  in  reality  be  made  this 
means  ;  *  but,  ia  the  second  place,  it  is  the  Mosaic 
law  in  its  truth,  and  in  that  inward  tendency  by 
which  it  became  the  schoolmaster  which  led  them  to 
Christ. 

Ver.  32.  Wherefore?  [(5ia  rt;]  The  fail- 
ure to  attain  to  the  law. 

Because  they  sought  it  not  by  faith  [oti. 
0('x  i/.  TziffTfifx;.  The  E.  V.  projierly  supplies 
sought  i<].  As  the  proper  observance  of  the  law 
leaiis  to  saving  faith,  so  does  it  proceed  from  a  germ 
of  faith,  which  is  shown  l)y  Abraham's  historical 
I)recedence  of  Moses.  Faith  is  the  inu'nrd  relatioa 
of  confidence  and  obedience  to  God's  Word  ;  only 
the  Spirit  in  the  law  gives  to  the  legal  striving,  which 
is  a  preparatory  school  to  the  gospel,  its  proper 
direction. 

But  as  by  w^orks  [ci//'  i')(;  il  tQyMv, 
On  w^-,  conip.  Winer,  p.  673.  Alford:  "as  'if 
about  to  olitain  their  oljject '  by."  See  Textual 
Note  '". —  R.]  Meyer  correctly  maintains  that  the 
i')^  is  not  redumlaiit — as  Koppe  holds — and  that  it 
does  not  indicate  hypocri.sy,  according  to  Theophy- 
lact ;  but  Meyer  is  incorrect  in  oppo.sing  Fritzsche's 
construction,  presumed  works,  with  this  explana- 
tion :  As  a  iiLil)/.nv  proceeding  from  works  is  con- 
stituted. His  ground  is,  that  the  Jews  really  set 
out  from  the  works  of  the  law,  but  not  simply  from 
trite  wurkx  (see  clia[).  x.  3.)-|:  A  pointed  f^  iityutv 
must  correspond  to  the  pointed  ix  niirrnoc,  which 
former  can  then  be  only  an  uk;  t;  I'^i/Mr.  In  their 
seeking,  they  proceeded  on  the  supposition  of  hav- 
ing one  treasure  of  good  works,  and  they  continu- 
ally piled  law  upon  law,  in  order  to  become  richer 
in  such  works.  In  short,  the  starting-point,  but  not 
the  (VM-'i/.fu',  should  be  emphasized  as  fundamentally 
false. 

For  they  stumbled  [7r(»o<r£xo V'«v  ya(). 
On  the  rendi'i-ing,  should  yd(i  be  rejected,  see 
Textual  Note  '".  Meyer,  however,  opposes  this  con- 
nection, though  rejecting  yci(t.  The  figure  of  a 
race,  if  not  prominent  here,  seems  at  least  to  have 
suggested  the  "  stuinliling." — R.]  To  what  does 
for  refer  ?  First  of  all,  it  presents  the  proof  that 
the  Jews  did  not  stand  in  the  direction  of  faith,  but 
in  the  illusion  of  the  righteousness  of  works.  Then 
this  proves  indirectly,  also,  the  principal  statement 


♦  (Alford  nffTces  substantially  with  this  view.  In  th« 
cn-sc  of  tho  Jews,  "tliore  wns  a  preseribed  norm  of  appa- 
rent rijfhtcousnesH,  viz.,  tho  law,  in  whieh  rule  and  way 
thev,  as  miilliT  nf  fitcl,  followed  after  it." — H.J 

t  (The  word  us  transfers  the  matter  to  tho  sphere  of 
sutiji'Otivo  fiiney,  and  expresses  this:  tli;it  the  Jews  im- 
nunied  they  were  dol"if  the  works  of  the  law,  but  did  not 
reallv  <lo  Ihem,  arcordinft  tfl  the  deeper  sen«e  and  Hjiirit  in 
wliiuli  the  law  should  be  apprehended.  Comp.  Isa.  Iviii.  2; 
rhil.  ill.  9.— r.  S.l 


CHAPTER  IX.   1-33. 


32'J 


hi  vers.  30  and  31.  But  the  full  strength  of  the 
proof  lies  in  the  fact  that  they  have  come  to  shame 
at  the  touchstone  of  the  true  Israelites,  which  made 
a  distinction  between  those  who  trusted  (that  is,  be- 
lievers) on  the  stone  laid  by  Jehovah,  and  those  who 
etambled — that  is,  who  were  defective  in  faith  be- 
CBJiiC  of  their  presumed  righteousness  of  works. 

At  that  stone  of  stumbling  [tw  kiOo) 
zoTi  TTiiofjuon fiaTOi;^  (Isa.  viii.  14;  xxviii. 
16  ;  Luke  ii.  34 ;  1  Cor.  i.  23  ;  1  Peter  ii.  6-8). 
The  Jews,  in  their  hypocrisy^  have  been  offended 
Jird  of  all  at  the  unworldly  spirituality,  the  penal 
office,  the  independence,  and  the  spiritual  freedom 
of  Christ  (see  Matt.  iv.  1  ff ;  John  ii.  18  ;  iv.  1  ;  v. 
9  ff.),  and  then,  in  their  claim  to  the  reward  of  uni- 
versal Messianic  glory,  at  His  poor  appearance,  His 
renunciation.  His  love  of  sinners,  and  His  suffering 
and  death  on  the  cross.  In  their  running,  they  ran 
all  the  more  violently  against  the  stone,  because  they 
were  just  then  engaged  in  their  strongest  running. 
The  Apostle  proves  that  this  fact  also  i's  represented 
beforehand  in  the  Old  Testament.  He  here  freely 
connects  the  passages  in  Isa.  viii.  14;  xxviii.  16, 
into  one  prophecy,  in  which  he  follows  the  original 
text  in  preference  to  the  LXX.  According  to  Isa. 
viii.  14,  Jehovah  himself  assuredly  becomes  a  stone 
of  stumbling  to  both  houses  of  Israel ;  but  it  is  Je- 
hovali  who  has  now  concealed  His  face,  in  order  to 
declare  himself  in  future  to  those  who  patiently  wait 
for  Him  (see  Isa.  viii.  17  ;  ix.  7).  But  that,  in  chap. 
xxviii.  16,  only  the  ideal  theocracy  of  the  Old  Testa- 
ment sphere  is  meant,  seems  very  doubtful.  The 
ideal  theocracy  of  the  Old  Testament  is  properly  de- 
fined as  the  growth  of  the  New  Testament  kingdom 
of  God.  Now,  if  a  corner-stone  for  this  is  laid  in 
Zion,  it  must  nevertheless  be  the  foundation  of  the 
"  ideal  theocracy,"  and  not  the  whole  ideal  theocracy 
itself,  or  even  this  ideal  theocracy  apart  from  its 
foundation.  Likewise,  the  collective  corner-stone  in 
Zion  (ver.  16)  constitutes  a  grand  antithesis  to  the 
Jewish  dissolution  of  God's  Word  into  a  ruined 
diversity  (ver.  13),  and  it  stands  in  connection  with 
the  judgment,  from  which  the  vnohvfi fta  appears. 
Therefore  Paul  and  Peter  had  a  perfect  right  to  re- 
gard this  passage  as  more  than  a  typical  prophecy. 

Yer.  33.  [As  it  is  ■written,  Behold,  I  lay  in 
Zion  a  stone  of  stumbling,  &c.  The  "  stone  of 
stumbling  and  rock  of  offence "  {anav^dlov; 
LXX. :  TiTMiiaTi)  is  taken  fiom  Isa.  viii.  14,  and 
substituted  for  the  "  corner-stone,"  &c.,  of  chap, 
xxviii.  16.  Both  passages  were  interpreted  by  the 
Jews  as  referring  to  the  Messiah.  Comp.  Luke  ii. 
84 ;  1  Peter  ii.  6-8.  The  combination  is  therefore 
both  justifijil)le  and  natural. — He  ■who  believeth 
on  him,  y.al  6  n i,ar fVMv  in  avr iji .  Hciq, 
which  is  found  in  chap.  x.  11,  is  omitted  here  (see 
Textual  Note  ^^).  The  emphasis  there  is  on  nai; ; 
here,  on  ntarivov,  in  antithesis  to  ver.  32. 
-R.] 

Shall  not  be  put  to  shame,  y.arai,axi'v- 
&Tj<T(rai,.  The  original  word  CTI^  [make  haute; 
Gesenius  :  flee  hastily. — R.]  is  here  given  as  an  ex- 
planation, after  the  precedence  of  the  Scptuagint 
\%a,Tai(j-/vv&fi,  from  which  Paul  varies,  as  above]. 


DOCTRINAL  AND    ETHICAL. 


[The  Literature  on  the  Doctrinal  questions  ic  reived 
tn  this  chapter  really  includes  all  woiks  on  svstematic  tbe- 
slogy,  all  confessions  since  the  times  of  the  lleformers, 


together  with  a  large  proportion  of  modern  psycl  ological 
and  ethical  treatises.  The  larger  commentaries,  especiallji 
those  of  Hodge,  Stuart,  Tholuck,  Philippi,  Meyer,  Haldane, 
"Wordsworth,  Jowett,  and  Forbes,  are  very  full  on  the  predes- 
tinarian  question.  The  literatui'e  of  tlie  Arminian  contro« 
versy  (much  of  which  is  enumerated  in  the  JJtimilelical 
]Vo'cs  on  chap,  viii.)  bears  on  this  subject.  (Comp.  lists, 
Iiilriicl.  p.  51,  V.  12-21,  p.  191.)  We  may  mention  lurther  • 
Atjgcstine,  Z>e  libera  arbilriu  ;  Anselm,  Dt  libiro  arbi/rio  ; 
also,  De  casu  Diabuli.  The  works  of  Calvin,  Aniu.vius, 
Episconus,  Pbes.  Edwards,  Ah  Inquiry  into  the  Frc'dom 
(if  the  Wilt  (in  numberless  editions  ;  necessarian  iu  its 
conclusions,  and  more  commented  upon  tlian  any  work  in 
this  department  of  thought).  Colehidge,  Aids  to  Rtflic- 
iinn  (latter  part ;  his  views  have  done  much  to  mould 
thout;ht  in  England  and  America).  The  C'cnions  nf  the 
Si/iiod  of  Dorl  give  the  strongest  Calvinistic  statements.  A 
list  of  important  controver.-ial  works  is  given  by  Tholuck 
(pp.  466,  4(i7).  The  philosophical  works  which  discuss  the 
Bubjeci  ill  its  ontological  aspects  cannot  he  enumerated,  but 
the  names  of  Sir  Wm.  Hamilton,  J.  S.  Mill,  Maxsel, 
Bain,  Tappan,  McCosh,  readily  suggest  themselves  to  the 
American  reader.  The  latest  monograph,  published  iu 
America,  is  by  G.  S.  Bishop  (Newburgh,  N.  Y.),  Reprubu' 
lion  (a  sermon  on  ver.  22),  New  York,  1869. — E..] 

1.  In  regard  to  the  copious,  and,  in  many  re- 
spects, mysterious  contents  of  this  chapter,  we  must 
refer  principally  to  the  JiJxeg.  Notes,  where  we  have 
anticipated  many  points.  We  would  also  refer  to  the 
history  of  the  exposition  of  this  chapter,  and  espe- 
cially to  the  monographs  bearing  on  the  subject,  men- 
tioned above.  The  real  difiSculties  which  the  chapter 
presents  have  been  greatly  increased  by  attempts  at  its 
exegesis.  This  has  occurred,  first,  in  consequence  of 
tlie  little  account  that  has  been  taken  of  the  connec- 
tion, the  immediate  relation  of  this  chapter  to  Israel, 
and  the  judgment  of  hardening  on  Israel ;  and  be- 
cause there  has  not  been  an  effort  made  to  explain 
with  sufficient  clearness,  according  to  the  analogy  of 
Scripture,  the  nature  of  the  judgment  of  hardening, 
or  sin  in  its  third  potency.  A  second  cause  of  diffi- 
culty has  been  the  confusion  of  the  antitheses  of  the 
Apostle  with  the  antitheses  of  the  history  of  doc- 
trines— of  Augustine  and  Pelagius,  or  Calvin  and 
the  Catholic  righteousness  of  works,  or  even  the 
doctrine  of  the  Remonstrants.  A  third  source  of 
difficulty  has  been  a  failure  to  use  aright  the  key  to 
this  chapter  in  the  passage,  chap.  viii.  29,  30,  and 
a  disposition  rather  to  accept  a  contradiction  be. 
tween  Rom.  ix.  7-29  and  chaps,  ix.  30-xi.  36,  than 
to  accommodate  the  former  part  of  the  wh'ole  sec 
tion  to  the  latter. 

2.  In  the  division  and  headings  we  have  already 
given  the  connection  between  the  whole  of  this 
section  and  the  former  chapters.  The  fundamen- 
tal  thought  is,  the  antithesis  of  sin  and  grace  in  ita 
three  potencies. 

First  antithesis:  The  actual  corruption  of  the 
whole  world,  and  therefore  no  conceivable  righteous- 
ness of  works ;  in  contrast  with  this  is  the  saving 
and  preponderating  righteousness  of  faith,  which  ia 
prepared  by  the  heartiness  of  conduct  toward  the 
law,  in  antithesis  to  extei'ual  legality  (chaps,  i.  18- 
V.  11). 

Second  antithesis :  The  corruption  of  human 
nature,  the  hereditary  character  of  liability  to  sin 
and  of  the  judgment  of  death,  in  which  the  whola 
creature-sphere  of  humanity  is  subject  to  vanity  and 
corruption ;  but  Christ  as  the  preponderating  prin- 
ciple of  the  new  birth  and  of  the  glorification  of 
man,  of  humanity  and  its  sphere,  stands  in  contrast 
with  the  Adamic  principle.  This  principle  is  opera- 
tive from  the  standpoint  of  a  watchful  spiritual  life, 
which  abnegates  the  old  carnal  propensity,  in  order 
to  lead  to  resurrection  a  new  embryonic  life  of  con- 
secrated corporeulness,  in  antithesis  to  the  life  in  the 


328 


THE   EPISTLE    OF   PAUL   TO   THE   ROMANS. 


liability  of  the  flesh  to  death,  to  which  the  external 
kgaiity  also  belongs  (ehap.  v.  12-viii.  ;^9). 

Tlii>d  antithesis :  The  eonu|jtiou  of  the  re- 
ligious people,  tiie  noble  people  of  lumianity,  and  of 
the  nianilc^ted  form  of  their  theocracy,  in  the  judg- 
ment of  iiistorical  hardening,  in  consequence  of  their 
false  reliance  on  natural  descent,  Iiistorical  privi- 
Icos,  and  the  righteousness  of  a  practice  of  legal- 
ism. In  C')ntrj-st  with  this,  on  the  other  iiand,  is  the 
freedom  of  Divine  grace  in  its  election,  ordination, 
and  call,  which,  as  election  distinguishes  i)ersons,  as 
ordination  shows  mercy  and  hardens,  and  as  a  call 
makes  the  judgment  of  hardening  first  of  all  a  means 
for  the  advancement  of  the  call  to  salvation,  and 
filially  cuts  itself  short  and  is  turned  in  another 
direction  by  the  historical  exercise  of  compassion. 
On  both  sides  it  is  conditional,  in  consequence  of  the 
autitliesis  of  pride  and  humility  (chaps,  ix-xi.) 

3.  T,tc  construction  of  t/in  citaptcr.  Tiie  Apostle's 
first  prologue  (vers.  l-r>).  An  afolycjn  for  his  pain- 
ful iluty  to  pronounce  clearly  tlie  decisive  declara- 
tion on  the  rtjeetion  of  the  majority  of  Israel ;  or, 
if  we  may  so  speak,  to  sum  up  all  the  individual  e.\- 
l)eriences  and  Divine  judgments  relating  to  tliis  fall. 
At  the  same  time,  he  pronounces  an  tic  .ij  on  the 
f.ill  of  his  glorious  p'Mjplc  of  God,  on  the  retributive 
rejection  of  the  old  hereditary  people  of  God,  in 
antithesis  to  tlie  realization  of  the  glorious  inherit- 
ance of  God's  children  (chap,  viii.),  witli  the  decla- 
ration of  his  patriotic  and  tragical  feeling  (increa.sed 
and  become  to  him  a  "  thorn  in  the  flesh  "  by  its 
ruin  with  the  direction  which  the  Jews  had  taken, 
and  by  t!ie  hatred  with  which  they  opposed  his  hive) 
— an  analogue  to  David's  i//-.'///  on  the  fall  of  Jona- 
than, Jeremiah's  Lamentations,  and  similar  laments 
in  the  <»ld  Testament.  But  he  finally  gives  expres- 
sion also  to  a  doxohrjii  in  regard  to  the  victorious 
exercise  of  the  authority  of  the  God  of  revelation 
on  Israel,  as  wi'll  in  ita  ancient  history  as  in  its  New 
Testament  fulfilment  in  Christ,  whose  glori!icatio!i 
predoniinalcs  over  the  division  between  believing 
and  unbelieving  Israel.  The  theme  :  The  rejection 
of  the  majority  of  the  members  of  the  Israeliiish 
people  is  not  an  abrogation  of  the  promise  to  the 
tlicocratic  Israel  itself  (vcr.  C). 

First  pi-oof  {from  the  time  of  the  patrinrchs) : 
The  fact  <f  election.  The  election  is  not  made  con- 
ditional by  descent,  nor  by  heirship,  nor  liy  l)irth- 
right,  nor  by  works;  it  is  (iod's  free  exercise  of  love 
in  the  predetermination  of  an  indiviilual  and  per- 
sonal nature,  which  is  only  self-conditioned  by  the 
organic  relation  to  Clu-ist  and  to  each  other  into 
which  the  elect  individuals  shall  enter,  and  by  the 
promise  made  to  them,  in  which  the  thouglit  of  love, 
winch  shall  appear  in  future  conceptions  and  births, 
is  already  rcHectcd.  It  unites  in  the  relative  an- 
tithesis (Jacob  and  E.sau)  the  infinite/;/  i/rcit  differ- 
ence in  tlie  (lualifications  of  persons  for  (Jod's  king- 
dom, but  not  the  absolute  antithesi.^  of  salvation  and 
con<lemnation  (vers.  6-13).— [The  doctrine  of  the 
predestination  of  a  part  of  the  human  race  to  eter- 
nal perdition  by  no  means  follows  from  the  state- 
Incais  of  these  verses.  Even  ("alvin  himself  calls 
the  do'cn-e  of  reprobiition  "  horrible "  {dic.rrtnm 
horrihili ,  nitamfn  wrmn),  and  it  i-i  o[)posed  to  those 
passages  of  the  Sicriplures  according  to  which  (Jod 
wills  not  the  death  of  the  sinner,  but  that  he  might 
turn  unto  Him  and  live.  (1.)  The  Apostle  is  not 
treating  here  at  all  of  eternal  pcnlition  and  ctcrmd 
iloiMei/nes^,  but  of  a  temporal  preference  and  dinrr- 
■>ard  of  nations  in  the  gradual  historical  develoi)- 


ment  of  the  plan  of  redemption,  which  will  finally 
include  all  (chap.  xi.  '25,  32),  and  hence  the  descend- 
ants of  Esau,  who  stainl  figuratively  for  all  the  Gen- 
tiles (Amos  ix.  11,  12;  Obad.  18-21).  On  tliil 
account  we  may  well  say,  with  Bengel :  "  not  all 
Israelites  are  saved,  nor  all  Edoniitcs  lost."  (2.) 
The  hate  of  God  toward  Esau  and  his  race  cannot 
be  sundered  from  their  evil  life,  their  obduracy 
against  God  and  enmity  to  His  people.  It  is  true, 
ver.  11  (witli,  however,  ver.  13,  does  not  stand  so 
closely  connected  as  vcr.  12)  seems  to  represent  not 
only  the  love  of  God,  but  His  hatred  as  transferred 
even  into  the  mother's  womb.  But  it  must  not  be 
forgotten  that,  to  the  omniscient  One,  there  is  no 
disiiiiction  of  time,  and  all  the  future  is  to  Him 
present.  Besides,  an  essential  distinction  must  be 
made  between  the  relation  of  God  to  good  and  evil, 
to  avoid  unscriptural  error.  God  loves  the  good, 
because  He  produces  tlie  very  good  that  is  in  them  ; 
and  He  elects  them,  not  on  account  of  their  faith 
and  their  holiness,  but  to  faith  and  holiness.  But 
it  cannot  be  said,  on  the  other  hand,  that  He  hatca 
the  evil  men  because  He  produces  the  very  evil  that 
is  in  them  ;  for  that  would  be  absurd,  and  destroy 
His  holiness ;  but  He  hates  them  on  account  of  the 
evil  that  they  do  or  will  do  in  opposition  to  His  will. 
While  human  goodness  is  the  effect  of  Divine  love 
and  grace,  on  tlie  contrary,  human  wickedness  is  the 
cause  of  Divine  hatred  and  abhorrence  ;  and  on  that 
account  alone  can  it  be  the  object  of  the  punitive 
wrath  and  condemnatory  decree  of  God.  Were  evil 
tlie  effect  of  His  own  agency.  He  would  be  obliged 
to  condemn  himself — which  is  irrational  and  blas- 
phemous.— P.  S.l 

Second  proof  {from  the  time  of  the  giving  of 
the  law) :  The  fact  of  ordimdion.  The  predetermi- 
nation of  the  historical  train  of  development  of  per- 
sons is  the  free  exercise  of  God's  (Jehovah's)  right- 
eousness on  persons.  It  is  not  made  con<litional  on 
a  self-volitional  human  willing  and  running;  but  it 
conditions  itself  by  its  con.sequence  in  relation  to  a 
definite  human  course  of  conduct,  by  further  show- 
ing mercy  on  him  to  whom  mercy  has  once  been 
shown,  and  allowing  all  his  experiences  to  contribute 
to  his  salvation,  and,  by  its  influence  and  long-sniler- 
ing,  leading  him  who  has  once  hardened  himself  to 
the  judgment  of  hardening.  In  the  infinitely  vast 
antithesis  between  the  one  to  whom  mercy  has  been 
shown  and  the  hardened  one  (Moses  and  Pharaoh), 
it  constitutes  the  perspective  of  the  antithesis  of  a 
final  glorification  and  rejection,  but  not  yet  this  an- 
titheses— ;.  c,  the  final  judgment  itself  (vers.  14-18). 

Third  proof  (from  the  time  of  the  development 
of  Israel  of  the  Old  'J'egtamen') : 

a.  The  f  id  of  the  coll.  The  free  exercise  of 
Divine  wi.-idom  on  the  tiiijniin,  or  the  spiritual,  plas- 
tic material  of  the  ancient  world,  aud  especially  on 
Israel.  This  exercise  is  not  made  conditional  on  the 
historical  Israel's  claims  to  inheritanei',  and  had  the 
right  to  make  of  Israel,  a-s  it  had  become,  ves-sels 
unto  honor  ami  unto  dishonor,  by  a  universal  Chris- 
tianization.  But  the  call  makes  itself  conditicuial  liy 
the  actual  state,  in  which  it  still  endures  with  much 
long-su  lie  ring  the  existing  vessels  of  wrath,  which 
are  already  fitted  to  destruction,  that,  by  thotr  exist- 
ence and  opposition,  the  full  disjilay  of  (Jod's  glory, 
of  His  .spiritual  revelation  in  Christ,  may  be  made 
known  on  the  vessels  of  mercy.  It  thereby  consti- 
tutes the  economic  antithesis  of  hanleiiing  in  the 
Xew  Testament,  and  of  the  historical  juditial  curse 
1  on  the  great  mass  of  Israel,  and  of  an  opposing  im 


CHAPTER   IX.    1-33. 


329 


measurable  display  of  tlie  glory  of  its  exercise  of 
mercy  in  the  Gentile  world.  But  this  antithesis,  as 
wo  shall  I'urlher  perceive,  does  not  preclude  the  pos- 
sibility of  mercy  on  individual  Jews,  and  of  the  re- 
jeciiou  of  individual  Gentiles  (vers.  19-24). 

b.  The  proof  of  this  freedom  of  the  Divine  call 
from  the  Old  I'lxtament.  First,  the  equalization  of 
Je'»"s  and  Gentiles  in  their  rLJectiou  is  prophesied 
by  Hosea  (ver.  'lb).  Second,  tiie  equalization  of 
Gentiles  and  Jews  in  the  mercy  shown  to  the  latter 
(ver.  26).  Likewise,  Lsaiah  has  prophesied,  first,  tlie 
reduction  of  the  great  mass  of  Israel  to  a  small  rem- 
nant, who  shall  be  saved  from  tlie  judgment  (ver. 
27);  but  second,  the  certainty  that  such  a  remnant 
Bhail  arise  from  a  judgment  cut  short  by  righteous 
mildness  (vers.  28,  29). 

Fourth  ]iroof:  The  correspondence  of  the  exer- 
cise of  Divine  authority  on  Jews  and  Gentiles,  with 
their  ethical  conduct,  or  with  the  antithesis  of  faith 
and  unbelief.  The  conclusion  from  the  whole  chap- 
ter, as  drawn  by  the  spirit  of  the  Apostle  (vers. 
80-33). 

[4.  This  chapter  cannot  be  fairly  explained  or 
properly  honored  without  a  recognition  of  the  pro- 
found truth  which  lies  at  the  foundation  of  the  doc- 
trine of  election,  viz.,  the  free,  unconditioned  grace 
of  God.  Those  expositors  who  would  limit  the  sov- 
ereignty of  the  Divine  will  by  human  freedom,  and 
deduce  salvation  more  or  less  from  the  creature, 
must  do  great  violence  to  the  text  if  they  make  it 
accord  with  their  systems.  Yet  we  must  guard 
against  the  opposite  extreme  of  supralapsariauism, 
which,  with  fearful  logical  consistency,  makes  God 
the  author  of  tlie  fall  of  Adam,  hence  of  sin  ;  thus 
really  denying  both  God's  holiness  and  love  and 
man's  accountability,  to  the  ultimate  extinguishment 
of  all  morality.  Many,  indeed,  have  held  this  view, 
whose  lives,  by  a  happy  inconsistency,  were  far  bet- 
ter than  their  theories.  They  arrived  at  this  ex- 
treme position  through  a  one-sided  explanation  of 
this  passage,  and  through  the  logical  consequence  of 
their  conception  of  the  sovereignty  oi'  God's  all- 
determining  will.  But  if  we  would  not  have  the 
Bible  prove  any  thing  man  wishes,  we  must  inter- 
pret single  pa.ssages  in  their  connection  with  the 
whole,  and  according  to  the  analogy  of  faith.  In 
the  early  part  of  this  Epistle  (cha|i.  i.  18 ;  iii.  30), 
Paul  unequivocally  declaies  that  God  is  not  the  au- 
thor, but  the  enemy  and  judge  of  evil ;  how,  then, 
can  he  here  affirm  a  specific  Divine  foreordination 
of  sin  and  perdition?  In  chap.  v.  12  ff.  he  shows 
that  redemption  through  Christ,  as  to  its  indwelling 
power  and  purpose,  is  fully  as  comprehensive  as  the 
fall  of  Adam.  With  this  agree  many  passages,  which 
Bpeak  of  God's  sincere  will  to  save  all  men,  and  of 
a  general  call,  extended  not  at  once,  but  graduallj', 
to  all  (Ezek.  xxxiii.  11 ;  1  Tim.  ii.  4  ;  Titus  ii.  11  ; 
2  Peter  iii.  9).  Accordingly,  Paul  must  have  in 
mind  here  such  a  general  reprobation,  as  is  either  a 
self-incurred  result  of  unbelief,  or  only  a  negative 
preparation  for  the  extension  of  the  plan  of  salva- 
tion, which  it  therefore  ultimately  furthers.  Be- 
sides, in  chap.  x.  the  casting  away  of  the  Jews 
is  "Attributed  to  their  own  uiibclief  hence  to  the 
personal  guilt  of  the  creature ;  and  in  chap.  xi. 
th»'  ^sjection  is  represented  as  temporary.  In  God's 
griw'ous  decree,  the  fall  cf  the  Jews  redounds  to 
the  blessing  of  the  Gentiles,  and  the  conversion 
of  the  Gentiles  ultimately  to  the  salvation  of  the 
Jews.'  So  He  has  permitted  the  (all  of  Adam,  in 
Order  to   redeem   humanity   in    Christ,  the   second 


Adam  (ver.  12  ff.) ;  He  has  included  all  under  di* 
obedience,  that  He  might  have  mercy  upon  all  (chap, 
xi.  .32  ;  comp.  Gal.  iii.  22).  But  the  salvation  can 
become  actual  only  gradually  ;  and  the  gradual  re- 
demption of  all  (not  all  as  individuals,  but  the  mass 
in  an  organic,  not  a  numerical  sense)  presupposes 
the  temporary  rejection  of  some. 

The  Scriptures  teach,  on  the  one  hand,  Ihe  ab 
solute  causality  and  unconditioned  grace  of  God  ; 
and,  on  the  other,  the  moral  nature  of  man,  includ- 
ing also  his  relative  freedom  and  his  re.'^ponsibility 
(i.  p.,  human  personality).  They  ascribe  redemption 
and  sanctification,  as  well  as  the  creation  and  main- 
tenance of  all  things,  to  God  alone.  He  works  both 
to  will  and  to  do  of  His  good  pleasure  (Phil.  ii.  13) ; 
no  man  cometh  to  the  Son,  except  the  Father  draw 
him  (John  vi.  37,  44) ;  without  the  Son,  believers 
can  do  nothing  (John  xv.  5).  Not  only  the  begin- 
ning,  but  also  the  progress  and  completion  of  con- 
version, are  attributed  to  God  (Jer.  xxxi.  18  ;  Heb. 
xii.  2  ;  Luke  xxii.  32  ;  Eph.  ii.  10 ;  1  Cor.  iv.  7  ; 
2  Thess.  iii.  2  ;  1  John  v.  4).  Hence  all  believers 
confess,  with  Paul :  "  By  the  grace  of  God  I  am 
what  I  am  "  (1  Cor,  xv.  10),  and  ascribe  all  the 
honor  and  glory  to  the  Lord  alone  (2  Cor.  x.  17), 
Indeed,  even  evil,  as  a  phenomenon,  and  according 
to  its  material  forces,  cannot  be  excluded  from  the 
absolute  activity  of  God.  He  hardens  Pharaoh  and 
raises  up  Nebuchadnezzar  ;  He  creates  the  light  and 
the  darkness ;  He  gives  peace  and  effects  evil  (Isa. 
xlv.  7) ;  and  there  is  no  evil  (misfortune)  in  the  city, 
that  the  Lord  has  not  done  (Amos  iii.  6). — On  the 
other  hand,  however,  the  Scriptures  never  treat  of 
man  as  a  mere  machine,  but  as  a  moral  being.  They 
hold  up  before  him,  in  the  Old  Testament,  laws,  with 
the  promise  of  blessing  if  he  obeys,  and  the  threat- 
ening of  a  cui'se  if  he  transgresses  ;  they  offer  him, 
in  the  New  Testament,  the  gospel,  baptism,  faith ; 
bid  him,  with  fear  and  trembling,  work  out  his  own 
salvation  (Phil.  ii.  12);  present  to  him  the  highest 
moral  duties  as  commands :  Be  ye  holy,  be  ye  per- 
fect ;  and  account  sin  and  the  rejection  of  salvation 
as  his  own  personal  fault.  "  How  often  would  I 
have  gathered  you,  as  a  hen  gathereth  her  ciiickens 
under  her  wings,  and  ye  wotdd  not"  (Matt,  xxiii.  27; 
Luke  xiii.  34).* 

*  [Forbes  thus  lays  down  the  fundamental  truths  on  thia 
difficult  subject  : 

"All  pood  originates  from  God. 
•  All  evil  originates  from  the  ci'eatiire. 

Election  oi-iginates  in  the  free  grnce  of  God. 
Rei^robation  originates  in  the  free-will  of  man. 

To  God  belongs  the  whole  glory  of  the  salvation  of  the 

Elect. 
To  man  belongs  the  whole  responsibility  of  the  ruin  of  the 

Reprobate." 

See  his  Dissertation,  pp.  380-475. 

That  these  positions  are  not  reconcilable  by  human 
lotrie,  is  evident  from  the  discussions  on  the  subject ;  but 
this  cannot,  of  itself,  disprove  then-  tiiith.  It  is  the  old 
and  ever-recurrii  g  mystery  of  the  origin  of  evil.  Forbes 
seeks  to  prove  that  these  positions  are  compatible  with  the 
doctrinMl  statements  of  the  Westminster  Asecmbly.  Those 
who  wish  the  sharpest  pridestinarian  views,  may  find  thoia 
in  Haldane's  notes  on  this  cha|iter.  The  Synod  of  Dort, 
■which  is  considered  by  many  the  representative  <pf  hj^per- 
Calvinism,  only  goes  thus  far  in  speaking  of  the  reprobates  : 
"  Whom  God,  out  of  H:s  sovereign,  most  lUt-t,  ineprehensi" 
I  ble  and  unchangeable  good  pleasure,  bath  decreed  to  Itave 
in  the  common  misery  into  which  they  have  wilfully  plungf4 
themselves,  and  not  to  bestow  upon  ihom  saving  faith  and 
the  grace  of  conversion  ;  but  permitting  them,  in  His  just 
judgment,  to  follow  their  ov.n  way,  at  last  for  the  declara- 
tion of  His  justice,  to  condemn  and  punish  them  forever, 
not  only  on  ac  ount  of  their  unbelief,  but  also  for  tbeiz 


330 


THE   EPISTLE   OF  PAUL   TO   THE   ROMANS. 


If  the  first  truth  respectiug  the  absolute,  creative 
causality  of  God  iii  the  works  of  creation,  redemp- 
tion, and  sanetification  be  denied,  we  fall  into  the 
Pelagian  error,  which  destroys  the  very  marrow  of 
Chrisiianity,  and  attributes  salvatioa  to  the  creature  ; 
but  if  the  second  class  of  Scripture  texts  be  denied 
or  wre:iCed,  we  are  brought  to  the  brink  of  the 
abyss  of  fatalism  or  Pantheism  ;  man  is  degraded 
into  a  mere  instrument  without  a  will,  and  his  re- 
eponsibility,  guilt,  and  punishment  abrogated.  The 
task  of  theology  consists,  not  in  the  establishment 
of  one  of  these  postulates  at  the  expense  of  the 
other,  but  in  reconciling  both,  and  bringing  into 
right  relations  with  each  other  the  infinite  and  finite 
causality ;  in  loosing,  not  in  cutting  the  gordian 
knot.  This  is,  indeed,  one  of  the  greatest  and  most 
ditficult  problems,  which  can  never  be  fully  solved 
from  the  standpoint  of  earthly  knowledge.  Only 
after  the  accomplished  victory  over  evil  can  the 
deep,  dark  enigma  of  evil,  which  forms  the  main 
difficulty  in  the  problem,  be  fully  solved.* 

For  practical  and  popular  use,  the  following  i-e- 
marks  will  suffice : 

(L)  There  is  an  eternal  predestination  of  believ- 
ers unto  holiness  and  blessedness,  and  hence  they 
must  ascribe  all  the  glory  of  their  redemption,  from 
beginning  to  end,  to  the  unmerited  giace  of  God 
alone. 

(2.)  They  do  not,  however,  on  this  account  cease 
to  be  free  agents,  responsible  for  all  their  doings ; 
but,  as  God  works  in  nature  not  magically  and  im- 
mediately, but  through  natural  laws,  so  He  works  in 
men,  through  their  wills,  hence  through  the  media- 
tion of  finite  causes  ;  and  the  more  that  grace  is  de- 
veloped within  them,  so  much  the  more  is  their  true 
freedom  developed ;  so  that  perfect  holiness  and  per- 
fect freedom  coincide  with  each  otiicr.  Acc(jrding- 
ly,  the  highest  freedom  is  the  complete  trium|)h  over 
the  evil,  and  is  consequently  identical  with  the  moral 
necessity  of  the  good.  In  this  sense,  God  is  free 
just  because  He  is  absolutely  holy. 

(3.)  There  is  no  Divine  foreordination  of  sin  as 
gin,  although  He  has  foreseen  it  from  all  eternity,  and. 


other  sins.  And  this  is  the  decree  of  reprobation  which  by 
no  means  makos  God  the  author  of  sin  (the  very  thDUplit 
of  which  is  blasphemy),  but  declares  Him  to  be  an  awful, 
iiTcprchciisible,  and  righteous  judce  and  avenger"  (Canon 
i.,  A.rt.  XV.).  This  is  as  far  as  any  ought  to  gn,  but  it  U  by  no 
moans  a  reconciliation  of  the  two  sides  of  revealed  truth, 
or  an  attempt  at  it.— R.l 

*  [A  few  schnUn  may  be  added  here  :  1.  The  relation  of 
scientific  theologj'  to  revealed  truth,  is  that  of  science  in' 
genortil  to  the  truth  it  seeks  to  systematize.  Hence  the- 
ology has  txnsolved  problems,  and  thoic  furnish  the  stimu- 
lus to  further  investigation.  2.  Thenlogy  is  nut  to  he  con- 
Bidered  untrustworthy  in  its  Bettlemcnt  of  great  questiou.i, 
because  some  remain  unsolved,  nor  can  the  failure  of  iU 
attempts  at  solution  invalidate  cither  the  positions  already 
won,  or  the  separ.ite  truths  which  it  has  not  yet  reduced  to 
a  system.  3.  The  modesty  of  true  science  lias  a  place  in 
theological  discussion.  If  theologians  claim  that  their 
attempt  at  the  solution  of  such  a  i)roblom  as  that  prescntrd 
In  this  chapter  is  the  only  one  that  should  be  madi-,  the 
objector  may  feel  that,  in  successfully  opposing  that  view, 
he  has  overthrown  the  truth  itself  4.  This  problem  is  one 
that  Ls  ontologicjil  as  well  as  theological,  and  hence  cannot 
bo  escaped  by  rejecting  rovelution.  Atheism  avoids  it 
Bolely  by  negation,  p.intheLsm  by  opposing  the  testimony 
of  our  own  cinsciousness.  Whoever  bclirves  in  a  personal 
God  and  his  own  personality,  is  confronted  with  it.  The 
Bafcr  piHitiim  for  a  child  of  Ood  to  tike  is  that  which  leaves 
the  difficulty  where  the  ifreatest  glory  is  ascribed  to  Ood. 
History  shows  that  those  who  thus  once  were  not  the  least 
toncenied  to  live  under  the  fullest  sen.'io  of  their  accoii-it- 
kbility.  The  Christian  life  is  thus  far  ttu!  only  solution  of 
this  great  problem ;  n  mystery  which  is  prui4ically  reeon- 
•ilud  only  hy  one  yet  greater,  the  mystery  of  godliueas,  Ood 
manifest  ill  the  Uesh.  — It.] 


with  respect  to  redemption,  permitted  it,  while  coiv 
stantly  overruling  it  to  His  purposes.  Hence,  those 
who  are  lost  are  lost  through  their  own  fault,  and 
must  blame  their  own  unbelief,  which  rejects  the 
means  of  salvation  proSered  them  by  God. 

(4.)  In  tlie  lime  of  the  calling  of  nations  and  io* 
dividuals  to  salvation,  God  proceeds  according  to  a 
plan  of  eternal  wisdom  and  love,  which  we  cannot 
fathom  here,  but  sliould  adore  in  silent  reverence. 

(5.)  The  right  use  of  the  doctrine  of  election  ia 
the  humbling  of  sinners  and  the  comforting  of  be- 
lievers, as  well  as  the  increase  of  their  gratitude  and 
happiness.  Only  a  culpable  misunderstanding  and 
misuse  of  it  can  lead  to  carnal  security  and  to  de- 
spair. 

(6.)  Instead  of  meditating  much  upon  the  pro- 
found depths  of  the  Divine  decrees,  it  is  better  for 
each  to  make  his  own  calling  and  election  sure,  and, 
with  fear  and  trembling,  to  work  out  his  own  salva- 
tion.— P.  S.] 

6.  The  lorbearance  and  confidence  with  which 
the  Apostle  pronounces  his  opinion  on  the  fall  of 
Israel,  his  patriotic  and  truly  human  pain  (2  Cor.  xii. 
7-9),  and  his  prophetic  elevation  above  it,  reaching 
to  sublimity,  are  characteristics  of  this  wonderftil 
man  of  God. 

6.  Israel's  glory  is  revealed  in  the  correspond- 
ence of  its  great  actual  blessings  with  its  chosen  in- 
dividuals. The  line  of  actual  saving  blessings  enters 
into  reciprocal  operation  with  the  jyersonal  line  of 
the  fathers  down  to  Christ  according  to  the  flesh,  the 
climax  in  which  divinity  and  humanity  unite.  Its 
foundation  is  Israel's  adoption,  in  Abraham,  to  son- 
ship.  On  this  there  is  founded,  first,  the  patriarchal 
antithesis  of  the  (toiu  or  of  the  revealing  angel  of 
Jehovah,  and  of  the  covenants,  in  which  the  evan- 
gelical clement  is  properly  plac-cd  in  advance  of  the 
legal  element,  conformably  to  the  character  of  the 
patriarchal  revealed  religion ;  then  comes  the  an- 
tithesis of  the  Mosaic  period,  of  the  gift  of  the  law, 
and  of  the  services ;  and  here,  in  conformity  with 
the  character  of  the  legal  economy,  the  legal  ele- 
ment precedes  the  evangelical.  Both  the  patriarchal 
and  Mosaic  economics  then  comprise  each  other,  just 
as  the  evangelical  and  legal  elements  are  comprised 
in  the  promises  of  the  jiroplietic  period.  It  has 
already  been  remarked  that,  notwith.-itaiiding  this 
articulation,  each  particular  of  the  attributes  men- 
tioned  is  peculiar  in  a  more  general  sense  to  the  en- 
tire theocracy. 

7.  Careful  attention  must  be  paid  to  the  fact  that, 
in  the  election  in  vers.  G-18,  the  connnunication  of 
the  Divine  decree  precedes  the  birth  of  the  chil- 
dren. But,  on  tiio  other  hand,  in  the  ordination  in 
vers.  14-18,  it  apjilies  to  characters  already  existing 
— .Moses  and  Pharaoh — in  accordance  with  the  direc- 
tion which  they  have  taken  them.selves.  In  the  call 
in  vers.  19-24,  this  communication  finally  follows 
the  state  of  the  case  already  existing :  Vessels  of 
wrath,  vessels  of  mercy.  From  the  whole  of  this 
section,  clia[)3.  ix-xi.,  it  follows  that  the  decrees 
underlying  these  communications  belong  also  to 
eternity.  But  they  belong  to  eternity  as  decrees 
which  are  conditioned  upon  individual  conduct,  as 
God  universally  conditions  iiimself  in  the  measures 
which  He  adopts  in  reference  to  persons  to  be  deter- 
mined or  already  determined,  aiul  their  personal  re- 
lalions.  The  decree  of  election  (or  of  love)  takes 
cognizance  of  no  other  condition  than  that  the  sin. 
pie  individual  must  be  defined  according  to  the  qrgan. 
ism  of  the  members  of  God's  kingdom  in  Christ 


CHAPTER  IX.   1-33. 


331 


The  decree  of  ordination  (or  of  righteousness)  is 
conditioned  by  the  fact  that  individuals,  in  their  free 
self-determination,  need,  both  for  themselves  and  for 
their  lehition  to  the  whole  body,  their  historical  des- 
tination and  special  guidance.  The  decree  of  the 
call  (or  of  wisdom)  is  conditioned  by  the  foct  that  it 
makes  the  judgments  pronounced  on  unbelief  itself 
means  for  subserving  the  promotion  of  faith.  The 
distinction  of  the  elder  theology,  decretum  prcedes- 
tinationu,  decretum  gratice,  decretum  Justificdiotds, 
has  confused  election  and  ordination  —  which  has 
generally  been  the  case  from  Augustine's  time  down 
to  the  present.  This  distinction  has  likewise  over- 
looked the  fact  that  the  decretum  gratice  constitutes 
the  very  centre  of  the  decretum  prcedeftinaiionis 
(Christ  6  MQKTuivos,  Acts  x.  42  ;  Rom.  i.  4).  The 
decreticm  justificationis  is  most,  intimately  connected 
with  the  decree  respecting  the  vocaiio. 

8.  We  have  elsewhere  brought  out  the  truth, 
that  the  wonderful  flower  of  tlie  biblical  doctrine  of 
election,  like  the  aloe,  has  been  long  concealed,  yet 
with  its  character  determined,  in  the  sharp  thistle  of 
the  ecclesiastical  doctrine  of  predestination  ;  and 
tliat  it  is  a  duty  of  our  day  to  acquire,  with  its  full 
idea,  the  whole  depth  and  glory  of  the  biblical  doc- 
trine of  personality  ;  but  not  to  seek  to  weaken  and 
render  indifferent,  by  the  old  Lutheran  or  Arminian- 
Reformed  definitions,  the  solution  of  an  enigma  to 
whose  real  solution  every  living  distinction  of  indi- 
viduals contributes,  more  than  a  scholastic  hatching 
of  confessional  antitheses  can  do.  In  this  respect, 
Lavater's  Physiognomy  may  be  regarded  as  an  ex- 
planatory enlargement  upon  Calvin  and  Zwingli. 
The  mystery  of  predestination,  like  that  of  the 
atonement,  and  every  other  Christian  mystery,  is  re- 
flected in  the  midst  of  life. 

9.  Ver.  1.  The  intimate  proximity  of  salvation 
and  sorrow  (chap.  viii.  39  ;  ix.  1)  in  the  Apostle's 
state  of  mind,  as  in  our  Lord's  stiites  of  mind. 

10.  Ver.  3.  For  more  particular  information  on 
the  ban,  see  Tholuck,  p.  472.  [See  also  Excursus 
on  Anathema,  p.  302.— R.] 

■  11.  The  Apostle's  patriotism  is  a  tragical  feeling, 
subject  to  the  dominion  and  kingdom  of  Christ,  and 
thereby  glorified  to  the  intercessory  feeling. — On 
the  Shekinah  (doza),  see  the  note  in  Tiioluck,  p., 
477. 

12.  On  the  divinity  of  Christ,  and  the  relevant 
passages  of  the  New  Testament  in  which  He  is  in 
part  called  really  God,  and  in  part  appears  to  be  so 
called  (John  i.  1  ;  xvi.  28  ;  1  John  v.  20  ;  Acts  xx. 
28  ;  the  present  passage,  ver.  5  ;  Rom.  xvi.  27  ; 
Eph.  V.  5  ;  1  Tim.  iii.  16  ;  2  Tim.  iv.  18  ;  Titus  ii. 
13;  1  Peter  iv.  11;  2  Peter  iii.  18;  Rev.  v.  13), 
comp.  Tholuck,  p.  482.  My  Fositiv  Dogm.,  p. 
160  flF. 

13.  Biblical  doxologies  :  Rom.  i.  25  ;  ix.  5  ;  xi. 
36  ;  xvi.  27,  &c. ;  2  Tim.  iv.  18  ;  1  Peter  iv.  11 ; 
2  Peter  iiu  18,  and  others. 

14.  Yer.  6.  Not  all  are  Israel  which  are  of 
Israel.  This  applies  also  to  every  nation,  to  every 
confession,  to  every  Christian  community,  just  as  it 
applies  in  general  to  the  branches  of  the  mystical 
vine,  Christ  (John  xv.  2). 

13.  The  children  of  the  flesh  and  the  children 
of  promise.  See  the  Commentani  on  John,  i.  13. 
[Comp.  Galadaxs,  pp.  119,  123.— R.] 

16.  On  the  theological  discussions  with  reference 
to  the  doctrine  of  predestination  in  the  present  sec- 
tion, see  Tiioluck,  pp.  490-506,  and  below. 

17.  Ver.  15.     On  the  idea  of  consistency  in  the 


name  of  Jehovah,  as  well  in  His  having  compa* 
sion  as  in  judging,  see  the  IJxeg.  Notes.  It  is  in  har- 
mony with  the  righteousness  of  Jehovah's  exercise 
of  authority,  that  even  the  judgment  of  death  re- 
dounds to  the  life  of  the  sincere  and  compassionated 
one  ;  while  the  gospel,  on  the  other  hand,  is  a  savor 
of  death  unto  death  to  the  perverse  and  unbeliev 
ing.  But  the  consistency  of  Jehovah  does  not  lie  in 
His  carrying  out  the  abstract  decrees  of  His  own 
will,  inflexibly  and  in  an  exact  direction,  but  in  Hia 
remaining  like  himself,  and  therefore  in  His  even 
assuming  a  different  position  in  relation  to  the 
changed  positions  of  man  ;  yet  this  is,  of  course,  in 
harmony  with  the  consistency  of  the  principles  es- 
tablished and  reahzed  by  Him.  Therefore,  there  is 
propriety  in  speaking  of  a  Divine  repentance — for 
example,  in  the  history  of  the  Flood.  The  position 
of  mankind  toward  God  has  become  so  thoroughly 
perverted,  that  the  Creator  must  become  the  De- 
stroyer.    Comp.  Ps.  xviii.  24-27. 

18.  On  the  Egyptians'  remembrance  of  the  Pha- 
raoh under  whom  Israel  went  forth,  see  the  article 
^fiypten,  by  Lepsius,  in  Herzog's  Theol.  Encyc, 
and  Tholuck,  p.  516.  On  the  hardenings  of  Pharaoh 
especially,  see  Exod.  iv.  21.  Since  the  judgment  of 
hardness  is  here  declared  collectively,  the  passage 
does  not  decide  on  the  succession  of  the  particular 
ones.  The  same  applies  to  chap.  vii.  3.  Then  the 
particular  historical  ones  follow.  First,  Pharaoh  ia 
hardened  by  the  counteraction  of  the  magicians 
(chap.  vii.  13,  22).  A  significant  illustration  of  the 
free  volition  of  Pharaoh  in  the  latter  case ;  see 
chap.  vii.  23.  In  chap.  viii.  15  we  read  :  "  Pharaoh 
hardened  his  heart,  and  hearkened  not  unto  them." 
And  now  his  heart  becomes  hardened,  even  in  spite 
of  the  warning  of  the  terrified  magicians ;  chap, 
viii.  19.  Again,  in  chap.  viii.  32  :  "  And  Pharaoh 
hardened  his  heart."  We  read  the  same  thing  in 
chap.  ix.  7.  But  in  chap.  ix.  12  we  read:  "And 
the  Lord  hardened  the  heart  of  Pharaoh."  In  chap, 
ix.  34,  on  the  other  hand,  we  again  meet  with  self- 
hardening,  which  is  then  designated  as  a  judgment ; 
ver.  35.  In  chap.  x.  27,  the  Lord  again  hardens 
him.     The  same  occurs  in  chap.  xi.  10  ;  xiv.  8. 

As  regards  this  whole  series  of  particulars,  the 
atomistic  exegesis  of  earlier  times  led  to  its  being  re- 
garded as  fatalistic.  But  we  must,  in  the  first  place, 
distinguish  the  prophetical  declarations  of  the  judg- 
ment of  hardening  as  general  views  of  the  whole 
course  of  events,  from  the  historical  particulars.  As 
for  the  historical  particulars,  v/e  must  always  be  very 
careful  to  notice  that  the  hardening  is  not  a  single  act, 
but  a  long  succession  of  acts,  which  succeed  momen- 
tary shocks  and  apparent  awakenings.  But  the  periods 
of  hardening  themselves  are  divided  into  three  partic- 
ular acts:  1.  Pharaoh  is  hardened  by  the  magicians; 
2.  He  hardens  himself;  3.  The  Lord  hardens  him. 
We  must  further  consider,  that  he  always  hardens 
himself  just  as  soon  as  he  has  recovered  a  little 
from  the  penal  judgments.  But  the  series  of  his 
expressions  of  penitence  must  be  regarded  as  aris- 
ing particularly  from  fear  (attritio,  not  contritio). 
Pharaoh's  starting-point  is  the  defiant  question : 
Who  is  the  Lord  ?  chap.  v.  2.  Then  he  requires  a 
miraculous  proof;  chap.  vii.  7-10.  He  does  not 
take  the  first  plague  to  heart,  because  the  magicians 
do  likewise  ;  chap.  vii.  22,  23.  The  first  shock  and 
its  characteristic  expression  ;  chap.  viii.  8.  Similar 
emotion ;  ver.  28.  The  first  confession  of  sin ; 
chap.  ix.  27,  28.  The  second,  chap.  x.  16.  It  is 
characteristic  that  Pharaoh  pays  least  attention  to 


S32 


THE   EPISTLE   OF   PAUL   TO   THE   ROMANS. 


tho  plagues  that  least  affect  him  and  his  house. 
Tills  may  bo  s^-eii  in  the  first  and  tiiird  plagues ;  but 
he  observes  with  more  attontioii,  on  the  other  hand, 
tiie  seeDriii  and  fourth,  which  rest  heavily  upon  liim- 
Belf.  lie  lines  not  trouljle  liimself  about  the  mur- 
rain the  boils  and  biains  seem  to  soare  iiini  person- 
ally. The  tliunder  and  liail,  on  the  contrary,  terrify 
him  ;  the  locusts  also,  but  the  darkness  less.  Final- 
ly, the  death  of  the  first-born  at  the  decisive  moment 
bioaks  tiie  tyrant's  defiance,  yet  without  being  aide 
to  Convert  him.  And  it  is  out  of  this  wonderful  net- 
work of  human  otlences  and  Divine  judgments  that 
a  ponderous  fitalistic  decree  has  been  contrived. 
Meyer  quite  gratuitously  opposes  Olsliausen's  expla- 
nation, that  the  hardening  assumes  at  the  outset  tho 
already  existing  beginnings  of  evil.  The  ijv  Oi/.n, 
does  not  oitpose  it,  for  God  can  let  man  die  before 
his  hardening.  Meyei,  also,  does  not  favor  Calovius' 
delinitions  of  hardening,  that  God  does  not  harden 
man  ivt{.>yi^Ti/.i'K,  but  1.  ffiy/(ii()fjTt.x(7i^,  propter  per- 
misxioiuni  ;  2.  okioo/hitixiTi^,  pir:>p/er  occnsionem  ; 
3.   iY/.(tTci).n,mi.y.(~)s ;    4.  na<^a()oTi.y.iii^, 

19.  Just  as  Pharaoh  hardened  himself  more  and 
more  at  Moses'  deeds  of  faith,  so  was  Moses  always 
advanced  and  strengthened  in  faith  by  the  trials  of 
faith  which  were  prepared  for  him  by  Pharaoh's  hard- 
eidngs  —  that  is,  by  the  ajiparent  failure  of  his 
miraculous  deeds.  This  is  a  fundamental  l:iw  of 
(iod's  kingdom.  The  kingdom  of  darkness  displays 
itself  in  its  reciprocal  action  with  the  kingdom  of 
light,  but  the  latter  is  also  displayed  in  its  reciprocal 
action  with  the  former. 

20.  Tholuck's  explanation  on  having  compassion 
and  hardening,  p.  52:5,  harmonizes  with  the  old  Lu- 
theran dogmatics.     Meyer's  r<sumr,  p.  310. 

[i'ages  '6'JO  ft",  4th  edition.  Justice  to  this  au- 
thor, whose  clear  and  acute  exegetical  notes  have 
been  so  freely  used  by  Dr.  Lange,  as  well  as  in  tiie 
additions,  requires  the  insertion  of  a  larger  portion 
of  his  theological  resume  than  is  given  in  the  origi- 
nal. 

"  The  contents  of  chap.  ix.  9-23,  as  they  have 
pre.sented  themselves  purely  exegetically,  and  taken 
in  and  of  themselves,  of  course  exclude  the  idea  of 
a  decree  of  God  conditioned  by  hutnan,  moral  spon- 
taneity ;  for  indeed  God's  i.bx'ilule  activity,  consid- 
ered in  itself  as  such,  eannot  depend  on  that  of  the 
individual ;  but  a  fatalistic  determinism,  which  robs 
man  of  his  self-deterndnation  and  free  self-positing 
for  salvation,  making  him  the  passive  object  of  Di- 
Tine  arbitrarines-;,  must  not  be  deduiH'ii  from  our 
pas-siige  as  a  Pauline  doctrine.  For  tliis  reason,  that 
this  pa.s.sage  is  not  to  be  considered  separately  from 
what  follows  (vers.  30  ff.  ;  x.  11),  and  also  because 
the  countless  exhortations  of  the  Apostle  to  believ- 
ing obedience,  to  steadfastness  ami  Christian  virtue, 
as  well  as  all  his  warnings  against  falling  from  graci', 
are  so  many  witnesses  against  that  dreary  view  which 
ammls  the  nature  of  human  morality  and  resprinsi- 
l)ility.  Shoidd  we,  with  Keiehe,  Kidlner,  Fritzsche, 
and  Krehl,  sujjposc  that  Paul,  in  his  dialectic  zeal, 
hail  permitted  himself  to  be  hurried  into  xclf-ronlrn- 
diction,*  we  would  have  a  self-contradiction  so  mnni- 
fost,  yet  .«»  extremely  important  and  dangerous  in  a 
religious  and  ethical  aspect,  so  harshly  opposed  to 
\he  ('hristian  moral  ideas  of  Divine  holiness  and  hu- 
/can  freedom,  that  it  were  least  of  all  to  be  expect- 
ed of  l/iiK  Apostle,  whose  acuteness  and  dialectic 

•  ^Fritr.Hcho,  il.  p.  550  :  "  M-liu>  m'hi  Pnuhm  rm  fnsissel, 
ti  Arulolcli$,  nun  Oaniali>ht  ulumiiui /uitsfl.  "  (    )— K.) 


skill  cotUd  guard  him  against  it  on  the  one  hand, 
while  especially,  on  the  other,  his  apostolic  illumina- 
tion and  the  depth  and  clearness  of  his  moral  exjie- 
rience  mu-H  guard  him  against  it."  "  lint  this  by 
no  means  justifies  the  interlining  of  the  clear  and 
definite  expressions  of  the  .\postle  in  our  passage, 
on  the  part  of  anti-predestinarianism  from  Origcn 
and  Chryso.stom  until  now,  to  the  effect  that  tho 
moral  self-determination  and  spontaneity  of  man  is 
the  correlative  factor  to  the  Divine  decree.  Tlie 
correct  judgment  of  the  deterministic  propositions 
(vers.  15-23)  lies  rather  between  the  psychologically 
and  morally  impossible  admi.>;sion  of  a  self-contradic- 
tion, and  the  exegetically  impossible  inter[)olation  in 
this  way,  of  thoughts  the  d.rect  opposite  of  the  Apos- 
tle's expression.  How  there  can  be  the  concurrence, 
so  necessary  in  the  moral  world,  of  the  individual 
freedom  and  s|)ont:ineity  of  rmin  and  the  absolute 
self-deterndiuition  and  -.dl-etticiency  of  Ood,  is  in- 
comprehensible to  human  reflection,  at  least  so  long 
as  it  does  not  desert  the  sphere  of  ('fiii«lian  view, 
and  pass  into  the  unscriptnral,  pantheistic  sphere  of 
Identity,  in  which,  indeed,  there  is  no  place  for  free- 
dom in  general.*  Whenever,  of  the  two  truths: 
'  God  is  absolutely  free  and  all-eflicient,'  and  '  man 
has  individual  freedom,  and  is  also  on  his  side,  in  his 
own  self-determination  as  frte  nf/ntf,  the  causer  of 
his  salvation  or  mi.sery,'  we  handle  but  otie,  and  that 
one  consistently,  and  lience,  one-sidedly,  we  are  coni- 
]iclled  to  speak  as  if  the  other  seems  to  be  invalidated 
by  our  reas'ining.  B\it  only  sectiis ;  for,  in  fact, 
there  is  in  this  case  oidy  a  temporary  and  conscious 
abstraction  with  respect  to  the  other."  "  Paul,  then, 
found  himself  in  this  case.  For  he  wished  to  pre- 
sent, in  opposition  to  the  fancy  of  the  Jews  respect- 
ing descent  and  works,  the  free  and  absolute  al- 
mightiness  of  the  Divine  will  and  work,  and  all  the 
more  decidedly  and  exclusively  the  less  he  would 
leave  any  ground  for  the  presumj)tuous  error  of  the 
Jews,  that  (iod  must  be  gracious  to  them.  The 
-\postle  has  here  placed  hiniself  entirely  on  the  abso- 
lute standpoint  of  the  theory  of  (Jod's  [nire  indepen- 
dence, and  that,  too,  with  all  the  l)()ldiiess  of  clear 
consistency  ;  but  only  until  he  has  done  justice  to 
that  ])olemic  jiurpose.  Then  he  returns  (vers.  3(»  if.) 
from  that  abstraction  to  the  humano-mcn-al  stand- 
point of  practice,  so  that  he  grants  to  both  modes 
of  view,  side  by  side,  that  right  which  they  have 
within  the  limits  of  human  thought.  The  view 
which  lies  beyond  these  limits,  the  metaphysical  re- 
lation of  the  essential  connection  of  the  two  ])oints, 
viz.,  objectively  Divine  and  subjectively  human  freo- 
dom  and  voluntary  activity,  was  necessarily  without 
and  beyond  his  present  circuit  of  view.  lie  would 
have  had  no  ocicasion  either  to  enter  upon  this  prol)- 
lem,  since  it  wjts  incumbent  upon  him  to  di-fcit  tho 
Jewish  presunii>lion  with  but  one  siile  of  this — with 
the  absoluti'uess  of  (!oil.  That,  or  how  far  the  Di- 
vine election  is  no  delectus  niilituris,  but  finds  its 
norm  immanently  in  God  himself  through  His  holi- 
ne.is,  ami  thus  may  be  conditioned  by  moral  comli- 
tions  on  the  human  siiie,  remains  for  the  present 
entii'oly  out  of  the  necount.  It  enters,  however, 
with  ver.  ;ii»,  in  which  the  one-sided  method  of  con- 
sidt'ration,  followed  for  a  time,  is  again  compensated 
for,  and  the  ground  afforded  for  a  time  for  apolo- 


•  iStlU  loss  In  modem  mnteri.ilir'in,  whon-  what  is  (prob- 
hh\\  from  hutiit)  ciilli-d  /nr  rivilualinn  is  nttril'Utcd  mainly 
to  climiito  and  food,  i^Kpccially  fish.  Compare  current 
literaluro  ail  luiutram. — IC] 


CHAPTER  IX.   1-33. 


333 


getic  purposes,  to  the  doctrine  of  absolute  decrees, 
is  again  withdrawn." — R,] 

He  opposes  those  who  have  charged  the  Apostle 
with  a  si.'lt-contradiclion — determination  and  free- 
dom (Reiche,  Kiillner,  Fritzsche,  &c.) ;  but  he  him- 
BL'lf  thinks  that  the  metaphysical  relation  of  unity 
betv/een  the  all-prevailing  efficiency  of  God  and 
man's  freedom  is  incomprehensible  by  Christian  re- 
flection, and  that,  thei-efore,  we  can  only  speak  of 
tlie  one,  considered  in  itself  alone,  in  such  a  way 
that  the  other  seems  to  be  removed  by  our  reason- 
ing. But  this  is  not  the  case  if  we  speak  either  of 
human  freedom  or  of  God's  free  grace  in  a  proper 
way.  The  former  assumes  dependence  on  God  ;  the 
latter  requires  faith.  Though  God's  all-efficiency  is 
not  conditional  on  man,  yet  it  conditions  itself  as 
the  personal  exercise  of  authority  in  relation  to  man, 
60  soon  as  he  is  determined  by  election,  according  to 
the  stage  of  development  in  which  man  is.  It  may 
also  be  said  that  the  one  decree  of  God  is  explained, 
according  to  chap.  viii.  29,  30,  in  five  decrees,  and 
these  are  reciprocally  conditional. 

If  the  decree  of  election  were  an  absolute  de- 
termination of  salvation  and  condemnation,  there 
would  be  no  peculiar  decree  of  ordination  or  his- 
torical predetermination ;  God  would  no  more  be 
free  to  say  to  Moses,  "  I  will  have  mercy  on  whom  I 
will  have  mercy."  But  if  the  decree  of  ordination 
were  absolute,  then  we  could  no  more  speak  serious- 
ly of  a  new  decree  of  the  call,  and  still  less  of  a 
free  idea  of  justification,  as  well  as  of  glorification. 
The  Divine  decree  in  relation  to  the  final  judgment 
has  conditioned  itself  by  the  nature  of  all  the  pre- 
ceding decrees.  And  only  in  this  way  does  God 
remain  a  free  God,  while,  on  the  other  hand,  we 
would  make  of  an  unconditional  decree  of  predes- 
tination itself  a  real  divinity,  which  would  have 
bound  the  personal  God.  But  it  is  quite  in  harmo- 
ny with  the  nature  of  religion,  the  real  relation  be- 
tween God  and  man,  that  the  truth  asserts  the 
majesty  of  the  Divine  right  against  every  human 
arrogation,  every  irreligious  claim  against  God.  The 
free  power  of  election  stands  in  opposition  to  the 
claim  of  a  natural  heirship  in  God's  kingdom  ;  the 
free  power  of  gri^ce,  in  its  historical  exercise  of  au- 
thority, opposes  the  claim  to  the  merit  of  works ; 
and  the  free  power  of  the  Divine  call  in  the  eco- 
nomic relations  of  God's  kingdom  opposes  the  claim 
to  both.  If  the  point  is  reached  where  man  will 
make  God  conformable  to  himself,  before  whom  he 
would  present  himself  independently,  yea,  one  whom 
he  thinks  that  he  can  bind  by  "  replying  against " 
him,  then  God  himself  opposes  him  in  His  truth  as 
the  God  who  stands  in  absolute  free  power  above 
him,  and  before  whom  he  is  as  nothing,  or  as  the 
clay  in  the  potter's  hand.  Up  to  this  point  the 
Apostle  must  have  recourse  to  the  Jewish  assump- 
tions against  God's  majesty.  The  pioneers  of  the 
Reformation,  but  particularly  the  Reformers  them- 
selves, were  in  a  similar  situation  ;  ecclesiastical  tra- 
dition had,  in  the  latter  case,  taken  the  place  of  de- 
Bcent  from  Abraham  ;  ecclesiastical  righteousness  of 
works  had  taken  the  place  of  Levitical  righteous- 
ness of  works ;  the  self-righteous  creature  began  to 
prescribe  laws  for  his  Creator.  The  Reformers,  ad- 
1  3ring  to  the  truth,  thus  reversed  the  relation  :  God's 
Bovercignty  and  grace  are  every  thing,  while  the 
arrogated  right  and  merit  of  man  are  nothing.  But 
their  arriving  in  theory — which  was  really  only  one 
chapter  in  their  system — to  the  negation  of  human 
freedom  of  election  (Melanchthon,  in  his  later  life. 


excepted),  and  their  being  led  into  contradiction  with 
their  ethical  principles,  were  in  part  a  tribute  of 
weakness  which  they  had  to  pay  to  their  indepen 
dence  from  the  Catholic  Augustine  (strong  exprea- 
sions  of  Calvin  and  Zwingli,  see  Tholuck,  p.  528), 
and  in  part  the  false  conclusion  from  a  profoundly 
justified  religious  feeling.  They  taught,  with  good 
ground,  that  God's  government  of  the  world  is  a 
government  controlling  and  pervading  all  moral 
events,  and  that  even  sin  is  not  merely  permitted, 
but  accepted  and  determined  as  a  fact  in  God's  plan  ; 
only  they  had  not  yet  found — as  Sebastian  Frank, 
at  their  time,  and,  subsequently,  such  orthodox 
teachers  in  the  Church  as  Breitinger,  Voetius,  and 
others — the  distinction  between  sin  as  a  wicked 
counsel  of  the  heart,  that  merely  appertains  to  man, 
and  sin  as  a  fact  in  which  inward  sin  itself  is  already 
treated  with  irony,  captured,  and  judged  (sec  Prov. 
xvi.  1  fif.).  The  Apostle  himself,  on  the  contrary, 
has  united  the  doctrine  of  the  absolute  judicial 
power  of  God  with  the  doctrine  of  the  importance 
of  faith,  yet  particularly  with  the  declaration  that 
God  has  delayed  His  historical  judgment  in  long- 
suffering,  and  has  made  the  already  existing  judg- 
ment of  hardness  a  medium  of  compassion.* — "  The 
people,  clay  in  the  potter's  hand,"  is  a  frequently 
recurring  biblical  expression.  See  Tholuck,  p.  630; 
also  the  Note  on  p.  532  ;  likewise  p.  636. 

21.  The  concatenation  of  judgment  and  compas- 
sion which  appears  throughout  in  the  fiicts  of  Holy 
Scripture,  as  well  as  in  its  doctrines,  has  not  been 
sufficiently  comprehended  and  made  use  of  by  tli« 
popular  ecclesiastical  conception  ;  and  this  is  a  prin- 
cipal source  of  its  hindrances  and  imperfections 
Righteousness  and  mercy  are  regarded  as  collateral 
modes  of  God's  revelation.  Judgment  and  compas- 
sion absolutely  preclude  each  other.  But  the  Scrip- 
tures unite  both  facts  in  various  ways. 

First,  the  reconciliation  of  men  themselves,  both 
collectively  and  individually,  inwardly  as  well  as  out- 
wardly, is  made  conditional  on  a  judgment  which 
separates  the  old  from  the  new  life.  Second,  the 
display  of  redemption  and  its  institutions,  of  the 
theocracy  and  of  the  Church,  is  conditioned  by  judi- 
cial acts  that  separate  the  old  from  the  new  states. 
Third,  judgment,  even  from  the  flood  downward, 
separates  an  old  from  a  new  race,  and  brings  to  pass 
the  redemption  of  the  latter  by  the  still  conditional 
rejection  of  the  former.  Even  in  the  final  judgment, 
the  consummation  of  heaven  is  made  conditional  on 
the  separation  of  the  wicked  ;  Matt.  xiii.  43. 

22.  With  the  confusion  mentioned  above,  there 
is  also  connected  the  fact  that  righteousness  has  ever 
been  too  much  regarded  as  the  extreme  consequence 
of  rigor,  but  not  also  in  the  light  of  forbearance  and 
mildness.  This  latter  idea  of  righteousness  is  fre- 
quently  taught  in  the  Scriptures  (see  Matt.  i.  19  ; 
1  John  i.  9),  and  so  also  in  the  present  chapter,  ver. 
28.     Comp.  also  chap.  iii.  26,  p.  135. 

23.  The  full  and  direct  force  of  the  passage  in 
ver.  31  is  only  reached  by  accepting  the  reading  pre- 
ferred by  us.  The  Jew's  righteousness  of  works,  as 
such,  was  never  faithful  righteousness  of  works,  but 
a  righteousness  of  boasting  of  the  practice  of  stat- 
utes, and  therefore  it  was  a  failure  to  obev  the  true 


•  [A  reference  to  the  Exeg.  Notes  will  show  how  Dr. 
Lanpre  finds  this  mitigating  idea  of  lonp;-sufferiiig  through- 
out the  chnpter.  Admitting  the  correctness  of  his  excgesii 
(which  many  will  not  be  prepared  to  do),  it  is  still  doubtful, 
whether  Ms  explanation  of  the  enigmatical  question  is 
hand  is  any  more  satisfactory  than  that  of  Meyer.— E.] 


334 


THE   EPISTLE   OF   PAUI.   TO   THE   ROMANS. 


vono-;  itself.  In  a  similar  sense,  James  portrays  the 
orthodoxy  of  the  Jews  (see  tiie  Commentary  hi 
loco).  Tills  is  also  the  case  with  the  ecclesiastical 
righteousness  of  works  in  the  Middle  Ages ;  its 
weight  does  not  lie  in  fidelity  to  tlie  law,  but  in  the 
fanatical  zeal  to  explain  and  sharpen  the  statutes  to 
excess.  And  so  the  orthodoxy  of  the  seventeenth 
century  wiis  not  strictness  of  confessional  fidelity, 
but  ze;il  for  the  statutory  amplification  and  sharpen- 
ing of  confessional  formulas.  Centrifugal  deviations 
from  the  collective  fundamental  thought  and  original 
fountain  everywhere  prevailed. 

24.  Israel,  in  its  guilty  and  accursed  destiny,  is 
also  a  type  of  the  richly  deserved  curses  in  the  po- 
litical as  well  as  in  the  ecclesiastical  life  of  nations. 

25.  Chaps.  X.  and  xi.  are  an  enlargement  upon 
chap.  ix. 

HOMIXETICAL  AXD  PRACTICAIi. 
Chap.  ix.  1-5. 

[IToMtLETiOAL  Bibliography  on  Rom.  ix.  3 :  "Weemse, 

J.,  Of  the  Hglvsl  D'gr-'ntf  Law  to  Qod ;  An  Exposition,  &c., 
vol.  i.  48;  LionxFOOT,  J.,  S.'.  P.iu's  Wish  li  6«  Accur/ed. 
Works,  vol.  vii.  312;  Gbll,  R.,  R'Hiains,  2;  Witsivs,  II., 
De  votivo  anaUomalc  Paiili ;  MiS'-.dlanese,  vol.  iL  41 ;  Water- 
land,  I).,  S\  Pau"!t  n'i.-h  Erjplaiued  ami  lllustraUd,  ,%•,■■ 
vions,  \yfirk.<,  vol.  ix.  i52 ;  Dodwell,  W.,  The  Jmporlance 
of  the  Christum  Fiith,  Vluslrated  in  the  Explanation  nf  S'. 
Paul's  ir-sA  of  being  Accuracd  f<ir  his  Brehnn,  Oxf. >rd, 
1752;  Keelin-g,  B,  Three  Difcnurses  on  SI.  Paul's  Wixh, 
Sec,  Oxford,  1766;  Mason,  W.,  Christian  Pa'riotUm,  Wurlcs, 
vol.  iv.  105  ;  ToPLADT,  A.  M.,  Thoughts,  &c..  Works,  vol. 
iii.  418;  Rf.cossidkred  Texts,  No.  I.,  J.  C.  Knight,  Kitto's 
Joariia!,  1st  scries  ;  Nos.  10-12.  Two  Letters,  by  A.  David- 
son and  J.  C.  Knight,  on  the  above  interpretation,  Ibid. 
—J.  v.  H.] 

The  Apostle's  sorrow  for  his  brethren :  1.  A 
great  sorrow,  so  that  he  wished  to  be  accursed  from 
Christ  for  tliem ;  2.  A  natural  sorrow,  because  they 
(a.)  are  his  kinsmen  according  to  the  flesh  ;  {b.'S  are 
Israelites  to  whom  pertaineth  the  adoption,  &c.  (vers. 
1-5). 

An  apostolical  a.sseveration  (ver.  1). — Words  only 
have  strength  when  our  conscience  bears  us  witness 
in  the  Holy  Ghost  that  we  say  the  truth  in  Christ 
(ver.  1). — The  witness  of  our  conscience  in  the  Holy 
Ghost  is  a  witness  for  us  that  we  say  the  truth  in 
Christ  ^ver.  1). — Magnanimous  heaviness  and  mag- 
nanimous pain  (ver.  2). — The  Apostle's  readiness  to 
stake  the  dearest  possession  for  his  brethren  ^ver. 
3). — The  ditference  between  Israelites  and  Jews  (ver. 
4). — What  do  Israelites  possess  ?  1.  The  whole  of 
the  Old  Testament,  with  all  its  covenant  blessings  ; 
2.  The  fathers  ;  3.  Througii  the  fathers,  Christ,  so 
far  as  His  human  descent  ia  concerned,  belongs 
cliiefly  to  them  (John  iv.  22)  (vers.  3-5). 

Si'AUKK,  Chamep.  :  In  impoi  tant  matters  for  God's 
honor  and  the  advancement  of  our  neiglibors'  salva- 
tion, we  may  swear  (Isa.  xix.  18;  Jer.  xii.  6);  but 
to  wantonly  affirm  a  thing  before  God,  is  an  abuse 
of  God's  name  (Exod.  xx.  7)  (ver.  1). — The  saints 
are  not  stoical  blocks  of  wood  (!) ;  therefore  we 
should  also  weep  with  those  that  weep,  and  rejoice 
with  those  that  rejoice  (ver.  2). — Love  has  certain  de- 
grees, and  onft  uuiy  with  a  good  conscience  prefer  in 
love  Ills  natural  friends  and  blood  relations  to  others 
("er,  3). — yoii't  liihi.  Tub.:  Xothing  grieves  piims 
people  more  than  the  ruin  ol'  the  ungodly.  Particu- 
larly a  true  shepherd  can  do  nothing  else  than  s|)eak 
of  ihem  with  sorrow  and  tears  (ver.  2). — Ukdisokr 
This  is  line  1  Oli,  that  wc  hud  even  a  less  degree 
of  it !  Exod.  xxxii.  32. 


Gerlach:  Calvin  beautifully  says:  "It  i?  not 
contradictory  to  this  wish  of  the  Apo.stle,  that  he 
knew  of  a  surety  that  his  salvation  by  God's  election 
could  not  prove  a  delusion.  For  as  such  a  glowing 
love  always  burns  out  more  violently,  so  docs  it  see 
nothing  and  care  for  nothing  except  its  object  '• 
(vers.  1-5). 

Lisco  :  The  Apostle's  sorrow  at  Israel's  unbelief 
(vers.  1-5). — In  Christ  every  tiling  was  glorified  and 
fulfilled  which  Israel  already  had ;  how  important, 
therefore,  it  was  to  believe  in  Him  whom  the  anti- 
types had  announced,  and  who  brought  grace  and 
truth  !  John  i.  16,  17. 

Heubnek  :  Asseveration  of  the  Apostle's  love 
for  his  people  (vers.  1-5). — It  is  only  a  spirit  sancti- 
fied by  God's  grace  that  can  be  grieved  at  the  spirits 
ual  fail  of  others.  The  unconverted  man  is  indiffer- 
ent to  the  moral  misery  of  his  neighbor.  The  holi- 
est sorrow  is  for  others  (ver.  2). 

Besser  :  Throughout  the  Holy  Scriptures  there 
is  not  another  passage  where,  as  in  the  present  in- 
stance, the  roost  profound  darkness  of  sorrow  is  in 
juxtaposition  with  the  brightest  sun  of  joy.  Paul 
has  ascended  on  tlie  wings  of  faith  to  the  height 
where  he  sees  the  whole  kingdom  of  the  world  and 
the  devil  lying  at  his  feet ;  and,  sheltered  in  the 
rock-strong  love  of  God  in  Jesus  Christ,  he  has  sung 
a  triumphal  song  in  the  upper  choir.  There  he 
pauses,  and  as  one  who  is  still  dwelling  in  the  land 
of  pains  and  tears,  just  at  this  point  he  discloses  to 
his  brethren,  first,  the  profound  and  concealed  sor- 
row  of  his  life  by  a  solemn  assurance  of  that  of 
which  he  would  have  God  also  conscious  (ver.  1). — 
The  sainted  Bkngel  says:  "  Souls  which  have  made 
no  progress,  do  not  comprehend  Paul's  wish  We 
should  not  lightly  pronounce  judgment  upon  the 
measure  of  love  in  Moses  and  Paul.  The  modicum 
of  our  thoughts  of  love  is  too  small  for  us  to  do  so ; 
just  as  a  boy  does  not  appreciate  the  heroic  spirit  of 
a  general"  (ver.  3). — Not  Jacobites,  but  IsraelileSy 
wrestlers  with  God,  are  called  the  descendants  of 
the  patriarch,  who  obtained  of  the  Lord  a  blessing 
upon  his  seeil,  that  they  might  be  called  after  hia 
name,  and  the  names  of  his  fathers  Abraham  and 
Isaac  (ver.  4).  —  Eight  blessings  of  God's  house 
united  in  four  pairs  (vers.  4,  5). 

[BuRKiTT  :  (Jod  luis  placed  a  conscience  in  every 
man,  whose  office  it  is  to  bear  witness  of  all  his 
words  and  actions ;  yea,  of  all  his  thoughts  and  in- 
ward affections.  Conscience  is  God's  register,  to  re- 
cord whatever  we  think,  speak,  or  act ;  and  happy  is 
he  whose  conscience  bears  witness  for  him,  ami  doth 
not  testify  against  him. — Ver.  2.  Note :  1.  What 
arc  the  dismal  etl'ects  and  dreadful  consequences  of 
obstinate  unl)clief,  under  the  offers  of  Christ  ten- 
dered to  persons  in  and  by  the  dispensation  of  the 
gospel,  without  timely  repentance  ?  2.  The  true 
spirit  of  Christianity  is  to  make  men  mourn  for  the 
sins  and  calamities  of  others  in  a  very  sensible  and 
affectionate  maimer.  Good  men  ever  iiave  been  and 
are  men  of  tender  and  compassionate  disposition  ; 
a  stoical  apathy,  an  indolence  of  heart,  a  want  of 
natural  affection,  is  so  far  from  i)eing  a  virtue,  or 
matter  of  just  commendation  unto  any  man,  that 
the  deepest  sorrow  and  heaviness  of  soul  in  some 
ca.ses  well  becomes  persons  of  the  greatest  piety  and 
wis<lom  ;  3.  Great  sorrow  and  continual  heaviness 
of  heart  for  the  miseries  of  others,  whether  immi- 
nent or  incumbent,  but  especially  for  the  sins  of  otb 
ers,  is  an  undoulited  argument,  sign,  and  evidence 
of    a  strong    and    vehement    love    toward    them.— 


CHAPTER  IX.   1-88. 


335 


Henry  :  We  ought  to  be  in  a  special  manner  con- 
cerned tor  the  spiritual  good  of  our  relations,  our 
brethren  and  kinsmen.  To  them  we  lie  under  spe- 
cial obligations ;  and  we  have  more  opportunity  of 
doing  good  to  them  ;  and  we  must,  in  a  special  man- 
ner, give  account  concerning  them,  and  our  useful- 
ness to  them. — HoDGK :  Fidelity  does  not  require 
'  that  we  should  make  the  truth  as  offensive  as  possi- 
ble. On  the  contrary,  we  are  bound  to  endeavor,  as 
Paul  did,  to  allay  all  opposing  or  hiimical  feelings  in 
the  minds  of  those  whom  we  address,  and  to  allow 
the  truth,  unimpeded  by  the  exhibition  of  any  thing 
offensive  on  our  part,  to  do  its  work  upon  the  heart 
and  conscience. — J.  F.  H.] 

[ScHAFF :  Vers.  4,  5.  These  advantages  of  Is- 
rael, sketched  by  the  Apostle,  are  at  once  types  and 
propiiecies  of  the  higher  blessings,  which  continue 
uninterruptedly  in  the  Christian  Church,  and  are  en- 
joyed daily  and  hourly  by  all  believers.  In  their 
lap  is  the  adoption  and  heirsliip  of  eternal  life,  the 
continued  presence  of  the  Lord  in  the  means  of 
grace,  the  eternal  covenant  of  grac6  instead  of  the 
successive  covenants,  the  free,  lifo-giving  spirit,  in- 
stead of  the  killing  letter  of  tlie  law,  the  worship  in 
spirit  and  in  truth  in  all  places  instead  of  the  ser- 
vice confined  to  Jerusalem,  the  far  more  plain  and 
precious  promises  of  the  heavenly  Canaan  and  ama- 
ranthine inheritance,  the  incomputable  cloud  of  wit- 
nesses, patriarchs,  prophets,  apostles,  martyrs,  and 
confessors,  from  all  climes  and  tongues,  and,  as  the 
sum  of  all  blessings,  Jesus  Christ,  the  God-man  and 
Saviour,  who  is  flesh  of  our  flesh,  aye,  our  Brother 
and  Friend,  and  yet  exalted  above  all,  the  eternally 
adored  Head  of  the  Clmrch,  which  He  calls  "  His 
bodv,  the  fulness    of  Him  who  fiUeth  all  in  all." 

Yers.  6-23. 

a.  Vers.  6-13.  Who  are  the  true  Israelites  ? 
1.  By  no  means  all  who  are  of  Israel,  or  are  the 
seed  of  Abraham,  are  children  according  to  the 
flesh  ;  but  rather,  2.  The  children  of  promise,  whom 
He  has  freely  chosen  according  to  His  purpose  (vers. 
6-13). — The  question  of  Divine  adoption  does  not 
depend  upon  natural  descent,  but  upon  the  mercy 
of  the  call,  without  the  merit  of  works  (vers.  6-13). 
— God's  word  (promise)  has  not  failed  because  many 
are  not  Israelites — that  is,  are  not  participators  in 
the  promise  (vers.  6-8). — Neither  has  God's  word 
failed  to  us  because  many  who  are  called  evangelical 
are  not  evangelical  (vers.  6-8). — How  Paul,  the 
Apostle  of  the  righteousness  of  faith,  reminds  us 
of  John  the  Baptist,  the  preacher  of  repentance  ! 
Comp.  vers.  6-8  with  Matt.  iii.  9. — The  children  of 
the  promise :  1.  Isaac,  the  son  of  Abraham  ;  2. 
Jacob-Israel,  the  son  of  Rebecca  (vers.  9,  10). — 
The  mystery  of  election  and  reprobation  (vers.  10- 
14). — Not  by  the  merit  of  works,  but  by  the  mercy 
of  Him  who  calleth  !  A  passage :  1.  For  our  hu- 
miliation ;  but  also,  2.  For  our  consolation  (ver.  12). 

Starke  :  God  does  not  look  at  carnal  service 
and  external  advantages  and  privileges  in  the  distri- 
bution of  His  mercy  and  spiritual  blessings  ;  1  Cor. 
IV.  10  (ver.  12). — Hedinger:  God's  word  always 
haa  its  fulfilment  in  either  one  way  or  the  other ; 
Jer.  xxxii.  42  (ver.  6). — Beware  of  founding  your 
hope  of  salvation  on  birth,  or  the  visible  Church,  or 
merely  seeming  work.  One  must  inwardly  be  a 
Chiistian  and  Abraham's  heir  (ver.  7). 

Spe.ner  :  By  this  instance  (vers.  8,  9)  Paul  has 


sufficiently  shown  that  salvation  does  not  depend  on 
natural  birth,  and  that,  therefore,  not  all  the  de- 
sccndants  of  Israel  were  necessarily  the  people  of 
the  covenant.  But  because  it  might  have  been  said 
that  Ishmael  was  born  of  the  bondwoman,  and  lost 
such  an  honor  in  consequence  of  his  wicked  life,  fbi 
he  was  a  scoffer,  Paul  proceeds  to  show,  by  the  ex- 
ample of  Esau  and  Jacob,  that  it  depended  upon 
God's  free  choice  as  to  whom  He  would  show  cer- 
tain spiritual  or  temporal  advantages  and  benefits,  in 
which  case  He  does  not  look  at  works  (vers.  10-13). 

Roos :  The  children  of  the  promise  are  such  aa 
have  become  the  children  and  true  seed  of  Abraham 
by  belief  in  God's  promise  (vers.  8-11). — An  elec- 
tion does  not  preclude  the  foreknowledge  of  faith 
and  works,  but,  on  the  contrary,  it  always  goes  in 
advance,  while  faith  and  good  works  follow  after- 
ward. Thus,  a  soldier  is  chosen  before  he  has  fur- 
nished a  proof  of  his  bravery ;  a  child  is  chosen  for 
adoption  before  he  has  given  evidence  of  filial  grati- 
tude. The  exhibition  of  bravery  and  gratitude  is 
hoped  for.  But  what  is  man's  hope,  is  God's  fore- 
knowledge. Yet  it  must  not  be  said  that,  in  mak- 
ing an  election,  the  one  who  chooses  has  been  influ- 
enced by  works  that  have  already  occurred.  It  was 
not  from  woiks  already  performed  by  Jacob  that 
God's  promises  resulted,  but  from  the  loving  will  of 
God,  who  stands  in  need  of  nothing,  whom  no  crea- 
ture can  place  under  obligation,  and  who  does  not 
inwardly  pass  from  hatred  to  love  (vers.  11-13). 

Gerlach  :  As  the  preference  of  Jacob  to  Esau, 
and  of  the  Israelites  to  the  Edomites,  was  declared 
by  God  before  the  birth  of  the  two  ancestors,  and 
thus  what  Jacob  had  in  advance  could  by  no  means 
depend  upon  any  privilege  or  merit  of  birth,  so  is 
free  grace  the  bestowal  of  justification  through 
Christ ;  it  does  not  depend  upon  anticipated  virtues 
or  services  of  him  who  receives  them  ;  it  admits 
valid  claims  of  any  kind  (vers.  11-13). 

Lisco :  The  Apostle's  purpose  is  to  prove  that 
God,  far  from  all  arbitrary  authority,  and  with  the 
most  exalted  love,  holiness,  and  wisdom,  though 
without  binding  himself  to  natural  laws  (primogeni- 
ture, posterity  of  Abraham),  or  to  the  narrow  limits 
of  a  certain  descent,  proceeds  in  His  guidance  of 
nations,  and  now  calls  this  one  and  now  that  one  to 
the  gospel,  just  as  He  formerly  called  to  a  share  in 
the  privileges  of  the  old  covenant  people.  The  Is- 
raelite, as  such,  had  legal  claims  to  .salvation  in 
Christ,  yet  not  on  account  of  his  natural  descent,  as 
is  shown  from  both  the  examples  adduced.  Even 
Esau's  descendants,  and,  indeed,  all  heathen,  have 
been  called  to  salvation  in  Christ ;  therefore  evi- 
dently Esau's  rejection  is  by  no  means  regarded  as 
eternal,  and  the  object  of  Jacob's  preference  is  the 
temporary  salvation  of  the  nations  descended  from 
both  Esau  and  Jacob  (vers.  11-13). 

Hecbner  :  We  must  maintain  :  1.  Paul's  speech 
is  altogether  individual  or  national,  and  applies  sole 
ly  to  Israel,  in  order  to  prostrate  Israel's  perverse 
pride  ;  2.  The  question  is  not  concerning  an  eternal 
election  and  reprobation,  but  the  calling  of  a  people 
by  the  external  call,  by  revelation,  and  concerning 
the  subsequent  rejection  of  such  a  call  (vers.  6-13), 

6.  Vers.  14-18.  Is  God  unrighteous  ?  This  ob- 
jection is  refuted  by  Paul :  1.  By  reference  to  God's 
declaration  to  Moses ;  2.  By  reference  to  such  a 
declaration  to  Pharaoh  (vers.  14-18). — Moses  and 
Pharaoh  ;  1.  Moses,  an  example  of  God's  mercy  and 
compassion  ;  2.  Pharaoh,  an  example  of  hardening ; 
3.  Both  together  are  examples  of  God's  free  elec- 


336 


TEE   EPISTLE   OF   PAUL   TO   THE   ROMANS. 


tion  (vers.  14-18). — On  what  does  our  salvation  de- 
pend ?  1.  Not  upon  our  willing  or  running  ;  2.  But 
upon  God'ri  mercy  (ver.  16). 

Starke:  God  is  and  ever  remains  righteous, 
however  He  dij^poses  things  according  to  flis  sov- 
ereign will  and  good  pleasure  (ver.  14). — Oh,  the 
great  and  exceeding  riches  of  divine  mercy  and  com- 
passion, by  which  God  performs  ail  the  good  which 
He  bestows  on  man,  without  regiird  to  any  service, 
greatness,  honor,  or  appearance  !  (ver.  15.) — IIkd- 
INGKR  :  One's  own  running,  working,  exerting  hira- 
Belf,  devising  services,  doing  penitence,  and  inflict- 
ing scourging,  crawUng  into  caves  and  putting  on 
sackcloth,  accomplish  nothing ;  God  must  open  the 
heart,  and,  when  lie  knocks,  open  to  Him  !  He  has 
the  key  himself,  and  you  have  from  Him  the  hands 
and  the  power  to  throw  wide  open  for  His  entrance 
(ver.  16). — Hardening  is  a  great  judgment.  Many 
are  involved  in  it,  and  yet  they  do  not  know  it  (ver. 
17). — Spi:neu:  Thus  God's  will  is  perfectly  free  and 
unconfined  in  its  own  work,  and  He  has  the  power 
to  show  mercy  or  not,  just  as  He  will,  without  our 
ability  to  find  sufficient  cause  for  the  difference, 
although  He  himself,  as  the  wise  and  holy  God,  does 
nothing  without  a  holy  cause,  so  that  even  His  freest 
power  wills  and  does  in  sucli  a  way  as  Ilis  wisdom 
perceives  conducive  to  His  glory.  For  as  men  of 
understanding  do  not  foolishly  and  thoughtlessly  use 
their  freedom,  but  do  every  thing  considerately  and 
with  a  rational  choice,  even  when  they  are  in  the 
enjoyment  of  the  most  unfettered  freedom,  how 
should  we  suppose  that  the  all-wise  God  can  have 
mercy  and  harden  without  holy  causes,  or  in  any 
other  way  than  is  in  harmony  with  His  goodness, 
righteousness,  and  majesty,  though  above  our  under- 
standing ?  This  should  be  enough  for  us :  The  holy 
and  righteoua  God,  who  never  can  wish  to  do  any 
thing  evil,  wills  it  to  be  thus. 

Roos :  Ver.  16 :  Moses  desired  to  see  God's 
glory ;  but  his  desire  would  not  have  obtained  this 
view  by  lorce.  More  than  one  e  Moses  ascended  to 
the  top  of  Sinai,  and  came  down  again ;  but  his  run- 
ning did  not  earn  as  a  reward  that  which  he  prayed 
for.  God  met  his  willing  by  compassion :  out  of 
compassion  He  crowned  Moses'  ascent  of  Mount 
Sinai  by  an  extraordinary  blessing. — Geri.acii  : 
Ver.  16  :  Paul  elsewhere  exhorts  (1  Cor.  ix.  24-27  ; 
Phil.  iii.  12-14)  in  the  most  decided  way  to  will  and 
to  run  ;  but  it  is  a  willing  whose  soul  is  God's  mercy 
toward  sinners,  and  it  is  a  running  whose  power  is 
God's  renewing  grace. 

Lisco  :  The  last  and  only  growid  of  participa- 
tion in  God's  kingdom  is  and  ever  remains  God's 
mercy  (ver.  16). — Ail  of  Pharaoh's  ertbrts  did  not 
frt-vent  the  execution  of  the  Divine  purposes,  but 
he  himself  became,  contrary  to  his  will,  an  instru- 
ment for  their  execution  ;  accordingly,  God  was  glo- 
rified in  the  perverse  king,  who  diil  not  escape  His 
righteous  punishment  (ver.  17). — Thus,  then,  God 
shows  His  mercy  on  whomsoever  He  will  with  un- 
limited freedom  ;  and  He  hardens  whomsoever  He 
will — that  is,  He  allows  His  mercy  to  redound  to  the 
ruin  of  those  who,  like  Pharaoh,  are  impervious  to 
all  of  His  instructions  and  guidance  ;  an<l  tlius  it 
can  also  come  to  pass  to  the  unbelieving  Jews,  that 
God  will  withdraw  His  mercy  from  them  if  they 
scorn  IPh  gospel,  just  as  Pharaoh  once  despised 
God's  will  (ver.  18). 

HtunsKK:  No  people  can  prove  that  it  will  be 
God's  people  (ver.  16). — The  humiliation  of  pre- 
sumptuous tyrants  is  a  glorillcutiou  of  God  (ver.  17). 


— Hardening  is  therefore  never  a  blindly  absolute, 
but  always  a  righteous  decree  of  God  on  those  who 
have  long  withstood  all  of  His  calls.  Pharaoh  would 
not  have  been  hardened,  if  his  many  cruelties  had 
not  alreatly  hardened  his  heart  (ver.  18). 

1}essek  :  To  sum  up,  says  Luther  ( Works,  voL 
xxii.  p.  745):  "Every  thing  is  spoken  against  the 
proud.  '  He  to  whom  I  give  shall  have  it,  and  you 
shall  not  take  it  from  me  by  your  holiness.'  What 
more  shall  he  do  ?  He  nevertheless  says,  '  You  shall 
have  it,  but  if  you  seek  and  wish  to  have  it  for  tha 
sake  of  your  righteousness  and  your  piety,  I  cannot 
and  will  not  allow  you  to  have  it ;  I  will  sooner  tear 
to  pieces  and  destroy  every  thing,  both  priesthood 
and  kingdom,  and  even  my  own  law.  But  show  ni* 
mercy,  and  you  shall  have  it'"  (ver.  16). — He  who 
can  still  take  upon  himself  to  say,  "  God  has  had 
compassion  on  me  because  I  am  not  as  Pharaoh  was," 
has  not  yet  read  the  Epistle  to  the  Romans  aright. 
The  reverse  is  the  case  :  because  God  has  had  com- 
passion on  me,  I  am  not  as  Pharaoh,  but  as  Moses 
(ver.  18). 

c.  Vers.  19-29.  Nay,  but,  0  man,  who  art  thou 
that  repliest  against  God  ?  1.  Remember  that  thou 
art  only  the  work,  but  He  is  the  Maker  ;  2.  There- 
fore submit  unconditionally  to  His  sovereign  will 
(vers.  19-21). — What  does  God  design  by  His  un- 
conditional and  free  election  ?  1.  On  one  hand,  to 
show  His  wrath  and  make  known  His  power ;  2. 
But,  on  the  other,  to  make  known  all  the  more,  by 
this  means,  the  riches  of  His  glory  (vers.  22-29). — 
The  vessels  of  wrath  and  the  vessels  of  mercy  (vers. 
22-24). — Who  are  the  vessels  of  mercy  ?  All  who 
are  called  ;  not  alone,  1.  of  the  Jews,  but,  2.  also 
of  the  Gentiles  (ver.  24). — Hosea  and  fcaiah  as  wit- 
nesses of  God's  grace,  showing  mercy  on  and  calling 
Jews  and  Gentiles :  1.  Hosea ;  2.  Isaiah  (vers.  25 
-29). 

LcTHKR :  Although  the  greater  part  fall  away 
and  remain  unbelieving,  He  will  nevertheless  not  let 
all  fall,  but  will  support  the  rest,  and  by  them  all 
the  more  abundantly  disseminate  His  word  and 
grace,  in  order  that  they  may  be  righteous  and  glo- 
rious (ver.  28). 

St.vrke:  God,  in  leading  man  to  salvation,  does 
not  deal  with  him  according  to  the  unconditional 
purpose  of  His  will  and  with  unlimited  pow«r,  but 
in  a  certain  order,  in  which  they  who  are  ennobled 
by  the  rational  soul  have  obtained  the  freedom  to 
obey  or  to  op|)os»  (ver.  29). — Also  tcacliers  and 
preachers  must  exhibit  an  appropriate  gentleness 
when  censuring  the  ungodly,  and  must  not  always 
select  the  rarest  words  of  abuse  and  reproach,  to 
pour  them  out  u[)on  them  like  a  heavy  .'^hower  (ver. 
26). — Do  not  despair,  though  you  be  miserable  ;  the 
merciful  and  gracious  Lord  can  cause  a  light  to  arise 
within  you  ;  IV  cxii.  4  (ver.  25). — Hedinoer  :  God 
be  praised  for  His  long-suffering !  How  many  thou- 
sand brands  of  hell  dost  thou  bear  with  !  Thou  art, 
and  ever  remaincst,  my  righteous  God  !  IV  ciii.  8 
(ver.  22). — L.vnce  :  If  you  would  be  a  true  vessel 
of  mercy,  you  must  draw  grace  for  grace  from  the 
fulness  of^  Jesus  (John  i.  16). — Let  the  love  of  God 
be  poured  out  in  your  heart  by  the  Holy  Spirit  (chap. 
V.  5);  and  in  order  that  you  may  be  useful  in  the 
Lord's  house,  and  a  vessel  sanctified  to  His  honor, 
seek  to  be  purified  from  contact  with  all  impure  vea. 
scla  (ver.  23). 

Spener  :  The  Apostle  says  of  the  vassels  of  mer- 
cy, that  God  /I'l.i  prepared  them  for  glory.  lie  is 
not  only  their  Creator,  but  (heir  being  the  vessels  of 


CHAPTER  IX.   1-33. 


537 


His  7)ierc>/  is  Hix  otcn  preparation.  But  he  does  not 
Eiiy  of  the  vessels  of  wrath,  that  God  prepared  them 
for  destruction,  but  that  they  are  Jilted  to  destruc- 
tion who  have  fitted  and  corrupted  themselves  to  it, 
60  that  their  condemnation  does  not  come  from  God, 
but  only  tiuit  He  has  long  borne  with  them  patient- 
ly, just  as  He  did  to  Pharaoh,  and  that  He  finally 
de-itroys  them  with  all  the  more  violence.  By  this 
are  declared  His  glory,  power,  compassion,  and 
righteousness,  without  one  coming  in  conflict  with 
the  other  (vers.  22,  23). — Roos :  The  great  long- 
Buftering  of  which  Paul  speaks,  proves  that  God 
takes  no  pleasure  in  the  destruction  of  the  vessels 
of  wrath  ;  for  if  He  had  wished.  He  could  at  any 
tinje  have  given  them  up  to  destruction  sooner  than 
He  really  did;  but  the  efficacious  call,  which  applies 
to  the  vessels  of  mercy  both  of  tlie  Jews  and  Gen- 
tiles, proves  that  God  does  not  indulge  a  precon- 
ceived hatred  either  of  the  Jewish  people  or  of  the 
Gentile  nations,  and  it  is  only  His  call  tliat  makes  a 
difference  between  the  vessels  of  wrath  and  of  mercy 
(vers.  22-24). — Geelach  :  We  must  always  bear  in 
mind,  that  when  God  has  compassion,  and  when  He 
hardens,  He  iicts  in  different  ways ;  in  the  former 
case,  He  produces  good  in  the  human  heart  by  His 
compassion  ;  and  in  the  second,  He  withdraws  from 
man  His  divine  light  and  life,  yet  does  not  awaken 
evil  in  him,  but  only  allows  the  evil  already  existing 
to  assume  the  form  and  take  the  course  which,  to 
Him,  is  evidently  necessary  for  the  salvation  of  the 
■world.  Man's  seeing,  in  mercy  as  well  as  in  harden- 
ing, a  perfectly  similar  operation  of  God — namely. 
His  own  arljitrary  authority — is  his  own  fault,  since 
he  closes  himself  against  God's  compassionate  love 
by  his  own  claims  (ver.  21). 

Lisco :  All  humanity,  and  not  merely  Israel 
(which  fancied  itself  thus),  is  like  the  clay  from 
which  God,  of  His  own  free  choice,  chooses  unto  par- 
ticipation in  the  kingdom  of  heaven  ;  and  He  is  not 
bound  to  Israel  in  such  a  way  that  He  cannot  also 
appoint  the  Gentiles  to  the  same  privilege  (vers.  20, 
21). 

HEUDifER :  Before  God  rejects  a  people.  He  pa- 
tiently gives  it  time  for  repentance  (vers.  19-23). — 
Especially  on  ver.  19  :  The  universal  objection  of  all 
determinists,  fatalists,  and  absolutists,  is :  "  How  can 
man  be  free,  since  in  his  existence,  and  in  the  forma- 
tion and  change  of  his  mind,  he  is  totally  dependent 
on  God  ? "  This  is  here  represented  in  a  special 
direction,  thus :  "  How  can  sin  be  imputed  to  man  ? 
Why  does  God's  punishment  of  him  enrage  him  ? 
He  is  only  what  God  makes  him  !  Who  can  oppose 
God  ?  "  This  objection  is  still  frequently  heard  in 
such  modifications  as  these :  "  Man  becomes  every 
thing,  just  according  as  he  is  trained,  educated,  and 
placed  in  a  favorable  or  unfavorable  state?"  We  may 
.nnswcr  this  objection  somewhat  as  follows :  Although 
man  does  not  himself  control  his  destiny,  and  al- 
though this  destiny  has  an  influence  upon  his  devel- 
opment, yet  it  is  by  no  means  compulsory  ;  the  ex- 
ternal world  does  not  operate  irresistibly  upon  him. 
— Yet  Paul  does  not  exactly  answer  thus,  but  says, 
ver.  26  :  "  Yea,  dear  man"  &c. — Yer.  21  :  This 
comparison  would  be  inaptly  applied  if  it  were  re- 
garded as  an  irresistible  formation  of  character : 
"  Can  God  not  make  out  of  this  man  a  bad  one,  and 
out  of  that  a  good  one  ?  "  The  question  is  only  the 
determination  of  the  external  state  which  operates 
on  man  :  "  Cannot  God,  according  to  His  own  will, 
direct  to  every  one  his  condition  and  all  the  circum- 
stances  that  operate  upon  him  ?  "  It  still  depends 
22 


on  man  whether  he  will  make  use  of  his  condition 
in  this  or  that  way,  and  in  what  shape  he  will  allow 
himself  to  be  be  formed.  Comp.  2  Tim.  ii.  20,  21. 
In  Jer.  xviii.  6,  the  type  of  the  potter  applies  to  the 
events  that  God  allows  a  people  to  experience,  but 
not  to  the  determination  of  their  salvation  or  de- 
struction. 

d.  Vers.  30-33.  The  faith  of  the  Gentiles,  and- 
the  unbelief  of  the  Jews  :  1.  The  establishment  t)f 
this  fact ;  2.  The  explanation  of  its  origin  (verj. 
30-33). — In  the  righteousness  of  faith,  the  law  of 
righteousness  is  really  fulfilled  (vers.  30,  31).—  Who 
attains  to  the  law  of  righteousness  ?  All  who  seek 
its  fulfilment,  not :  1.  By  the  works  of  the  law,  but, 
2.  By  faith  (vers.  31,  32).— The  stumbling-stone: 
1.  For  some  a  rock  of  oifence ;  2.  For  others  a 
rock  of  salvation  (ver.  33).    Comp.  1  Peter  ii.  4-10. 

Luther  :  Christ  justifies  without  works  ;  they 
who  do  not  believe  Him,  run  against  Him  and  stum 
ble  (ver.  32) 

t^TAEKE  :  0  thou  tempted  soul,  who  art  ever  in- 
dulging in  fearful  thoughts,  thou  shalt  certainly  not 
be  ashamed  1  (ver.  33.) — Cramer  :  If  one  should 
seek  fire  in  snow,  or  ice  in  fire,  he  vrould  not  find  it ; 
so  he  who  seeks  life,  lighteousnesss,  and  salvation  ia 
the  law,  and  not  in  Christ,  will  never  receive  them 
(ver.  32). 

Spexer  :  God  laid  such  a  stone  in  Zion  as  would 
of  itself  be  a  stone  of  help,  a  tried  and  preciou.s 
corner-stone,  on  which  the  fallen  could  and  should 
rise.  But  man's  wickedness,  &c.,  causes  many  to 
stumble  against  it,  and  their  fall  is  more  dangerous 
than  if  such  a  stone  had  not  been  placed  there 
Yet  God's  saving  counsel  must  not  be  in  vain  for  all, 
for  there  are  others,  on  the  other  hand,  who  hold  to 
this  rock,  and  believe  on  it.  These  will  not  be  de- 
ceived in  their  hope,  nor  come  to  shame,  as  they 
will  take  from  it  tliat  which  they  have  hoped  for — 
salvation  (ver.  33). 

Roos  :  As  Paul  had  previously  made  every  thing 
dependent  on  simple  grace  and  mercy,  and  on  God's 
free  will,  so  he  now  makes  every  thing  dependent  on 
faith.  Grace  and  faith,  the  will  of  God  and  faith, 
correspond  to  or  meet  each  other.  Grace  is  in  God, 
faith  is  in  man  (vers.  30-33). — Gerlach  :  God  did 
not  enforce  His  right  against  the  unbelieving  Israel- 
ites, nor  harden  their  hearts,  nor  fit  them  for  de- 
struction, because  He  predestinated  them  for  de- 
struction before  their  existence,  but  because  they 
"  replied  against  God  "  (vers.  18-22). 

Lisco  :  The  reason  why  Israel  refuses  to  accept 
the  gospel,  and  is  rejected,  is  because  they  seek  it — 
i-ighteousness — before  God,  7iot  of  faith,  but  by  do- 
ing the  works  prescribed  in  the  law ;  and  therefore 
they  experience  the  judgment  of  falling  against  the 
stumbling-stone  (ver.  32). 

Heubner  ;  Xo  people  or  no  man  is  so  corrupt 
that  God  cannot  call  and  save  if  they  will  only  be- 
lieve  in  the  gospel,  and  become  sensible  of  their 
guilt  (ver.  30). — All  the  works  on  which  man  relies 
cannot  save  him,  but  rather  hinder  him  (Luke  xii. 
24).  Therefore  the  paradox  :  It  would  be  better  for 
many  if  they  were  worse  (ver.  32). — Offence  at 
Christ  is  culpable ;  it  is  one  that  is  taken,  and  not 
given  (ver.  33). 

Besser  :  Luther  {Works,  vol.  vii.  p.  321)  strik- 
ingly compares  the  law  to  the  field  in  which  Christ, 
the  Treasure,  is  buried.  The  Jews  had  the  field, 
and  even  tilled  it  with  great  pains,  but  they  did  not 
see  the  buried  treasure ;  but  the  Gentiles,  on  the 
contrary,  since  they  found  ChrL=t  in  the  law,  went 


338 


THE   EriSTLE   OF   PAUL   TO   THE    ROMANS. 


for  joy  beyond  the  law,  and  sold  every  tiling  which 
they  hiid,  and  bouglit  the  field  with  its  treasure — 
that  is,  tiie  law  with  Christ  (vers.  30,  31). 

L  vs(jE  :  The  forbearance  and  decision  with  which 
the  Apostle  expresses  the  strict  judgment  on  Israel, 
is  an  example  lor  us,  when  occasion  occurs,  to  speak 
unpk'iLsatit  truths. — The  Apostle's  fidelity  to  the  Is- 
raelites is  conditioned  by  his  fidelity  to  the  Lord  ;  or 
the  duty  and  limits  of  patriotism. — Israel's  fall  is  an 
eternal  admonition  for  churches,  states,  and  nations. 
— The  greater  the  glory  of  a  coninninity,  the  deeper 
Is  its  fall. — Israel,  which  was  once  saved,  is  now 
judged  in  Christ  its  Head. — tJod's  freedom  with  re- 
spect to  humanity :  1.  How  it  is  bound  by  institu- 
tions and  promises;  2.  Yet  how  it  also  remains  free. 
— Ilis  freedom  in  His  determinations:  1.  In  the  de- 
termination of  the  personalities  themselves ;  2.  Of 
their  fate,  and  its  eti'ect;  3.  Of  their  call  to  the  king- 
dom.— The  freedom  and  consistency  of  Divine  sove- 
reignty in  the  name  Jehovah. — The  antitheses :  Israel 
and  Isaac,  Jacob  and  Esau,  Moses  and  Pharaoh.  The 
judgment  of  hardening  elucidated  by  Pharaoh's  his- 
tory.— Judgments  changed  by  the  sovereignty  of 
God  himself  to  the  glorification  of  His  mercy. — 
God's  judgments  are  cut  short  by  His  wisdom  and 
grace. — Tlie  importance  of  faith  in  antithesis  to  or- 
dinances.— The  twofold  operation  of  the  corner- 
atone. 

[LiGHTFOOT  :  Ver.  3.  We  owe  charity  to  every 
one  because  of  his  soul.  If  a  soul,  in  its  essential 
constitution,  be  not  beautiful  and  lovely,  what  thing 
upon  earth  can  be  accounted  beautiful  and  lovely  ? 
A  soul  that  carries  the  image  of  God  in  its  very  con- 
stitution— that  is  like  to  the  nature  of  angels  in  its 
essence  and  being — that  is  capable  of  divine  nature 
and  of  eternal  life  and  glory — if  this  be  not  lovely, 
what  is?  It  is  a  great. piece  of  wisdom  to  study 
souls,  and  to  observe  the  nature,  worth,  price,  and 
excellency,  both  of  our  own  and  other  men's ;  and 
there  is  not  a  more  general  and  comprehensive 
cause  of  the  ruin  of  souls,  than  men's  ignorance 
of  and  unacquaintance  with  their  own  souls.  Shall 
I  hate  any  man's  soul  ?  It  may  be  united  to  God. 
Hate  any  man's  body  ?  It  may  be  a  temple  of 
the  Holy  Ghost.  Any  man's  person  ?  He  may 
be  an  inheritor  of  eternal  glory.  Scorn  not  poor 
Joseph  ;  for  all  his  rags  and  imprisonment,  he  may 
come  to  sit  upon  a  throne.  Despise  not  poor  Laz- 
arus ;  for  all  his  sores  and  tatters,  he  may  be  car- 
ried by  angels  into  Aliraliam's  bosom. — Burkitt: 
Learn  :  1.  What  the  sincere  believer  shall  not  be 
ashamed  of:  a.  He  shall  never  be  a.shamed  of  his 
choice ;  6.  Nor  of  his  profession ;  c.  Nor  of  the 
cause  and  interest  of  Chri"*,  which  He  has  owneil 
and  vindicated  in  the  worlil ;  d.  Nor  of  any  time 
sincerely  spent  in  the  work  and  service  of  Christ ; 
e.  Nor  of  reproaches  and  sulfcrings,  tribulations  and 
persecutions,  for  the  sake  of  Christ ;  _/'.  Nor  in  eter- 
nity, that  he  never  waa  ashamed  here  of  Christ  and 
His  gospel,  His  work  and  serrice,  His  cause  and  in- 


terest. 2.  When  the  believer  shall  not  be  ashamed : 
a.  When  he  is  called  to  bear  testimony  of  Christ 
before  the  world,  at  the  hour  of  death,  or  at  the  day 
of  judgment ;  b.  Nor  the  dreadfulness  of  the  day, 
nor  the  majesty  of  the  Judge,  nor  the  number  of 
the  accusers,  nor  the  impartiality  of  the  sentence, 
nor  the  separation  which  shall  then  be  made.  3. 
Why  the  believer  shall  never  be  ashamed :  a.  Sin, 
the  cause  of  shame,  is  removed ;  b.  Those  only 
from  whom  he  can  reasonably  fear  shame,  will  never 
be  ashamed  of  Him  ;  c.  He  can  look  God  and 
Christ,  his  own  conscience  and  the  whole  world,  in 
the  face,  without  shaiue  and  suffering. — Hk.nry: 
What  does  God  do  for  the  salvation  of  His  chil- 
dren ?  He  prepares  them  beforehand  for  glory. 
Sanctifieation  is  the  preparation  of  the  soul  for 
glory,  making  it  meet  to  partake  of  the  inheritance 
of  the  saints  in  light.  This  is  God's  work  ;  we  «in 
destroy  ourselves  fast  enough,  but  we  cannot  save 
ourselves ;  sinners  fit  themselves  for  hell,  but  it  is 
God  that  prepares  saints  for  heaven. — Waterlasd  : 
There  is  a  degree  of  pity  and  regard  due  even  t« 
very  ill  men,  to  ungodly,  and  sinners ;  not  to  be 
shown  by  caressing  them  and  smiling  upon  them,  but 
by  earnest  and  ardent  endeavors  to  reclaim  them. 
There  is  not  a  more  forlorn  or  miserable  wretch  un- 
der heaven  than  an  overgrown  sinner,  become  mad, 
desperate,  and  incurable  in  his  sins.  For  though 
such  persons  regard  neither  God  nor  man,  nor  have 
any  mercy  or  tenderness  for  friend  or  brother,  but 
would  go  any  lengths  in  mischief,  and  set  the  world 
on  fire,  if  it  lay  in  their  power,  yet  we  very  well 
know,  all  the  while,  that  they  are  weak  and  impo- 
tent, and  are  under  bridle  and  restraint.  The  utmost 
thoy  can  do  is  only  to  afflict  and  torment  good  men 
for  a  time  here,  while  they  themselves  lie  exposed  to 
eternal  vengeance,  to  torments  everlasting  hereafter. 
— DoDDUiDGK :  We  know  a  descending,  a  risen  Re- 
deemer. He  still  visits  us  in  His  gospel,  still  preach- 
es in  our  assemblies,  and  stretches  out  a  gentle  and 
compassioiuite  hand  to  lead  us  in  the  way  of  happi- 
ness.— Where  we  see  a  zeal  for  God,  let  us  pay  all 
due  regard  to  it,  and  compassionate  that  ignorance 
which  may  sometimes  be  mingled  with  it. — Scott  : 
Modesty,  caution,  humility,  and  profound  awe  of  the 
holy  majesty  of  God,  should  restrain  and  guide  the 
tongues  and  pens  of  all  who  speak  or  write  on  the 
great  sulijects  connected  with  salvation,  however 
satisfied  such  men  may  be  with  their  own  views  of 
them  ;  and  every  sentence  which  is  written  or  spo- 
ken with  impetuous  injustice  to  God,  is  a  proof  of 
the  pride  and  irreverence  of  the  writer  or  speaKcr.^ 
HoPGK :  Vers.  15-19.  It  should  be  assumed  as  a 
first  principle,  that  God  cannot  do  wrong.  If  He 
does  a  thing,  it  must  be  right.  And  it  is  very  much 
safer  for  us,  corrui)t  and  blinded  mortals,  tnus  to 
argue,  than  to  pursue  the  opposite  course,  and 
maintain  that  (lod  does  not  and  cannot  do  so  and 
so,  because,  in  our  judgment,  it  would  be  wrong.— 
J.  F.  U.1 


CHAPTER  X.    1-21.  33<, 


fisroKD  Section.— J[/brc  decided  explanation  of  the  mysterious  fact,     Tht  faith  of  the  Qentiht  and  th. 

unbelief  of  Israel, 

Chap.   X.  1-21. 
A.    Self-righteousness,  and  the  righteousness  of  faith  (vers.  1-11). 

1  Brethren,  my  heart's  desire  [or,  good- will,  evdoxia]  and  prayer*  to  God  foi 
Israel  [on  their  behalf]"  is,  that  they  might  be  saved  [for  their  salration]': 

2  For  I  bear  them  record  [witness]  that  they  have  a  zeal  of  God,  but  not  accoid- 

3  ing  to  knowledge.  For  they,  being  ignorant  of  God's  righteousness  [not  knowing 
(i.  c,  mistaking)  the  Hghteousness  of  God],  and  going  about  [striving]  to  establish 
their  own  righteousness,*  have  not  submitted  themselves  unto  the  righteousness 

4  of  God.      For  Christ  is  the  end  of  the  law  for  [unto]  righteousness  to  every 
6  one  that  belie veth.^     For  Moses  describeth  [writeth  concerning]  the  righteous- 
ness Avhich  is  of  the  law.  That  the  [saying,  The]  ^  man  which  doeth  those  things 

6  [Avho  hath  done  them]  shall  live  by  them  [or,  in  it].^  But  the  righteousness 
which  is  of  faith  speaketh  on  this  wise  [thus],**  Say  not  in  thine  heart,  Who  shall 
ascend  into  heaven  ?    (that  is,  to   bring  Christ  down  from  above   [omu  from 

1  above]  :)    Or,  Who   shall  descend  into  the  deep  ?    (that  is,  to  bring  up  Christ 

8  again  [omit  again]  from  the  dead.)  But  what  saith  it  ?  The  word  is  nigh  thee, 
even  [omit  even]  in  thy  mouth,  and  in  thy  heart :  that  is,  the  word  of  faith,  which 

9  we  preach  ;  That  [Because]  if  thou  shalt  confess  with  thy  mouth  the  Lord  Jesus 
[or,  Jesns  as  Lord],^  and  shalt  believe  in  thine  heart  that  God  hath  [omit  hath] 

10  raised  him  from  the  dead,  thou  shalt  be  saved.  For  with  the  heart  man  believ- 
eth  [faith  is  exercised]  '°  unto  righteousness  ;  and  with  the  mouth  confession  is 

11  made  unto  salvation.  For  the  Scripture  saith,  Whosoever  believeth  on  him  shall 
not  be  ashamed  [put  to  shame]. 

B.    The  equal  clnim  of  Jews  and  Gentiles  to  faith.    Hence  the  necessity  of  universal  preaching.    The  unequal  results 

of  preaching  (vers.  12-18). 

12  For  there  is  no  difference  between  the  Jew  and  the  Greek  [distinction  be- 
tween Jew  and  Greek]  : "  for  the  same  Lord  over  .ill  is  [is  Lord  of  all,]  '^  rich 

13  unto  all  that  [who]  call  upon  him.     For  whosoever  [every  one  who]  *^  shall  call 

14  upon  the  name  of  the  Lord  shall  be  saved.  How  then  shall  [can]  they  call  '* 
on  him  in  whom  they  have  not  believed  ?  and  how  shall  [can]  they  believe  '*  in 
him  of  whom  they  have  not  heard  ?    and  how  shall  [can]  they  hear  "  without  a 

15  preacher  ?  And  how  shall  [can]  they  preach,"  except  they  be  sent  ?  as  it  is 
written,'"  How  beautiful  are  the  feet  of  them  that  preach  the  gospel  [those  who 

16  bring  glad  tidings]  of  peace,"  and  bring  glad  tidings  of  good  things  !  But  they 
have  not  all  obeyed  the  gospel  [did  not  all  hearken  to  the  glad  tidings].""     For 

17  Esaias  [Isaiah]  saith.  Lord,  who  hath  [omit  hath]  beUeved  our  report?''*  So 
then  faith  cometh  by  [of]  hearing,  and  hearing  by  [through]  the  word  of  God." 

18  But  I  say.  Have  they  not  heard"[Did  they  not  hear]  ?  Yes  [Nay]  verily,  their 
sound  went  [out]  into  all  the  earth,  and  their  words  imto  the  ends  of  the  world. 

0.    The  unbelief  of  Israel  and  the  faith  of  the  Gentiles  already  prophesied  in  the  Old  Testament  (vers.  19-21). 

19  But  I  say.  Did  not  Israel  [Israel  not]"  know?  First  Moses  saith,  I  will 
provoke  you  to  jealousy  by  them  that  [with  those  who]  are  no  people,  and  by 

20  [withj  a  foolish  nation  I  will  anger  you.  But  Esaias  [Isaiah]  is  very  bold,  and 
saith,'*  I  was  found  of  them  that  [by  those  who]  sought  me  not ;   I  was  made 

1 1  manifest  unto  them  that  [those  w  ho]  asked  not  after  me.  But  to  [of]  Israel  he 
saith,"  All  day  long  I  have  [omit  have]  stretched  forth  my  hands  unto  a  disobe- 
dient and  gainsaying  people. 


a40  THE    EPISTLE    OF   PAUL   TO    THE    ROMANS. 


TEXTUAL. 

>  Vcr.  1.— [After  i/ricrit,  K.  L.  Rcr.  insert  if,  defended  by  Philippi ;  omitted  in  N.  A.  B.  E.  F.  O.,  by  Lnchniann, 
Tischei.dorf,  Muy<-r,  Tholuck,  Alford,  Trej-'elles.  Pioliably  insfited  to  limit  irpbt  rbi-  6t6v  to  iii)'an,  ^ince  .t 
seemed  improper  to  connect  it  with  evioxia.  On  the  meaniug  of  the  last-named  woid,  as  involvtii  i:j  the  erit'oa. 
question,  see  kxeg.  Xnts. 

*  Ver.  1. — fx.  A.  B.  D.  F.  O.,  all  modern  editors,  read  avruv,  instead  of  tow  'lapa^A  (K.  L.  R-c).  The  lattc* 
(Fas  Kubslituted  as  an  cxp.anutory  gloss,  which  was  tlie  more  necessarj',  as  this  verse  bepan  a  church  .'C!6<li  (LfcX-ge). 
EoTif  (to  comiilete  the  seue)  is  inserted  before  eis  aun.  in  Rcc,  on  the  authoiity  of  n'-  K.  L.  ;  rejcted  by  modem 
editors  (generally. 

'  Ver.  1. — [R^e.  (x*.  K.  L.)  insert  ecrriv  before  «i«  <rmrripiav .    This  probably  led  to  the  paraphrase  of  the  K.  V, 

*  Ver.  3. — [A.  B  D.,  a  number  of  versions  und  fatliers,  omit  biKaioavvriv  alter  ifiai'.  (So  Lachuiann,  Tisch- 
cn'iorf,  Wordsworth,  Trepelles.^  It  is  found  in  N.  F.  K.  L.,  Syiiac,  &c. ;  also  after  frjToCi'Ttt  in  one  cur:-ivo.  It  la 
retained  by  Meyer,  Lanpe  ;  bracketted  by  Alford,  who,  in  his  notes,  agrt-es  with  the  authors  just  named,  in  thinking  the 
repititiiin  to  be  original  and  emph:itic,  but  easily  deemed  superfluous  ;  heiice  the  omi-nion. 

'  Ver.  -1. — [Dr.  Lange's  rendering  is  striking:  Dcnn  das  EndzUl  des  Geseizn  ht:  Chris'us  zur  GrecJitigkeit  fur 
Jftlen,  d'T ghiubt  (For  the  end  of  the  law  is  :  Christ  as  lighteouwness  for  every  one  who  be.ieves).  Luther's  version  is 
really  a  paraphrase  :  Denn  Clirisltix  i-t  d'-s  G'-^cizrs  Endt ,  wr  aii  den  ghiubt,  dcr  ist  g'rich'. 

•  Ver.  5. — [The  K.  V.  has  translated  on,  which  is  here  merely  a  quotation-mark  {ort,  rrcHanlis).  The  above 
emendation  is  Irom  the  IJevision  by  Five  Anglican  Clergymen.  The  on  is  found  before  ti\v  5t(c.  in  n'.  A.  D'. — an 
nlteratioii,  on  account  of  the  accusaiive  after  ypaifxi.. — The  quotation  is  ti-om  Levit.  sviii.  5.  If  the  reading  of  the 
Rer.  be  adopted,  the  only  variation  is  6,  instead  of  a  ;  a  change  necessary  to  adapt  the  citation  to  its  position  here.  See 
next  Xote. 

'  Ver.  5.— [The  correct  reading  is  difficult  to  determine.  Most  editors  now  retain  air  a  (R-c,  N'.  B.  F.  G.,  most 
versions  and  fathers).  Instead  of  ev  ourot?  (Kcc,  N'.  D.  F.  L.,  some  ver>ionR  and  fiithcrs,  ^Ieyer,  Wordsworth, 
Lunge),  the  reading  ev  avrij  is  found  in  N'.  A.  B.,  many  versions,  and  is  accepted  by  Lachmann,  i)e  Wette,  Alford 
Tregelles.  The  hingular  would  be  a  variation  from  both  the  LXX.  and  the  Hebrew  ;  yet  this  but  renders  an  altenition 
to  the  plural  (for  the  sake  of  conformity)  the  more  probable.  On  the  other  hand,  Meyer  urges  strongly  that  thi-  plural 
stimde  or  falls  with  avra,  which  is  now  pcucrally  accepted.  The  change  to  the  singular  may  have  been  made  to  guard 
against  the  validity  of  the  riphtcousness  of  works,  as  indeed  A.  substitutes  wiVreus  for  fo/xov.  With  some  hesitation, 
I  hold  to  the  reading  of  the  Rec. 

"  Ver.  6.— [From  this  point  to  the  middle  of  ver.  8,  we  have  a  free  citation  from  the  LXX.,  Deut.  3xx.  12-14.  Parts 
of  the  verses  arc  quoted,  but  there  is  only  one  considerable  variation  (at  t!ie  beginning  of  ver.  7).  As  the  LXX.  does 
not  differ  materially  from  the  Hebrew,  we  give  only  the  text  of  the  former:  (ver.  11,  on  »)  ei/roAij  aui-j),  ij  eyio  eiTc'A- 
Ao/ioi  <TOi  (nififpov,  ovx  inripoyKO^  earii/,  ovSe  tiaxpav  ar-b  cou  ianv.)  12.  ovk  iv  tcu  oupacu  avui  eo-Ti,  Aeywi'  ■  tiV 
avaPrjiTfTai.  iifilv  ci?  to;'  ovpaco;',  xai  A)ji/«Toc  r)fi,tv  avrriv,  Koi  aKOvaavTf^  auTij;'  noirj<Top.€v ;  13.  oiihi  irepav  t^?  OaXd<Tenti 
ivri,  \iyu>v  •  Tt's  &iairepdcrei.  rfftiv  ti?  to  TTipav  t^s  SaAao'cTT)?  KaX  Aa^f)  r^p-iv  avTrjv,  xal  aKOvarriv  Troirjaj)  aurijr,  xai 
irotjjffonei' ;  14.  iyyv^  <tov  iarl  to  pi)/aa  a<f>66pa  ey  Tcp  <TT6p.ari  <70u,  xal  iv  TJj  KapSia  crov,  xai  ev  rati  X^P"^'  "''"'  "'oieii' 
ouTo.  The  New  Testament  text  is  remarkably  well  established  throughout.  The  variations  from  the  LXX.  are  noticed 
in  the  Exrg.  Anlts. 

•  Ver.  9. — (B.  has  oTt  icvpio?  'IijcroOs,  some  fathers  ;  others  add  tariv.  These  readings  are  doubtless  explanatory 
glosses,  and,  as  such,  tend  to  confirm  the  interpretation  given  in  the  brackets  above  :  Jisus  as  Lm-d.  .See  Ex-ij.  yotes; 
also  on  the  rendering  h'cnue. — The  E.  V.  improperly  translates   fiyeiptv,  halh  raisei.    It  is  the  historical  aorist. 

10  Vpr.  10. — [The  E.  V.  has  made  this  verb  active,  and  the  second  one  passive.  Both  are  passive.  It  would  seem  as 
if  this  rendering  was  borrowed  fiom  the  Gennan  :  man  giaubl,  which  exactly  expresses  the  force  of  the  Greek. 

"  Ver.  12.— [Literally  :  llfrr  in  no  lUflhictinn  of  J-w  and  Gicck  ;  but  this  sounds  too  abstract,  as  if  the  distinctions 
were  obliterated,  as  in  Gal.  iii.  28.  flero  it  is  better,  then,  to  preserve  the  concrete  idea,  by  using  betwten.  Su  Rev.  Five 
jVng.  C  ergymen. 

'^  Ver.  12. — [Lange  renders  :  Dmn  Einer  und  derselhe  ist  Htrr  vnn  Allen.  So  Noyes  :  For  one  and  the  sarti':  is  Lord 
overall.  Five  Ang.  Clergymen  :  The  same  is  Lord  over  all.  The  Amer.  Bible  Union  as  above.  This  is  must  literal. 
Alford,  indeed,  objects,  "on  account  of  the  strangf-ness  of  6  avrdt  thus  standing  alone ;  but  this  is  met  by  Dr.  Ljingo 
in  the  Exeg.  A'o(»'.v,  where  he  expands  the  phrase  into  :  One  nnil  Ihr  snmf  L»rd  is  L'ird  over  all.  Stuart :  There  is  Ihi  stmt 
Lord ;  which  is  harsh.  On  the  whole,  it  is  best  to  find  the  predicate  here,  and  not  supply  is  with  rich,  as  is  done  in  the 
E.  V. 

"  Ver.  13. — [This  is  almost  word  for  word  from  the  LXX.,  Joel  ii.  .32  (Heb.  iii.  5):  koX  ttnai  iros,  &?,  k.t.A. 
The  yap  is  inserted  to  introduce  the  proof.  In  Acts  ii.  21,  the  citation  is  made  even  more  exactlv.  The  strong  form 
of  the  Greek  is  retained  by  rendering,  rvery  one  whosoever  (Alford,  Five  Ang.  Clergymen) ;  Ainer.  lliblo  Union,  Xoyea  : 
every  one  who. 

^*  Ver.  14. — [In  each  of  the  four  intorrogativo  sentences  of  vers.  14,  15,  the  exact  form  of  the  le.ading  verb  is  doubt- 
ful. The  Jiec.  in  every  case  gives  the  future  indicative,  but  the  uncial  authority  supports  the  aorist  subjunctive,  the 
deliberative  or  conjum  live  aorist.  The  MS.  authority  is  given  in  the  separate  notes.  Here  the  Rr.,  with  K.  L.,  and 
some  fathers,  reads  :  ejriKoAcCT  o  v  toi  ;  n.  A.  B.  D.  F.  G.  :  «  w  i  k  a  A  «  o-  w  i/  t  o  i .  The  future  is  supported  by  Meyer,  and 
apparently  accepted  bj'  Dr.  Lange.  The  aorist  is  adopted  throughout  by  most  critical  editors.  (So  Tregelles.)  As  the 
variation  here  involves  only  the  change  of  w  into  o,  it  is  readily  accounted  for.  The  E.  V.  gives  a  correct  rendering  of 
the  future,  which,  inueed,  in  these  cases  differs  little  in  meaning  from  the  CDnjunctive.  Can  is  subi^titiited  to  express 
the  force  of  the  correct  reading,  although  it  is  perhaps  a  shade  too  «tron'.r.  'Ino  Amer.  Bible  Union  omits  liave  in  the 
relative  clauses  throughout  ;  but,  although  this  is  a  litcml  rendering  of  the  aori.st,  it  here  obscures  the  meaning  by 
destroying  the  lilniis.    All  other  later  versions  properlv  retain  the  English  perfect. 

"  Ver.  14.— [/fee.,  A.  K.  I/.  :  TTtorewo-o  vo-ii'.     N.  B.  D.  F.  G.  n  i.cr  tvuuxT  lv  .    The  last  two  prefix  the  argument. 

"  Vor.  14.— [/^<;.,  L.  :  aKovaovaiv;  N'.  D.  F.  G.  :  aKovaovran  ;  '.  A'.  It.  : a xo uo-co o-if  ;  the  latter,  though  not 
so  well  supported  as  the  other  aorists,  is  probably  correct,  since  there  is  no  reasim  for  a  change  of  tense. 

"  Ver.  \5.—  [R-c.  (no  M.SS.) :  Ki)pvf  o  vcnf  ;  K.  A.  B.  D.  K.  L.  ;  K>)p  v(u<rii>.  This  well-supported  aorist  seems  to 
decide  the  other  cases. 

'«  Ver.  15.— [Isa.  Iii  7.  The  qaotation  is  not  exact,  though  giving  the  sense  of  the  Hebrew.  The  LXX.  is  scarcely 
followed  at  all.     Sec  Ex>g.  Note*. 

'»  Ver.  15.— [The  words:  tvayytKi^oniviav  (tpijvi)!',  rStv,  are  omitted  In  N'.  A.  B.  C,  by  some  versions 
and  fathers ;  rejected  by  Lachmann.  Tisohendorf,  Tregelles ;  bracketted  by  Alford.  They  are  found  in  N'.  D.  F.  K.  L., 
many  version-*  and  fathers ;  retainea  by  Meyi'r,  Wordsworth,  Lange,  on  the  ground  that  the  repetition  might  easily  lend 
to  the  omission.  Tliii  view  will  readily  be  allowed  by  any  one  who  examines  the  passage,  since  it  Is  easy  to  mistake  the 
first  occurrence  of  so  long  a  word  for"  the  second.  The  original  passage,  of  course,  favors  the  retention.— The  uncial 
aatliority  ag.tinst  ra.  (Ric  )  before  ayaSa,  is  decisive.  The  E.  V.  takes  away  tne  exact  parallelism  by  rendering 
tvayye^iiofteviov  by  a  different  phrase  in  each  clause.  A  paraphrase  is  necessary  in  any  case,  from  the  poverty  ol 
(lu;  language. 

'"  Ver.  in. —[Here  also  gospel  is  too  restricted.  The  above  emendation  is  adopted  by  Amer.  Bible  Union,  Noyes, 
Five  Ang.  Clergymen. 

"  Vor.  l(i.— [As  none  of  the  modem  versions  have  altered  this  citation,  it  is  allowed  to  remain,  but  the  reader  will 
find  in  tho  Exrg.  Nr'es  the  view  of  Forbes,  which  would  be  thus  expressed  :    Who  (of  us)  hath  believed  what  ui«  heard t 

''  Ver.  17.— (N'.  1'.  C.  D'.,  manv  yor8ior.a  (including  the  Vulgate)  XpioroO;  adopted  by  Lnchm:inn,  Alford,  Tre- 
gelles. The  great  majority  of  the  Hithers,  of  modern  commentators  sustain  the  reading  of  the  Rec.  (x.  corr.  A.  D".  K. 
L.,  some  versi(,ns).  lieile  :  Dei  Chri.'ti.  Alforl  dcetas  the  received  reading  "a  rationalizing  correction,"  while  Meyei^ 
De  Wetto,  and  most,  think  the  other  was  a  later  gloss,  wliich  Is  more  probable. 


CHAPTER  X.   1-21. 


341 


*•  Ver.  19. — [The  order  of  the  Rec.  is  poorly  supported.    N.  A.  B.  C,  and  others  :  'I<rpaf)K  ouk  eyvu,  adopted 

by  critical  editors.     The  alteration  in  the  order  of  the  Eiglish  text  i.-<  sustained  by  modern  versions. 
»*  Ver.  20.— [The  Hebrew  text  of  Isa.  Ixv.  1,  as  far  as  cited  by  Paul,  is  : 

•    \ ' :    •  :  -       ..    :  .  t    r  :  ■    :  -  :  • 

The  LXX.  :  e)u<Jpavi)s  eyenjffrjf  toi?  e/xc  /nr)  iTreptoTHxTLV,  fipeOriv  rots  ine  fii)  ^r)Tov<Tiv.  The  variations  are  a  transposition 
of  the  clauses,  ai  d  fyfv6fj.-r)v,  instead  of  iyevrje-i^v.  The  Hebrew  is  followed  with  exactness. — 'Ev  is  inscrled  aftei 
tipebriv,  in  B.  D'.  F.  ;  brackctted  by  Altord  and  Tiegelles. 

'■'^  Ver.  21.— [The  order  of  the  LXX.  is  :  i^tveraaa  r.  x-  /"•  o^W  '^''  '7M-^P*'' >  otherwise  the  citation  is  exact.  The 
B«l  afTiAe'y oi/Ttt  is  an  addition  of  the  LXX.  The  Hebrew  gives  but  one  adjective,  ~*nD,  relnllious. —  To  Israel, 
is  not  correct ;  with  rfspect  /o,  concrrning,  is  the  meaning,  -which,  however,  is  sufficiently  indicated  by  of;  so  Five  Aug. 
Olergymei',  Amer.  Bible  Union.— E.] 


EXEGETICAL  AJS'D   CEITICAX. 

Summarii. — The  fart  of  the  partial  rejection  of 
Israel,  &c.  The  fact  is  not  a  fatalistic  decree,  for 
the  Apo.-;tle  prays  for  Israel,  and  bears  record  to 
their  zeal ;  vers.  1,2.  It  rests  rather  on  the  an- 
tithesis between  self-iighteousncss  as  the  presumed 
righteotisness  which  is  of  the  law,  and  the  righteous- 
ness which  is  of  faith  ;  vers.  3,  4.  The  righteous- 
ness of  faith,  although  arising  from  Israel,  is  proved 
by  the  prophecy  of  the  Old  Testament  to  be,  accord- 
ing to  its  nature,  accessible  to  all  men,  and  not  con- 
fined to  the  Jewish  nation.  It  is  universal ;  that  is, 
accessible  to  all  in  its  internal  character,  because  it 
is  allied  to  the  inward  nature  of  man  ;  vers.  5,  9. 
Its  universality  is  confirmed  by  experience  ;  vers. 
10,  11.  It  is  proclaimed  by  the  Old  Testament 
Scriptures,  which  promise,  in  Christ,  salvation  to 
every  man.  There  arises  therefrom  the  universality 
of  faith — the  freedom  of  faith  to  Jews  and  Gentih-s ; 
vers.  12,  13.  This  freedom  of  faith  is  made  actual 
by  the  universality  of  the  preaching  of  the  gospel 
and  of  the  apostolic  mission  ;  vers.  14,  15.  Unbe- 
lief is  voluntary,  like  faith.  The  gospel  is  con- 
ditioned by  faith;  vers.  16-18.  But  the  faith  of 
the  Gentiles  is  prophesied  in  the  Old  Testament,  as 
well  as  the  unbelief  of  the  Jews ;  vers.  19-21. 

[There  is  little  difference  of  opinion  among  com- 
mentators respecting  the  meaning  of  this  chapter  as 
a  whole.  Dr.  Hodge  coincides  most  nearly  with  Dr. 
Lange  in  his  divisions.  Tholuck,  Philippi,  Meyer, 
Alford,  make  two  sections.  (1.)  The  further  exposi- 
tion of  the  fact  that  the  exclusion  of  Israel  is  found- 
ed on  tlieir  own  unbelief;  vers.  1-13.  Alford: 
"  The  Jews,  though  zealous  for  God,  are  yet  ignorant 
of  God's  righteousness  (vers.  1-3),  as  revealed  to 
them  in  their  own  Scriptures  (vers.  4—13)."  (2.) 
Proof  from  Scripture  of  the  same  fact;  vers.  14-21. 
Tholuck :  "  They  could  not  excuse  themselves  by 
this,  that  God  had  not  done  His  part  to  make  hu- 
manity know  the  gospel,  or  that  it  had  not  reached 
them,  or  that  they  could  not  have  seen  what  their 
conduct  with  regard  to  it  and  God''s  dealings  with 
the  Gentiles  would  be."  The  connection  with  chap, 
ix.  33  is  very  close  ;  and  as  the  Apostle  is  accus- 
tomed to  repeat,  at  the  close  of  an  argument,  the 
ffoposition  from  which  he  started,  the  repetition  of 
ihe  quotation  of  chap.  ix.  33,  in  ver.  11,  fiivors  the 
division  of  Dr.  I.ange. — R.] 

A.  Faith,  vers.  1,  2.  The  fact  described  is  no 
jataHstic  decree. 

Tor.  1.  Brethren  ['./^rft  A  gc  o  i.  Bengel  : 
''  yiinc  quasi  superatn  proeredentis  tractationii,  se- 
neritafe  comiter  appellat  frairen.''^  Comp.  1  Cor 
xiv.  20;  Gal.  iii.  15.— R.']  Though  this  is  an  ad- 
diess  to  all  readers,  yet  it  is  dhected  with  special 
feeling  to  the  Jewish  Christians,      Repetition  and 


carrying  out  of  the  personal  reference  in  chap.  ix. 
1  fif. 

My  heart's  desire,  or,  good- will  [^  //£> 
iv<)o/.ia  rtji;  i /i  t;  c  y.a(j  d  iac'\.  A  real  antithe- 
sis to  the  f(  i  V  is  contained  in  the  judgment  passed 
in  ver.  3.  [See  Winer,  p.  535  ;  who  thinks  the  an- 
tithesis was  too  painful  to  be  expressed.  All  ad- 
mit that  the  thought  is  found  in  ver.  3. — R.]  Mey- 
er, contrary  to  Chrysostom,  Theodoiet,  and  most  of 
the  early  writers,  as  well  as  De  Wette  and  Olsliau- 
sen,  holds  that  ndo/.ia  cannot  mean  wish,  dtside- 
Hum,  but  only  benevolence  (Vulgate,  volurdas ;  Au- 
gustine, bona  voluntas  ;  Calvin,  bcvevolentia).  Tho- 
luck :  "  There  is,  indeed,  no  example  as  yet  in  which 
fvdo/.ia  is  exactly  equal  to  '  wish.'  But  how  could 
the  Apostle  have  said,  '  My  good  pleasure  and  my 
prayer  for  them  to  God  are  directed  to  their  salva- 
tion.' "  Yet  he  regards  it  advisable  to  adhere  to  the 
translation :  My  gcod-inll  for  them.  [The  lexica' 
objection  to  rendering  ti()o/.ia,  dfsire,  is  weighty. 
On  the  other  hand,  the  rendering  good-will  severs 
it  from  the  context.  The  insertion  of  tj  after  ()itj(rt,c 
^■as  probfibly  an  attempt  to  avoid  this  difficulty. 
Alford  suggests  a  "  a  mixture  of  constructions  :  the 
Apostle's  iliio/.ia  would  be  their  salvation  itself — 
his  ditjait;,  x.r./..,  was  flq  ffwr."  We  hold  to  the 
more  usual  meaning  of  the  word.  Wordsworth 
pushes  it  as  far  as  this :  "  Probably  he  uses  this 
word  because  he  wishes  to  represent  the  salvation 
of  the  Jews  as  a  thing  so  consonant  to  God's  wishes 
and  counsel,  that,  as  far  as  He  is  concerned,  it  is  as 
good  as  done ;  and  the  Apostle  delights  in  looking 
back,  in  imagination,  upon  that  blessed  result  as 
already  accomplished."  There  is  little  warrant  in 
the  word  or  context  for  such  an  interpretation. — R.] 

And  prayer  to  God  [xal  fj  diijaic;  ngoq 
rov  x)i6v.  The  latter  phrase  can  be  limited  to 
f)trj(Ti.i;  without  adopting  the  poorly  supported  ?j. 
The  "  prayer"  was  undoubtedly  "  of  his  heart,"  but 
there  are  no  grammatical  rea.sons  for  connecting  that 
phrase  with  these  words.  Jitjaut;  is,  strictly,  peti- 
tion, request. — R.]  We  refer  y.al  tj  dirjtTit; 
back  to  y.afjdiac,  and  then  exclusively  to  nQot; 
rov  dfov.  My  heart  is  not  only  full  of  good-will 
toward  the  Jews,  but  it  can  also  venture  to  inter- 
cede  for  them  before  God — a  proof  that  they  falsely 
regard  me  as  their  adversary — and  I  have  not  yet 
given  up  the  hope  of  their  salvation.  This  also  com- 
prises a  pledge  of  Divine  compassion.  [So  Bengel : 
"  Non  orassei  Paulus,  si  absolute  reprobati  eisent." 
-R.] 

[On  their  behalf  is  for  their  salvation, 
V  71  i  ()  alt  (It  V  ft'c  (To>Tfj^iav.  The  correct 
reading  shows  how^  close  the  connection  with  chap. 
ix.  is.  Meyer:  ".S'wTiy^/ta  is  the  etid  which  my 
fi(>oyia  would  have  for  them,  and  my  prayer  asks 
for  then."  The  E.  Y.  gives  the  correct  sense, 
though  m  a  paraphrase. — R.] 


342 


THE   EPISTLE   OF   PAUL   TO    TUE    ROMAKS. 


Ver.  2.  For  I  bear  them  -nritnesB  [/caQ- 
rv(io>  yti^i  avToTi;.  l'ii(j  introduces  the  rea- 
son for  the  preec'lin^j;  dechiiution. — R.]  Ue  still 
sees,  even  in  their  error,  something  good :  they 
have  a  zeal  of  Qod  [^JJAov  Oiov  i/ovcriv. 
Zeal  /or  God,  not  ffrcnt  zeal,  ov  godly  zeal~\.  (Acts 
ixi.  20 ;  xxii.  3  ;  Gal.  i.  14 ;  John  ii.  17.)  T'nid 
will,  indeed,  not  be  the  only  ground  of  his  tvdoxia, 
but  ii  the  ground  of  the  cheerfulness  of  his  inter- 
cCiJsion  lor  them. 

But  not  according  to  knowledge  [a)./.' 
ov  xrcT*  ini'/VKta {,v .  Conii).  cliap.  iii.  20,  p. 
123  ;  Col.  i.  9  (Lange's  Comm.,  p.  17).— R.]  The 
i7Tiyv(f>(nq  is  the  knowledge  which,  being  the  living 
principle  of  discernment,  impels  far  beyond  the  mere 
historical  ;'V(jjffn,-.  Meyer's  definition:  in  consequence 
of  tlie  iniyi'.,  is  incorrect.  The  antithesis :  xara 
ayvumv,  Acts  iii.  17.  The  Apostle's  statement  may, 
at  all  events,  be  designed  to  alleviate  his  charge. 
The  bright  its  well  as  the  dark  side  of  the  religious 
zeal  of  tlie  Jews  was  and  is  a  peculiar  phenomenon 
in  the  hi.story  of  the  world.  [The  objective  advan- 
tages of  the  Jews  were  given  in  chap.  ix.  1-5  ;  here 
we  have  the  subjective  religiousness,  whicii  corre- 
sponds, although  degenerating  into  blind  fanaticism. 
Yet  religious  fanaticism,  we  infer  from  this  passage, 
is  preferable  to  religious  indifferentism.  There  is 
something  to  hope  for,  a  ground  for  good-will,  where 
there  is  earnestness. — R.] 

Vers.  3,  4.  Self-righteousness,  and  the  rigJit- 
eousness  of  fath. 

V<  r.  ;i.  For  they,  not  know^ing  (mistaking) 
the  righteousnesB  of  God  [«;- rori'Tf  c  yufj 
T  >j  V  Tor  x)  t  u  7'  i)  i  X  a  i  o  (7 1'  v  ij  v  ].  ^V'e  take 
ground,  with  De  Wette,  and  others,  against  Meyei', 
who  does  not  see  in  tlie  idea  of  ayvooofTfq  the  ele- 
ment of  mistake,  but  merely  the  declaration  of  igno- 
rance. [.Meyer  justifies  his  position,  by  saying  that 
Paul  was  only  proving  the  "  not  according  to  knowl- 
edge."— R.]  But  simple  ignorance,  without  guilt, 
could  have  no  meaning  whatever  in  the  ])rcsent  in- 
stance ;  and  still  less  could  it  be  the  cause  of  wicked 
results.  The  same  holds  good  of  chap.  ii.  4  ;  1  Cor. 
liv.  38  ;  see  also  Tlioluck,  in  loco.  Their  ayyonv 
is  the  cause  of  their  seeking  to  establish  their  own 
righteousness,  and  conseciuently  they  did  not  submit 
themselves  to  the  Divine  righteousness  revealed  in 
the  gosj)el  for  faith.* 

And  striving  to  establish  their  own  right, 
eousnesa  [  x a t  r  ij  v  i <) iuv  <) i z « i o rr v  v tj  v  ^ ;y - 
rovvTft;  (TT^irai,.  See  Textual  Note  *^.  Essen- 
tially, it  is  the  same  as  the  righteousness  of  the  law, 
according  to  Phil.  iii.  9.  Formally,  this  expression 
is  stronger,  because  it  not  only  signifies  acquired 
righteousness  in  distinction  from  that  which  is  (ii- 
stowed,  but  as  the  real  principle  of  this  acquired 
righteousness,  it  denotes  one's  own  choice,  power, 
and  will,  as  well  as  man's  own  will  in  opposition  to 
God's  choice,  grace,  and  order.  [The  point  of  this 
distinction  is  lost,  if  the  ])hrase  be  construed  as  = 
their  own  jiiitificntion. — R.]  Therefore  this  effort 
remains  a  nugatory  ^tjrtiv  axTjnai  (chap.  iii.  31  ; 
Ilcb.  X.  9).  The  ffr^rrai  expresses  the  clement 
of  pri<le  in  their  effort. 


•  [Stuart,  and  others,  taki-  the  phmso  righifnusnnit  of 
Cod  here  as  =:  OkI's  mtth'nl  of  juKliili-nli'in.  How  iiicor- 
tv5t  this  18,  will  uppi-M  fi.tm  u  reference  to  p.  74  tf.  llr. 
Hodge  snyD,  very  proporlr  :  "It  i*  that  on  wliirh  the  pou- 
tence  of  justific^ition  Is  ('ounded."  Altbid  :  "that  righ'c- 
otuntii,  which  uv.iils  before  Uod,  wUich  beooinon  ours  iu 
uatiflcation."— K.] 


[Have  not  submitted  themselves,  &c  ,  ti; 
di,Ka,i,o(jvvt\  ,  .  .  orx  i n it dyijaav .^  Meyer 
regards  the  vniTciyijaav  as  passive,  as  in  chap, 
viii.  20  ;  1  Cor.  xv.  28.  Tlioluck,  on  the  other  hand, 
correctly  regards  it  as  reflexive.* 

Ver.  4.  For  Christ  is  the  end  of  the  law 
[rt^Os  ynp  vo.uoii  A'()ktt6i;].  First,  ri/.oi 
must  be  left  in  its  full  signification,  and  not  be  con. 
sidered  merely  as  the  negative  end  by  which  the 
voitoi;  is  made  void ;  second,  A'^ktto,-  is  =  Christ 
himself,  not  simply  the  foundation,  the  fundamental 
law  of  His  theocracy  (Meyer),  or  the  doctrina  Christi 
(Socinians,  and  other.<).  In  both  cases,  Meyer's  ex- 
planation f  would  destroy  the  full  meaning  of  the 
text.  The  same  thing  is  declared  in  reality  by  the 
passages.  Matt.  v.  17  ;  Rom.  xiii.  10 ;  Gal.  iii.  24  ; 
Eph.  ii.  15  ;  Col.  ii.  14.  The  end  of  the  law  was 
Christ,  because  Christ  was,  in  a  positive  form,  the 
fulfilment  of  the  spiritual,  essential  import  of  the 
law,  and  therefore  lie  was,  at  the  same  tinje,  the 
making  void  of  the  imperfect  Old  Testament  form 
of  the  law.  Comp.  1  Tim.  i.  5  ;  1  Peter  i.  9  ;  Rev. 
xxi.  6  ;  xxii.  13.  The  centre  of  the  idea  is  there- 
fore final  aim,  purpose,  and  end  (Chrysostom,  Me- 
lanchthon,  Calvin,  and  others).  There  is  no  good 
ground  for  dividing  this  explanation  into  two  differ- 
ent ones.  On  one  hand,  Erasmus,  Wolf,  and  others, 
have  brouglit  out  the  positive  view  :  Fulfilment  of 
the  law.  The  alternative  here :  obedieulia  aciva, 
or  obcd.  acliva  and  passiva  (see  Meyer),  must  be  re- 
moved.  As  for  the  negative  view  of  the  idea,  Mey- 
er cites  a  large  number  of  authorities  who  harmo- 
nize with  him  in  limiting  it  to  this  ;  yet  he  can  hardly 
prove  this  by  Augustine,  Olshatisen,  and  many  oth- 
ers. |  Even  ver.  4  plainly  says  that  Christ  is  in  so  far 
ri^.oq   rofiou  as  He  is  unto  righteousness  to 


*  [Alford  defends  the  passive  sense,  as  ea^rcssintr  the 
result  only,  it  miafht  be  thomselvcs,  or  r-oxae  other  thai  sub- 
jected them— the  historical  fact  wa?,  they  uotrt  mil  subj  c'cd. 
But  as  this  verse  presents  an  aiitithi-sis  to  iiiv  (ver.  1) ;  and 
ns  the  whole  cun-ent  of  thouchl  iinplice  their  personal 
puilt,  the  middle  sense  is  preferable,  and  is  adopted  by  the 
majority  of  commentators.  — K.J 

t  [Jkfeycr  thus  par.iphrases  :  "For  in  Christ  the  validity 
of  the  l:iw  has  come  to  an  end,  that  ripliteousness  should 
become  the  portion  of  every  belie\-iiiB  one." — It.l 

{  fPr.  Lange's  view  is,  on  the  whole,  to  he  preferred; 
but  he  does  not  charly  state  tho-e  of  other  commentators, 
"We  append,  therefore,  the  three  opinions  most  iu  fivea 
(1.)  Chrirtt  is  the  aim  {EwhW)  of  the  law.  (So  Chrysostom, 
Calvin,  Beza,  Bentret,  Alford,  Webster  and  Wilkinson,  imd 
others.)  This  view-  me.ins  cither  (".)  the  end  of  the  law 
was  to  make  men  righteoim,  and  this  end  is  accompli-'hed 
in  Chiist  (Chrycostora,  Stuart,  and  others) ;  or,  (6.)  the  law 
led  to  llira,  us  schoolmaster  (Calvin,  and  othei-«,  Tlioluck 
reaches  thiis  from  another  point  of  view).  !2  )  Christ  is  Iho 
fnlfilmcnl  of  the  law  (riiAot  =  irAijpuiMa).  This  is,  iiiiieed, 
true,  but  SGircely  meets  the  reiiuii'ement.s  of  this  passa^re, 
especially  if  Uito  be  limited  to  the  ceremonial  law.  (3.) 
Christ  Is  the  terminal  ion  of  the  law  (.\u^rustine,  Luther, 
Tlioluck,  Meyer,  llodgc).  This  is  the  clironolo|fic4il  view, 
which  Dr.  Lanu:c  CiilU  the  nrg.itivc  one.  In  what  fense  he 
is  the  teiTnination  of  the  law,  is  also  a  m.itter  of  disi>uto 
(ceremonial,  or  moral  ?).  Some  confusion  exists  in  most 
commentaries  iu  the  citing  of  authorities.  In  fuc!,  these 
menninKs  lari;i-ly  run  into  each  other.  In  favor  of  the  hist, 
it  mav  be  urjjid  that  the  Apoatle  is  drawing  such  a  contnist 
hero  lietwecn  the  righteousness  of  the  law  and  the  r  i;lit-e- 
ousness  of  fiilh  (vers.  5,  fi),  ns  requires  a  strong  antith«sij 
l)otween  the  law  anil  Chri-t;  but  unless  we  interpret: 
"When  Christ  came,  the  old  legal  system  was  nholinhc^l, 
and  a  new  em  coranienc'd  "  (Hodge),  this  nnlithesis  will 
not  be  correct.  Yet  the  fart  that  I'aul  quotes  from  the  l.iw 
itself  to  8U]'port  the  clnims  of  the  righteousness  of  faitli, 
seems  ini'onsistent  with  this  view.  (See  l>el(iw.)  Nor  will 
it  K-  evident  how  this  verse  intnulncos  a  proof  of  tin'  non- 
siibmisiloii  of  the  Jews  to  thr  richtrousness  of  Ood  \  ver.  .3), 
unless  it  asserts  that  the  law  led  to  Christ,  rati. or  than  thiU 
Christ  abolished  the  law.  .\11  three  views  may  bo  included, 
but  the  lirst  is  the  more  prominent  one. — B.] 


CHAPTER   X.    1-21. 


343 


every  one  that  believeth,  fj'y  di,xai,oavvrjv 
tjuvtI  xiji  ntaxfvovrt,,  and  the  ya(i  intro- 
dtt'jes  just  the  proof  that  the  Jews  did  not  submit 
themselves  to  the  ru/kteortsness  of  God,  which, 
however,  was  manifested  in  Christ's  fultihnent  of 
the  law  (comp.  cliap.  ix.  31).  The  question  of  the 
extent  of  prominence  here  given  to  the  negative 
sid?  of  the  Ti/.o<;,  is  connected  with  the  expla- 
nation of  vers.  6  and  6.  [Stuart,  following  Flatt, 
renders  jtc,  with  reaped  to.  It  is  better  to  take  it 
as  indicating  renult  or  purpose.  The  former  will  be 
preferred,  if  ri/.oq  be  rendered  aim  ;  the  latter,  if  it 
be  rendered  tewiination.  The  sense  will  tlien  be, 
either :  Christ  is  the  aim  of  the  law,  so  that  right- 
eousness  may  come  to  every  one,  &c. ;  or :  Christ 
abolished  (or  fulfilled)  the  law,  in  order  that,  &c. 
The  word  righteousness  has  here  the  full  sense, 
"  righteousness  of  God ;  "  but  the  emphasis  rests  on 
heUeveth. — R.] 

Vers.  5-9.  The  universality  of  the  righteousness 
of  faith  is  proved  by  the  Old  Testame7it  also. 

On  the  citations.  It  is  evident  that  vers.  5  and 
6  present  an  antithesis  between  the  idea  of  the  right- 
eousness which  is  of  works  and  the  inward  essence 
of  righteousness.  But  it  is  clear  from  the  place 
of  the  citations,  that  this  antithesis  means  no  con- 
tradiction between  the  Old  and  New  Testament. 
The  quotation  in  ver.  5  is  taken  from  Lev.  xviii.  5  ; 
the  quotation  in  ver.  6  from  Deut.  xxx.  11-14.  It 
is  evident,  therefore,  that  the  Apostle  places  the  two 
sides  of  the  law  in  contrast,  one  of  which  is  an  ex- 
ternal Jewish  law  of  works,  and  the  other  is  an  in- 
ward law  of  the  righteousness  which  is  of  faith,  or  a 
law  designed  for  the  inward  life ;  the  one  is  tran- 
sient, the  other  permanent.  Therefore,  he  takes  his 
first  statement  from  Leviticus,  and  from  that  part  of 
it  wiicre  the  laying  down  of  the  Mosaic  obstacles  to 
marriage  is  introduced ;  the  second,  on  the  other 
hand,  is  taken  from  Deuteronomy,  which  early  im- 
parts a  profoundly  prophetical  meaning  to  the  law. 
Therefore  we  read,  first:  51oses  dcscribeth,  or  viriteth 
(and  what  he  writes  is  a  command) ;  but  then,  The 
righteousness  which  is  of  faith  speaLeth  (and  what  it 
says  is  a  proclamation).  Though  the  Apostle  holds 
Deuteronomy  to  be  as  fully  Mosaic  as  Leviticus,  yet, 
in  the  former,  Moses  administers  his  office  as  the  Old 
Testament  lawgiver  of  the  Jews;  while,  in  the  lat- 
ter, the  prophetic  spirit  of  the  righteousness  of  faith 
speaks  as  decidedly  through  him  as  if  it  altogether 
took  his  place. 

Ver.  5.*  For  Moses  •writeth  respecting 
the  righteousness,  &c.  [Mwid^y  ya^  j^ia- 
q  f  I.  rijv  di,iicci,o(Tvvriv,  x.t.)..  The  accusative 
after  y^(iq:fi,v  is  either  governed  by  the  verb  in  the 
transitive  sense :  to  write  of  to  describe,  or  is  the 
remote  object,  that  concerning  which  it  is  written. 
The  rendering :  describeth  is  perhaps  too  strong, 
though  lexically  admissible. — R.]  7'(ja(pft,  John 
i.  46.  The  citation  is  from  Leviticus,  according  to 
the  LXX.,  but  of  the  same  purport  as  the  original 
text. 

We  further  read :  Moses  writeth  down,  or  com- 
tcands :  The  man  Tvho  hath  done  them  [  o  t  t 
o    TTonyijas   avxa,   a v & q o) n o li'l.      The    ttoi//- 


•  fXhe  translator  foiind  it  necessary  to  make  some 
ahar§«s  in  the  ordor  of  the  origin;il.  In  making  the  addi- 
tions, it  was  found  to  be  impossible  to  avoid  confusion, 
without  further  transpositions.  Nothing  lias  been  omitted, 
but  it  has  been  an  unusually  diflicult  task  to  pi'eso;it  Ur. 
Lange's  notct-  in  a  shajie  that  would  correspond  to  the  order 
cf  the  Ai)ostle's  words.— K.] 


ffa?  is  emphatic,  yet  it  is  significantly  connected 
with  civ&ijoinoc.  uiird,  that  which  is  written, 
the  commandments  ;  the  law,  in  the  analytical  form 
of  commandments.  The  emphasis  here  rests  on  the 
doing.  "  But  the  righteousness  which  is  of  faith 
says :  '  The  word  is  nigh  thee,  even  in  thy  mouth, 
and  in  thy  heart ;  only  confess  with  thy  mouth,  and 
believe  in  thy  heart.'  " 

Shcdl  live  by  them  l^Ltjatrai  Iv  arroTs 
See  Tcjrtnal  Note''.  If  avr^i  be  adopted  as  the 
correct  reading,  it  refers  to  the'  righteousness  accru- 
ing from  the  doing  of  the  commandments  (Alford). 
Dr.  Lange  renders  iv ,  durch,  but  this  is  too  strong; 
iti  the  strength  of  is  better, — R.]  The  ditteieut 
readings  appear  to  have  arisen  from  an  apprehension 
that  the  Apostle's  expression  might  cause  a  misun- 
derstanding, perhaps  au  acceptation  of  the  possibil- 
ity of  righteousness  by  works.  Hence  the  omission 
of  avrd,  and  the  reading  iv  av-zf]  ("He  shall 
live  by  righteousness  itselt  ").  Cod.  A.  even  reads  : 
rrjv  du/..  i/.  niaxiMi;.  A  proof  how  decidedly  the 
early  Church  rejected  the  righteousness  of  works. 
The  assurance  of  life  has  been  referred  to  the  life 
in  Palestine.  But  the  historical  standpoint  of  the 
Mosaic  economy  indicates  something  further  than 
the  vita  jrospera.  Proof:  1.  The  vita  prospei-a  in 
the  real  sense,  or  as  the  welfare  of  the  people,  is  a 
special  promise  for  obedience  to  parents  ;  Exod.  xx. 
12.  2.  Tiie  most  direct  meaning  of  the  passage  in 
Leviticus  is,  that  the  transgression  of  the  following 
statutes  is  connected  with  the  punishment  of  death  ; 
chap,  xviii.  29.  3.  The  passage  in  Deut.  xxx.  16, 
not  to  mention  Ezek.  xx.  11,  indicates  something 
further  than  the  mere  vita  prosptra.* 

There  are  here  two  antitheses :  first,  that  of  the 
externality  of  Xhi  law  and  the  inwardness  of  the 
gospel ;  second,  that  of  doing  and  experiencing.  In 
the  first  case  the  promise  reads  :  shall  live  by  them  ; 
and  in  the  second  case  there  is  the  assurance :  he 
shall  be  delivered,  shall  be  saved.  We  have  already 
observed  that  the  Apostle  did  not  wish  to  say  that 
there  is  a  contradiction  between  the  Moses  of  Levit- 
icus and  of  Deuteronomy ;  we  may  now  ask,  whether 
he  has  instituted  an  irreconcilable  contrast  between 
the  two  passages.  This  is  very  supposable,  if  ver. 
5  be  regarded  as  a  purely  hypothetical  and  almost 
ironical  promise :  If  one  fulfil  all  the  commandments 
of  the  law,  he  would  certainly  live  by  them  ;  but 
since  no  one  is  capable  of  this,  no  one  can  find  life 
by  tlie  commandments.  Therefore,  after  ver.  6,  the 
gospel  now  takes  the  place  of  the  law.  [So  Hodge, 
and  others.]  But  this  cannot  be  the  Apostle's  mean- 
ing.  For,  first,  in  that  case  the  law  would  have  been 
useless  from  the  beginning.  Second,  an  analytical 
fulfilment  of  the  law  would  be  designated  as  ana- 
lytical, or  at  least  as  a  theoretical  way  of  life,  by  the 
side  of  the  practical,  and  thus  two  kinds  of  right- 
eousness would  be  conceivable,  as  well  as  two  kinds 
of  hfe.  But,  in  our  opinion,  ver.  5  is  not  merely 
designed  to  prove  that  the  law  is  at  an  end,  but  that 
its  end  has  come  because  Christ  has  come.  There- 
fore the  expression  in  ver.  6  has  an  enigmatical  form, 
as  that  in  1  Tim.  iii.  16.  Moses  inscribes  his  pre-" 
cepts  thus     The  man  which  doeth  those  things — 


*  [To  this  may  he  added  the  exalted  sense  which  ^»4 
has  in  the  Kew  testament.  Comp.  Xholnck,  Trench  (re- 
ferring to  Christ's  calling  himself  if  fu>^) :  "Ko  wonder, 
then,  that  Scripture  should  know  of  no  higher  word  than  ^coij 
to  set  forth  cither  the  blessedness  of  Ood,  or  the  blessednesa 
of  the  creatuie  in  communion  with  God."  Syn.  A'l  u  Icsia- 
mcnt,  §  xsvii.— K.] 


844 


THE   EPISTLE    OF   PAUL   TO    THE   ROMANS 


that  is,  who  truly  fulfils  them — shall  live  by  them. 
To  be  sure,  the  most  dii-eet  Jewisii  social  sense  of 
this  declaration  was,  that  the  observer  of  the  com- 
maudments  should  not  be  subject  to  death,  but  lire. 
But  ill  its  religious  meaning,  the  law  was  as  a  sphynx, 
whose  riddles  every  Israelite  should  attempt  and  try 
hard  to  solve  until  lie  came  to  self-rigliteousiiess, 
until  the  people  became  matured,  and  until  the  Jlun 
came  who  solved  the  riddle.*  In  Leviticus  the  sig- 
nificajice  of  the  form  of  tlie  passage  under  consider- 
ation, "  the  man  which  doeth  those  things  shall  live 
by  them,"  appears  in  the  addition :  "  /  uni  the  Lord." 
The  Lord  holds  up  the  prize,  and  {)ledges  it ;  Christ 
baa  won  it.  Thus  ver.  5  means  not  only  the  fact 
that  Christ  has  made  void  the  law  by  the  fulfilment 
of  the  law,  but  also  that  he  has  transposed  and  trans- 
formed it  from  the  whole  mass  of  external  precepts 
to  a  principle  of  the  inward  life.  Therefore  the 
Apostle  can  immediately  assume,  in  ver.  6,  that 
Christ  is  known  and  is  near  to  all,  and  accordingly 
\  apply  the  statement  of  Deut.  xxx.  11-14. 

Ver.  6.  But  the  righteousness  which  is  of 
£axth  [ f)  di  e-ii  nimniti;  iSi/.aiotrvv ij^  Just 
as  iloses  has  referred  prospectively  to  Christ  by  the 
law,  so  does  the  righteousness  wliich  is  of  faith,  or 
the  gospel,  refer  retrospectively  to  Uim.-j-  The  con- 
nection of  tlie  declaration  in  Deuteronomy  is  as  fol- 
lows :  in  chap.  xxix.  the  curse  is  threatened  the 
people  if  they  become  apostate ;  and  in  chap.  xxx. 
mercy  is  promised  them  if  they  be  converted.  Ver. 
10 :  (The  Lord  will  bless  thee)  "  if  thou  turn  unto 
the  Lord  thy  God  with  all  thine  heart  and  with  all 
thy  soul."  Then,  the  ground  of  the  possibility  of 
such  a  conversion  consists  in  the  heartiness  in  the 
rcid  spiritual  nature  of  the  law,  which  will  always 
reassert  and  prove  itself  The  Apostle  fully  de- 
velops this  christological  germ  by  api)lying  the  prom- 
ise of  the  righteousness  of  faith  from  the  law  to 
the  gospel.     The  development  is  as  follows  : 

1.  As  the  inward  chai'acter  of  the  law  was  nigh 
and  intelligible  to  the  Jews  at  that  time,  or  during 
the  previous  jieriod  in  general,  so  nigh  and  intel- 
ligble  must  Christ,  as  the  end  of  the  law,  now  be  to 
them. 

2.  As  Moses,  at  that  time,  referred  to  an  un- 
belief which  regarded  the  law  as  merely  external, 
arbitrary,  and  therefore  foreign,  far-fetched,  so  does 
there  now  stand  in  the  way  an  inibolief,  which  mis- 
takes and  regards  as  an  odd  and  peculiar  phenome- 
non the  near  Christ,  the  nearness  of  Christ,  which 
lies  in  His  affinity  to  the  inmost  necessities  of  the 
heart. 

3.  If,  at  th.at  time,  the  unbelieving  Jew  could 
say,  "  Wiio  shall  bring  down  the  law '!  " — namely, 


*  [Dr.  Iiin!?e  thus  attempts  to  avoid  the  two  opposincr 
Ticws  (1.)  thiit  iin  iictual  outward  ohi-dicnco  was  followoil 
>iy  a'tUHl  temporal  hU-.ssinss,  and  that  this  was  all  the  say- 
inc;  of  Mosos  meant;  (2.)  th:it  the  law  hidonffed  to  a  cove- 
»i;iiit  of  works,  the  conditions  of  whirh  could  not  lie  ful- 
01Ii-d.  Thf  first  is  altopethcr  out  of  keeping  with  the 
Apostle's  arcumcnt.  The  second  sccm-s  lo  put  the  luw  in  iv 
wron-^  position  ;  fcir  the  law,  althoui;h  made  a  mere  oxpres- 
Bion  of  the  condition  of  a  IcRal  nsrhteousness,  is  really 
•omcthins  far  more  ;  it  is  the  schoolmaster,  &c.,  com]), 
chap.  vii.  and  Oal.  Hi.  19-2.5.  The  antithesis  hetwecn  verH. 
6  and  fi  is  not  ahsolute,  hnt  relative.  Even  the  doinij  and 
livinc,  pointed  to  Christ,  wius  fulfilled  in  Christ;  who,  by 
llis  vicirioiis  doincr  and  living,  m/ik<!8  us  //iv  and  iIk.—II. ] 

t  i.Sluait:  " /?«'  jiutijl-itliun  In/  /lillt  sffnk'lh  thii^. 
The  Ror.se  is  the  »;imo  as  to  sii  v :  •  one  who  preaches  jusiiS- 
cation  hy  f.iith,  mi»i;ht  m.v,'  "  &c.  This  is  scarrtdy  allow- 
able, for  It  transfers  the  whole  paKsaue  altoRether  out  of 
the  pc'lod  of  Moses*  words,  besides  putting  a  limited  and 
inexact  mo:uiini;  upon  6iKaiu<Tvi'r).—U,] 


that  which  was  once  neglected  and  lost — from  above, 
that  means,  in  the  language  of  the  present,  "  Who 
shall  bring  Christ  down  from  above ':  "  although  He 
has  come  upon  the  earth,  and  has  here  finished  Uil 
life,  and  incorporated  himself  with  humanity. 

4.  If,  at  tliat  time,  the  unbcheving  Jew  esiid : 
"  Who  shall  go  over  the  sea  for  us,  and  bring  the 
law  to  us  V  " — that  is,  as  much  as  lo  s;iy  from  the  fu- 
ture world,  ths  lower  regiou.s — that  question  is  now: 
"  Who  shall  bring  Christ  to  us  from  the  dead  V  " 
although  Christ  has  risen  from  the  dead,  and  has 
sealed  His  resurrection  by  the  outpouring  of  Hia 
Spirit. 

6.  But  just  as,  at  that  time,  the  essence  or  word 
of  the  law  was  infinitely  near  to  Israel  as  an  ouUhi^ 
of  its  most  personal  and  inward  nature,  so  is  now 
Ciirist,  or  the  gospel  by  Him,  still  more  than  the 
fulfilment  and  completion  of  the  most  inward  nature 
of  man  to  rig'.iteousness  and  salvation.  For  if  the 
law  was  already  glorious,  how  shall  not  the  gospel 
exceed  in  glory  ':  2  Cor.  iii.  7-11. 

SpeaJzeth  thus  [o'l'inoi;  /.t'yft].  The  Apos 
tie's  decided  intention  of  finding  in  the  passage  in 
Deuteronomy  itself  the  real  sense  which  he  further 
expounds,  is  evident  from  the  fact  that  he  allows 
the  rigliteousuess  which  is  of  faith,  personified  in 
that  passage,  itself  to  speak.  The  multifarious  sur- 
prise expressed  by  expositors  on  the  Apostle's  cita- 
tion is  chiefly  traceable  to  a  defective  construction 
of  the  passage  in  Deuteronomy.  According  to  Mey- 
er, the  meanuig  of  the  Mosaic  passage  is  :  The  coiu- 
mandmeut  is  neitlier  too  hard  nor  too  far ;  the  peo- 
ple speak  of  it,  and  it  is  impressed  in  tlieir  hearts,  in 
order  that  it  may  be  performed.  De  Wette  adopts 
tlie  same  view.  According  to  Thohick,  the  words 
would  say :  The  faithful  observance  of  the  law  is 
made  so  emsy  to  man  after  the  revelation  that  has 
taken  place.  But  how  can  Moses  Siiy  to  the  people, 
whose  apostasy  he  hypothetically  assumes,  in  their 
apostasy :  Thy  God  will  again  accept  thee  if  thou 
turn  to  Him,  for  thou  hast  the  law  in  thy  mouth 
and  in  thy  heart — in  the  sense  that  the  people  are 
still  living  in  the  knowledge  of  the  law,  that  the 
law  is  still  in  their  hearts,  and  that  they  only  need 
to  perform  it  ?  The  explanation  of  ver.  14  lies 
rather  in  ver.  15;  The  law  is  the  true  life  of  man 
himself;  it  is  his  real  good.  The  transgression  of 
the  law  is  dciith  and  evil.  God  can  therefore  deliver 
man  from  the  transgression  of  the  law,  hnause  the 
law  is  as  an  inalienable  appointment  in  his  heart, 
and  because  he  returns  to  his  God  when  he  comes 
to  himself  (Luke  xv.  17).  Because  of  this  inward- 
ness  of  the  law  in  itself,  it  can  be  written  upon 
man's  heart  (see  Deut.  xxx.  f>) ;  it  can  always  revive 
afresh  in  him.  The  law  is  therefore  not  merely  con- 
cealed from,  or  foreign  to,  man  ;  it  is  not  simply 
something  positive  from  heaven,  which  may  again 
altogether  vanish  to  heaven  ;  and  it  is  no  simple 
promise  or  threat  from  the  future  world,  or  from 
the  realm  of  the  dead,  "  from  over  the  sea,"  which 
may  be  forgotten  until  death.  Rather,  it  is  still 
with  Christ.  For  undoubtedly  the  .\postle  will  not 
merely  say,  in  ver.  8,  Faith  is  so  nigh  to  men,  be- 
caiKse  Christ  is  ]ireached  to  thetn  as  the  One  who 
has  become  man,  and  is  risen  from  tlu;  dead  ;  but 
because  tlie  truth  of  Christ's  incarnation  and  resur- 
rcction  can  unite,  in  the  faith  of  their  heart  and  in 
the  confe.>*si(m  of  their  mouth,  for  the  completion 
and  salvation  of  their  inmost  nature.  The  typical 
prophecy  of  the  Mosaic  pas.sage,  which  Paul,  the 
gieat  master,  has  suikingly  brought  out,  lies  in  the 


CHAPTER   X.    1-21. 


345 


feet  that  conversion  to  the  law  is  the  beginning  of 
its  hearty  reception,  but  that  i'aith  in  the  gospel  is 
its  completion  ;  or,  objectively  defined,  that  the  law 
is  the  shadow  of  the  inward  life,  and  that  Christ  is 
the  lite  of  this  life  itself. 

On  the  different  misunderstandings  of  this  typi- 
cal propliecy,  see  Tholuek,  who  speaks  of  a.  profound 
parodii,  p.  557  ff.  Explanations :  Only  an  ajiplica- 
tion  of  the  words  of  ilie  law  in  the  Old  Testament 
(Chrysostom,  Theodoret,  &e.,  down  to  Neander) ; 
accoinmodat'w  (Thomasius,  Seniler) ;  Inovoi-a  (Gro- 
tius) ;  alliisio  (Calixtus) ;  suavissima  parodia  (Ben- 
gel,  and  othei's).* 

The  explanations  divide  themselves  into  two  prin- 
cipal classes.  According  to  one,  Paul  has  made  use 
of  the  words  of  Moses  for  clothing  his  thoughts,  with 
the  knowledge  that  they,  considered  in  themselves, 
expressed  something  altogether  different.  Philippi 
calls  it  "  a  holy  and  lovely  play  of  God's  Spirit  upon 
the  word  of  the  Lord."  But  would  not  that  be  a 
very  unlovely  play  of  the  Apostle  upon  the  word  of 
the  Lord  ?  Likewise  Tholuek  is  of  the  opinion,  that 
there  has  been  a  failure  to  prove  an  application  cor- 
responding to  the  meaning  of  the  text,  and,  still 
less,  the  identity  of  the  historical  meaning  with  the 
Pauline  interpretation.  Naturally,  the  constructions 
of  this  class  are  partly  of  a  critical  (Semler)  and 
partly  of  an  apologetical  nature  (Bengel). 

The  other  class  accept,  that  in  the  declaration 
of  Moses  the  Apostle  has  really  found  the  prophecy 
declared  by  him.  But  this  again  divides  into  two 
subdivisions :  1.  He  was  the  expositor  of  that  pas- 
sage in  his  spiritual  illumination  as  an  Apostle ;  2. 
Katlier,  one  intimately  acquainted  with  the  rabbinical 
hermeneutics.  Calvin,  and  others,  who  belong  to 
the  first  subdivision,  hold  that  uuiversa  doctriua 
verbi  divini  is  meant ;  Knapp,  the  commandment 
of  love  toward  God ;  Hackspan,  and  others,  the 
messianic  promise ;  Luther,  who  is  frequently  hesi- 
tating, belongs  to  both  of  the  principal  classes  (Tho- 
luek, p.  558).  The  expositors  of  the  other  subdi- 
vision regard  Paul's  interpretation  as  an  allegorical 
exegesis — that  Paul,  using  the  Jewish  expository  art, 
has  allegorized  the  passage,  and  has  found  in  it  a 
Midrash,  or  secret  meaning.  Meyer  regards  the  sum 
of  the  oracular  meaning  to  be  this  :  "  Be  not  unbe- 
lieving, but  believing  !  "  A  Midrash,  indeed,  which 
might  well  be  drawn  from  every  verse  of  the  Bible. 

[The  majority  of  commentators  adopt  the  view, 
that  Paul  does  not  cite  the  words  of  Moses  as  such, 
but  merely  adapts  them  to  his  purpose.  But  the  posi- 
tion of  Dr.  Lange  seems  preferable,  not  only  because 
this  "  adaptation  "  or  "  accommodation  "  is  not  what 
we  would  expect  from  such  a  writer  as  Paul,  but  be- 
cause the  other  view  is  more  in  accordance  with  the 
context.  As  Forbes  well  says :  "  St.  Paul's  great 
object  in  reasoning  with  his  countrymen  is  to  prove 
to  them,  out  of  their  own  Scriptures,  that  God's  mode 
of  salvation,  from  the  first,  had  been  always  the  same 
(simple  faith  in  Him),  and  that  their  Law  was  but  a 


♦  [So  Hodge  :  "  Without  directly  citing  this  passage, 
Pau  uses  nearly  the  same  language  to  express  the  same  idea." 
Stusirt ;  "  It  is  the  gfwral  nature  of  the  imagery,  in  the 
main,  which  is  sigruflcnnt  to  the  purpose  of  the  -nTiter. 
Paul  means  simply  to  affii-m  that,  if  Moses  could  tiuly  say 
that  his  law  was  inte'.lisilde  and  accessible,  the  doctiine 
of  jastification  by  fnith  in  Christ  is  still  more  so."  But 
this  method  of  regarding  the  passage  is  open  to  very  gra%'e 
Dbjections.  It  legards  Paul  as  sanctioning  that  dangerous 
uee  of  Scripture,  "  by  way  of  aecommodiition,"  which  is 
evidently  wrong,  judged  by  its  evil  eflecls  on  preacher  and 
^oplc  at  the  present  day.— R.] 


provisional  dispensation,  designed  to  prepare  for  the 
universal  Gosjiel,  which  was  to  embrace  all 'equally, 
Gentiles  as  well  as  Jews.  Is  it  likely  that  the  argu- 
ments  adduced  to  persuade  the  Jews  of  this  from 
their  own  Scriptures  would,  even  in  part,  be  words 
turned  from  their  true  meaning  in  the  Je:^i>h  Scri]:> 
tures  y  "  Vers.  2  and  3  show  how  necessary  this 
proof  is.  This  view  accords,  too,  with  ver.  4,  and 
the  real  position  of  the  law.  Alfbrd  :  "  The  Apos- 
tle, regarding  Christ  as  the  end  of  the  law,  its  great 
central  aim  and  object,  quotes  these  words  not  mere- 
ly as  suiting  his  purpose,  but  as  bearing,  where  origi- 
nally used,  an  a  fortiori  application  to  I'aith  in  Him 
who  is  the  end  of  the  law,  and  to  the  commandment 
to  believe  in  Him,  which  is  now  '  God^s  comntand- 
meut.''  If  spoken  of  the  law  as  a  manifestation  of 
God  in  man's  heart  and  mouth,  much  more  were 
they  spoken  of  Him,  who  is  God  manifest  in  the 
fesh,  the  end  of  the  law  and  the  prophets."  "  In 
this  passage  it  is  Paul's  object  not  merely  to  describe 
the  righteousness  which  is  of  faith  in  Christ,  but  to 
sliow  it  d(^scribed  already  in  the  words  of  the  law." 
Thus  the  connection  as  well  as  the  contrast  of  law 
and  gospel  are  preserved.  This  view  suits  the  pre- 
cise  circumstances  of  the  original  utterance  (see 
Forbes,  pp.  356  ff.).  That  the  variation  (in  ver.  7) 
and  the  omission  of  parts  of  the  original,  do  not 
interfere  with  it,  is  obvious. — R.] 

Say  not  in  thine  heart  [fiij  flnriq  iv  rri 
xaQ  d  I cc  a  0  V .  LXX. :  /Ayutv  ;  Hebrew,  "lisxb  . 
The  passage  is  taken  out  of  its  grammatical  connec- 
tion, and  "  in  thine  heart "  added,  as  miglit  well  be 
done.  The  phrase  is  =  think  not  (Allord). — R.] 
This  is  the  ever-recurring  secret  or  expressed  Ian- 
guage  of  the  unbeliever :  Revelation  is  something 
thoroughly  heterogeneous  and  strange  to,  and  in 
disagreement  with,  my  nature.  To  the  words  say 
not,  Paul  has  added  m  thme  heart,  perhaps  to  bring 
out  the  contradiction,  that  a  witness  of  faith  can 
assert  itself  in  the  same  heart  in  which  unbelief 
speaks  negatively. 

Who  shall  ascend  into  heaven  ?  [T  iq 
avaf^ijcffxav  ili;  t  6  v  ov  ^  av  6  v  ;  The  rjfi  Iv 
of  the  LXX.  is  omitted.]  This  formerly  meant :  It 
is  impossible  to  bring  down  from  heaven  the  law 
(that  which  we  have  lost,  because  it  was  foreign  to 
us);  but  it  now  means:  Who  shall  bring  Christ 
down  from  heaven,  that  He  may  become  man?  the 
incarnation  of  the  Son  of  God  is  inconceivable. 
Thus  the  actual  incarnation  of  Christ  is,  to  Paul,  the 
full  consequence  of  the  moral  truth  of  the  Mosaic 
law. 

[That  is,  to  bring  Christ  down,  r ovr' 
eari'V  X()t,<jr'ov  y.ar aycty^lvj.  The  toT't 
£ffTn'  lays  down  the  meaning  of  the  Old  Testa- 
ment language  in  the  New  Testament  sense.  Ou 
the  different  explanations  of  it,  see  Tholuek,  p.  565. 
[The  two  leading  interpretations  are  (1.)  J'hat  ''-s  to 
i-ay — i.  e.,  whoever  asks  this  question,  says,  in  effect, 
Who  will  bring  Christ  down  ?  thus  he  denies  that 
He  has  come  already — makes  of  the  Incarnation  an 
impossibility.  (So  Erasmus,  Calvin,  Philippi,  and 
others.)  (2.)  That  is,  in  orJer  to  bvinc/  Christ  down. 
This  gives  the  purpose  of  the  ascending.  In  this 
view,  rorr'  irrri-v  is=  the  rabbinical  nn.  This 
implies  also  a  denial  of  the  Incarnation.  See  Meyer 
In  its  favor  is  the  fact,  that  a  final  clause  follows  in 
Deuteronomy.  The  reference  to  the  present  posi. 
tion  of  Christ  at  the  right  hand  of  God  (Calvin, 
Reiche,  and  others)  is  out  of  keeping  witt  the  con- 


346 


THE   EPISTLE   Of   PAUL  TO   THE   ROMANS. 


text,  especially  the  order  in  ver.  9.  The  passage 
has  been  tortured  into  a  variety  of  special  applica- 
tions, but  the  majority  of  commentators  now  support 
the  reference  to  the  Incarnation,  though  differing  as 
to  the  precise  character  of  the  questions  (see  below). 
It  should  be  noticed,  that  this  view  assumes  the  cer- 
tainty of  the  precxistcncc  of  Christ. — R.] 

Who  shall  descend  into  the  deep?  [tj  Tiq 
*  a  r  a  [J  t'l  a  t  r  a  I,  f  1 1,-  t  /;  v  a  [1  v  a  a  vv  ;  LXX.  : 
TK  imTtnidfsn,  tjuiv  fii;  to  nifjav  r^t;  &a/.a.aa tjt;\ 
An  explanation  of  the  Mosaic  p;ujsage :  Beyond  the 
sea  1  According  to  Schulz,  (Daiteronomium),  Be- 
ifT*id  the  sea  refers  only  to  the  vast  extent  of  the 
sea.  This  would  be  tautology  in  relation  to  the  fore- 
going. To  bring  from  beyond  the  sea,  can  also  not 
mean  (according  to  Vitringa),  to  bring  over  from  the 
Greeks.  That  the  sea  may  be  considered  as  cinn , 
afiraaoq,  is  proved  by  the  harmony  of  the  Septua- 
gint.  But  cinn  is  not  "^  ,  and  over  the  sea  is  alto- 
gether a  different  idea  from  into  the  deep.  The 
probable  solution  of  the  difference  is,  that  the  ideas 
oixr  the  ocean  and  beneath  the  earth  coincide  as 
designations  of  the  realm  of  the  dead.  The  Greek 
Tartarus  is,  indeed,  under  the  earth,  but  not  a  real 
cavern  under  the  earth.  Tlie  Greek  Elysium  lies  far 
out  in  the  ocean,  on  the  Isles  of  the  Blessed.  Also, 
in  the  present  passage,  Paul  has  evidently  found  the 
realm  of  tlio  dead  to  be  indicated  by  tlie  words  be- 
yond the  sea.  Similar  notions  existed  among  the 
Celts  and  Germans.  Meyer  dismisses  the  question 
in  a  very  untenable  manner,  when  he  says :  The 
view  of  Rciche,  Bolten,  and  Ammon — that  tlie  place 
of  the  blessed  (over  the  sea)  is  also  meant  in  the 
Hebrew — confounds  a  heathen  representation  with 
the  Jewish  one  of  Sheol  (see  Job  xxvi.  !),  ti). 

[Dr.  Lange  (following  Chrysostoni,  De  Wette,  Mey- 
er, and  others)  iussumes  throughout  tliat  these  ques- 
tions arc  questions  of  unbeliefs  altliough  finding  in  the 
passage  something  more  than  Meyer's  brief  statement: 
"  Be  not  unbelieving,  but  believing."  Alford  gives 
a  full  di.-'uussion  of  the  three  views :  questions  of  un- 
belief, of  emharrassment,  of  anxiety.  He  coml)ines 
all  three :  The  anxious  follower  after  rigliteousnes.s 
is  not  di.sappointed  by  an  impracticable  code,  nor 
mocked  l)y  an  unintelligilile  revelation  ;  tlie  word  is 
near  him,  therefore  accesnible  ;  plain  and  simple, 
and  the«efore  apprehensible — deals  with  definite  his- 
torical faet,  and  tlierefore  certain  ;  so  tliat  his  salva- 
tion is  not  contingent  on  an  amount  of  performance 
whicli  is  beyond  him,  and  tlierefore  inaerexsihle ; 
irrational,  and  therefore  inapprehensible  ;  undefined, 
and  therefore  involved  in  iiHcertainty.  Thus,  it  seems 
to  me,  we  satisfy  all  the  conditions  of  the  argument; 
and  thus,  also,  it  is  clearly  brought  out  that  the  wordu 
themselves  could  never  have  been  spoken  by  Moses 
of  the  righteousness  which  is  of  the  law,  but  of  that 
whicli  is  of  faith,"  Dr.  Hodge  does  not  clearly  de- 
fine wliicli  view  he  adopts,  although  objecting  to  the 
thought,  that  the  object  is  to  encourage  an  anxious 
inquirer. — R.]  The  reference  of  utibelief  to  an  un- 
belief in  the  sitting  of  Christ  at  the  right  hand  of 
God  (by  Melanchtlion,  Calvin,  and  others),  removes 
the  centre  of  the  object  of  faith  ;  this  centre  is  tiie 
resuiTcction. 

Ver.  8.  But  what  saith  it  ?  [«;.;.«  t  t 
A/yfi;]  After  the  Aposth?  has  shown  what  the 
rigliteousncss  which  is  of  faith  forbids  saying,  he 
brings  out  what  it  says  itself  to  unbelief.  Riickert 
and  I'hilippi  [Ilod'^e  and  Stuart]  have  intensified  too 
much  the  uniithesis  between  Moses  and  the  right- 


eousness of  faith  ;  Meyer  obliterates  it  by  formally 
referring  even  the  expression  concerning  the  right- 
eousness of  faith  to  "  For  Moses  writelh."  [Tlifl 
former  position  is  almost  inseparable  from  the  view 
of  ver.  4,  and  of  the  use  of  Old  Testament  language, 
which  these  commentators  hold. — R.] 

The  word  is  nigh  thee  [syyi'?  aov  rh 
i;^  ft  d  tffTiv].  The  iyy  v  i;  aov  is  strongei 
than  if  it  were  tyyi't;  aoi.  It  is  one  next  to  the*,  a 
neighbor,  a  relative  of  thine.  The  opinion  of  Chry. 
sostom,  Grotius,  and  others  [held  to  some  extent  bj 
Stuart,  Hodge,  and  others],  that  this  verse  is  an  as* 
surance  how  e<isy  it  is  to  become  righteous,  is  for. 
eiga  to  the  context.  We  must  not  sujipose  that  thii 
is  an  expression  of  merely  the  historical  acquaint- 
ance  with  Christianity.  If  this  were  the  case,  how 
could  it  be  said  to  the  doubter  and  unlieliever:  It  is 
in  thy  mouth  and  in  thy  heart  ?  [The  Apostle 
evidently  here  says,  not  what  is,  but  what  7nay  be, 
just  as  Moses  had  done  (Tholuck). — R.]  But  as  the 
word  of  life,  which  .should  be  pecuharly  in  the  mouth 
and  in  the  heart,  it  is  attested  in  a  twofold  way. 
First,  it  is  the  word  of  faith,*  which  ■we,  the 
apostle.s,  as  God's  heralds  and  Christ'.s  witnesses, 
preach.  Second,  its  effect  is,  that  he  who  con- 
fesses Jesus  with  the  mouth  as  his  Lord,  and  be- 
lieves in  his  heart  that  He  is  risen  from  the  dead  to 
a  blessed  life,  shall  be  saved. 

Ver.  9.  Because  [or...  The  E.  V.  follows 
Beza,  the  Vulgate,  iS;c.,  in  rendering  ort,  /Ao/,  in- 
dicating the  purport  of  the  word  preached.  Dr. 
Ilodge  gives,  besides,  a  view  which  connects  this 
verse  directly  with  the  former  part  of  ver.  8  :  it 
says  that,  &c. ;  but  this  is  opposed  by  any  proper 
view  of  the  citation  from  Deuteronomy.  Tlie  sense, 
as  now  generally  agreed  (Tholuck,  Stuart,  I)e  Wette, 
Meyer,  Alford),  is  that  of  because,  or  for,  giving  a 
proof  of  what  precedes.  To  mouth  and  heart  cor- 
respond confession  and  belief.  This  purjiort  of  the 
preaching  would  scarcely  be  stated  in  this  form. — R.] 

[l£  thou  shalt  confess  with  thy  mouth, 
e  dv  o  /t  0  ).o  y  tj  (J  fit;  tv  t  lo  a  r  o  ft  ar  i  <to»'. 
i  Confession  is  put  first  here,  on  account  of  the  con- 
nection with  the  woids  quoted  in  ver.  8.  This  is  a 
further  ])roof  of  the  meaning  because.  In  ver.  10, 
belief  comes  first. — R.] 

Jesus  as  Lord  [  x  i''  p  i  o  v  ']  rj  n  o  r  v .  The 
mass  of  coiiimentators  are  disposed  to  take  xvfjiov 
as  a  predicate  placed  first  for  emphasis,  and  render 
as  above.  So  Tholuck,  Stuart,  Hodge,  De  Wette, 
Meyer,  Selialf,  Webster  and  Wilkinson,  Noyes,  Lange. 
Alfonl  doubts  this  interpretation  ;  comp.  his  note  in 
loco.  See  Tixtunl  Note  ".  Hodge:  "To  confess 
Christ  as  Lord,  is  to  acknowledge  Him  as  the  .Mes- 
siah, recognized  as  such  of  God,  and  invested  with 
all  the  power  and  prerogatives  of  the  mediatorial 
throne."  Used  in  such  clo.se  connection  with  a  cita- 
tion from  the  LXX.,  which  translates  Jehovah  by 
the  same  word  xi '^jio?,  it  certainly  means  more  than 
an  acknowledgment  of  power  and  moral  excellence; 
especially  as  this  ]tart  of  our  verse  corresponds  with 
the  coming  down  from  heaven  alluded  to  in  ver.  (5. 
— R.]  Just  ius  the  words  "Lord  Jesus"  correspond 
with  to  bring  down  from  heaven,  so  raised  him 


♦  (Eithor  ilie  word  rf.'prrling  fdilb,  or,  which  iorms  t&j 
8u1)Htnitum  mill  olijcct  of  faith  (Alford).  Thti  liitter  Is  Uj 
lie  vrofcrifd,  Kinco  word,  iiist  before,  must  he  taken  in  a 
vory  wido  senho,  an  including  the  wlmlo  siil>jcot-iniittor  of 
llKkVos;  ol.  Thr  pi  moiiiil  ohj'Ct  o/fnitlt  it  nntr,  is  oortainly 
imi)lied  n  vor.  7  ;  but  this  is  not  directly  cxprosBod  hera 
--A.1 


CHAPTER  IX.    1-33. 


34"' 


from  the  dead  corresponds  with  to  bring  up  from 
the  dead. — [Thou  shalt  be  saved,  aioQ-^ffji. 
iielief,  inih  the  heart,  in  the  central  fact  of  redomp- 
lion,  the  resurrection,  not  as  an  isolated  historical 
event,  but  as  linked  indissolubly  with  the  coming 
down  of  the  Son  of  God,  now  the  ascended  Lord — 
and  hence  confession  of  Him  as  such — these  are  the 
requisites  for  salvation.  "A  dumb  faith  is  no  faith" 
(Olshausen).— R.] 

Ver.  10.  The  experimental  proof  of  the  right- 
eousness whieh  is  of  faith. 

For  with  the  heart  faith  is  exercised 
unto  righteousness,  and  -with  the  mouth  con- 
fession is  made  unto  salvation.  The  Apostle 
presents,  in  this  verse,  the  parallelism  with  refer- 
ence to  ver.  9,  and  the  underlying  passage  of  Deut. 
XXX.  14.  Yet  he  now  reverses  the  order  of  heart 
and  mouth,  in  harmony  with  the  genesis  of  the  life 
of  ftiith,  especially  in  the  New  Testament.  As  a 
matter  of  course,  faith  and  confession  are  connected 
with  each  other,  just  as  the  heart  and  the  mouth,  or 
as  the  heart  and  speech ;  that  faith  without  confes- 
sion, would  return  to  unbelief,  but  confession  without 
faith  would  be  hypocrisy.  However,  the  distinction 
is  correct :  first,  faith  in  the  heart,  then,  confession 
with  the  mouth.  There  is  the  same  distinction  of 
effects.  FaiLh  in  the  heart  results  in  justification ; 
confession  with  the  mouth  —  that  is,  the  decided 
standing  up  for  foith  with  word  and  deed — results  in 
aioTijQia  in  its  final  signification,  deliverance  from 
evil  to  salvation,  with  the  joy  and  freshness  of  faith.* 
It  Is  natural  to  man  that  only  that  first  becomes 
his  complete  possession  and  his  perfect  joy  which 
he  confesses  socially  with  his  mouth,  and  which  he 
maintains  by  his  life.  See  Tholuck,  p.  5*71,  on  the 
apprehension  of  the  early  Protestant  orthodoxy,  that 
by  a  distinction  of  the  two  parts  tii;  (J'txatocri'i- 
V  t]  V  and  ili;  a  wr  tjQ  lav  prejudice  would  be 
done  to  the  doctrine  of  justification.!  The  doctrine 
of  the  righteousness  which  is  of  faith  has,  indeed, 
been  carried  to  such  excess,  that  it  has  been  regard- 
ed as  prejudiced  by  the  requirement  of  the  fruits  of 
faith  in  the  final  judgment.  This  reduces  it  to  a 
dead-letter  affair,  and  is  a  failure  to  appreciate  the 
necessary  elements  in  the  development  of  life.  The 
Apostle's  testimony  is  so  decidedly  one  of  experi- 
ence, that  it  expresses  the  permanent  force  of  the 
law  of  faith  by  the  passive  forms :  jiiaTfifTai, 
ouo'ioyu-tai.  This  is  its  custom;  thus  is  the  kmg- 
dom  of  heaven  taken  by  force. 

Ver.  11.  T//e  testimon>j  of  Scripture  for  the 
righteousness  of  faith. 

For  the  Scripture  saith  (Isa.  xxviii.  16). 
"  Jlaq,"  says  Jleyer,  "  is  neither  in  the  LXX.  nor 
in  the  Hebrew,  but  Paul  has  added  it- in  order  to 
mark  the  (to  him)  important  feature  of  universal- 
ity, which  he  found  in  the  unlimited   6   ni,axiv- 


♦  [.^Iford  thus  paraphrases  :  "With  the  heart,  faith  is 
exercised  {wKneverai,  men  believe)  unto  (so  ;is  to  be 
available  to  tie  acqxiisition  oi)  righteousness,  but  (q.  d., 
not  only  80  ;  but  there  must  be  an  outward  confession,  in 
order  for  justification  to  be  carried  forward  to  salvation) 
with  the  icouth  cunfe^-sion  is  made  unto  salvation."  "  2o>t. 
is  the  'terminus  ulUmus  et  apex  jus((ficat,inms,'  consequent 
cot  merely  on  the  act  of  justifying  faith,  but  on  a  good 
c>»nfession  before  the  world,  maintained  unto  the  end." 
-K.] 

t  [Dr.  Hodge  is  very  guarded  here  "  By  confessing 
Him  before  men,  we  secure  the  peiformaiice  of  His  promise 
that  He  will  confess  un  before  the  angels  of  God.'"  But 
surel>  we  may  not  fear  to  interpret  sal  ratioti  as  an  actual 
salvation,  begun  here  in  us,  ai  d  to  culminate  at  that  time, 
when  wu  shall  be  thus  confessed.— E.] 


o)v."*  This  is,  in  meaning,  certainly  contained  in 
the  "piDXSii .  The  weight  of  the  clause  lies  in  the 
fact  that  only  faith  is  here  desired.  The  Apostla 
has  very  justifiably  referred  the  e;r'  avroi  to 
Christ. 

Shall  not  be  put  to  shame.  That  is,  shall 
attain  to  salvation  (see  chap.  v.  6  ;  ix.  33). 

B.  The  universality  of  faith.  Vers.  12,  13 : 
The  testimony  of  Scripture  for  the  universality  of 
faith. 

Ver.  12.  For  there  is  no  distinction  be- 
tween Jew  and  Greek  [oi'i  ya()  iari^v  dta- 
TO krj  lovdalov  Tf  xai  "E)./.tivo(;.  This  ren« 
dering  is  more  literal  than  that  of  the  E.  V.  See 
Textual  Note  ".  Greek  stands  here  for  Gentile. 
Comp.  chap.  i.  18 ;  also  in  chap.  iii.  22. — R.]  No 
difference  in  reference  to  the  freedom  of  faith ;  in 
reference  to  the  possibility  and  necessity  of  attain- 
ing  to  salvation  by  faith.  The  right  of  faith  is  the 
same  to  Jews  and  Gentiles.     Proof: 

For  the  same  is  Lord  of  all  [6  yap  avroi; 
xi'^to?  ndvxMv.  See  Textual  Note  ".]  Strict- 
ly  speaking,  we  must  suppose  a  breviloquence  also 
here  :  One  and  the  same  Lord  is  Lord  over  all.  The 
one  Lord  is  Christ,  according  to  Origen,  Chrysostom, 
Bengel,  Tholuck,  and  most  other  expositors  (see  ver. 
9).  Others  refer  the  expression  to  God  (Grotius, 
Ammon,  Kollner,  &c.) ;  Meyer,  on  the  other  hand, 
has  good  ground  for  observing  that  it  was  first  neces- 
sary to  introduce  the  Christian  character,!  as  Olshau- 
sen has  done  ("  God  in  Christ  ") ;  see  Acts  x.  36  ; 
Phil.  ii.  11. 

Rich.  [Lange :  erroeisend  sich  reich.'\  n).ox>- 
TiTiv  (see  chap.  viii.  32 ;  xi.  33  ;  Eph.  i.  7 ;  ii.  7 ; 
iii.  8). 

Unto  all  [?«'(;  ndvrotq.  Alford:  toward  all; 
Lange:  Uber  Alle ;  Meyer:  fur  Alle,  zum  Beslen 
Alter;  Olshausen:  "By  ili;  is  signified  the  direc- 
tion in  wihch  the  stream  of  grace  rushes  forth." — 
R.]  This  is  both  the  enlargement  and  restriction 
of  Christ's  rich  proofs  of  salvation.  Only  those  who 
call  upon  him  [toiic;  int.y.a).ovfiivoi'i;  av- 
Tor],  but  also  all  who  call  upon  him,  share  in  His 
salvation.  The  calling  upon  Him  is  the  specific 
proof  of  faith,  by  which  they  accept  Him  as  their 
Lord  and  Saviour. 

Ver.  13.  [For  every  one  w^hosoever,  &c., 
Tray  yag  oc,  y..r.)..  Hee  Textual  JS'ote  ^^.  Scrip- 
tural proof:  Joel  iii.  5.  [LXX.  and  E.  V.,  ii.  32.] 
Tholuck  :  "  The  omission  of  the  exact  form  of  the 
quotation  occurs  either  in  universally  known  decla- 
rations, as  in  Eph.  v.  31,  or  where  the  Apostle 
makes  an  Old  Testament  statement  the  substratum 
of  his  own  thought,  as  in  chap.  xi.  34,  35."  Paul 
has  specified  the  name  y.v^i.o<;  in  Joel  as  the  name 
of  the  God  of  revelation,  in  harmony  with  the  mes- 
sianic passage.  [If  we  accept  a  reference  to  Christ 
in  ver.  12,  we  must  do  the  same  here,  as,  indeed, 
the  next  verse  also  requires.  Alford  well  says : 
"  There  is  hardly  a  stronger  proof,  or  one  more 
irrefragable  by  those  who  deny  the  Godhead  of  our 
Blessed  Lord,  of  the  unhesitating  application  to  Him 

♦  [Alford  :  "  The  Apostle  seems  to  use  it  here  as  taking 
up  navrl  t(3  irurrevovTi,  ver.  4."  At  all  events,  there  is  a 
recurrence  to  the  startinp-point,  chap.  is.  »3,  where  the 
same  passage  was  cited,  and  this  enlargement  of  It  is  at 
once  established  in  the  verses  which  follow.  A  weighty 
monosy'lable  ! — R.] 

t  rv?yer  means  that,  if  God  is  referred  to,  we  must  add 
this  dehtition,  "  God  in  Chi-ist;  "  which  is  altogether  arbi* 
trary,  as  he  well  remarks. — B.] 


348 


THE   EPISTLE    OF   PAUL   TO   THE   ROMANS. 


bv  tlie  Apostle  of  the  uaiue  and  attributes  of  Jeho- 
vab."— li.] 

Verd.  14,  15  :  Tfie  realization  of  the  universal 
riyhti oui>n' ss  of  faith  through  the  univcraality  of 
prcath'tuj  fiitd  thr  a/jostnlic  mission. 

Ver  14.  How  then  can  they  call  on  him? 
f?Tw<;  or  I'  1 7T  n'.a/.irr  lit  vT  ai  n^,  x.t.L  See 
I'extual  Xole  ",  and  below.]  The  proof,  clothed  in 
the  vivacious  form  of  a  question,  of  the  necessity 
of  the  universal  apostleship  :ind  of  his  preaching,  is 
a  sorites.  Faith  in  the  Lord  precedes  ealiing  itjion 
Him  (in  order  to  be  saved);  the  hearing  of  the 
message  of  faith  precedes  faith  ;  but  llis  message 
presuppo.=ies  preachers,  and  preaching  presupposes 
again  a  corresponding  mission.  From  this  it  then 
follows,  that  the  apostolate  urges  forward  the  preach- 
ing in  the  name  of  the  Lord,  and  that  uiiljelief  in 
the  apostolic  message  is  disobedience  to  the  Lord 
himself.*  The  view  of  Grotius  and  Michaelis,  that 
vers.  14  and  15  are  a  Jewish  olyeetion  and  excuse, 
complicates  the  Apostle's  perspicuous  train  of  tliougiit. 
But  Chrvsostom  and  otliers  have  correctly  observed, 
that  he  here  establishes  the  universal  apostleship  by 
virtue  of  the  institution  of  faith,  even  in  respect  to 
the  Jews,  and  to  the  narrow  Jewish  Christianity  ; 
but,  according  to  Meyer,  lie  does  not  rcaeli  this  point 
until  ver.  18  If.,  where,  indeed,  he  first  makes  full 
application  of  its  establishment.  Meyer :  "  Import- 
ant Codd.  have  the  conjunctive  (deliberative)  aorist 
instead  of  the  future,  winch  Laclimunn  has  accepted. 
But  the  testimony  ia  by  no  means  decisive.  [See 
Textual  Xote  '\  On  the  future,  see  Winer,  p.  262. 
—  II.]  Tiie  subjects  of  those  who  call  are  all  who 
are  c.dled  to  salvation,  Jews  and  (jentiles,  in  the 
universal  sense.  [Or,  as  Alford  suggests,  "  7hc7i, 
represented  by  the  nci:;  o^  av  of  ver.  13." — R.] 
Thus  the  preachers,  in  vers.  14  and  15,  are  still  in- 
dednite  (De  Wette,  and  others,  against  Meyer). 

[How  can  they  believe,  &c.,  nmii  i)e  m-n- 
r  n'l  (T  III  T  I,  V  or  nil/,  i'j  xo  t'frciv.  On  the  construc- 
tion of  the  genitive  o*,  see  .Meyer;  comp.  Eurip., 
Mel'a,  p.  752.  Meyer  .seems  scarcely  justified  in 
insisting  upon  the  correctness  of  the  Vulgate  :  quo- 
rnoh)  credent  ei,  quern  non  iiwlicruid.  The  E.  V. 
gives  the  proper  moaning. — Without  a  preacher, 
/I'lfjii;  X  ij  ()  ii(Taovroi; .  Tittmann,  Si/7t.  y.  T.,  p. 
yS  :  •/iitniii  lid  suhjectum,  quod  ad  objccfo  sejunctam 
est,  refifrlitr,  avtn  autem  ad  ohjectnin,  quod  a  sitb- 
j'cto  ah/'sse  cof/itafur.  Dr.  Lange  may  be  correct 
in  claiming  that  the  preachers  are  as  yet  indefinite, 
but  the  beautiful  precision  of  the  Greek  requires  us 
to  find  an  intimation  of  the  certainty  of  the  univer- 
sal gospel  proclamation.  In  the  first  two  (juestions, 
there  is  an  absolute  negative ;  in  the  third,  /nx^iii 
occurs,  implying  the  prol)ability  that  on(;  will  preaeli; 
in  the  last,  we  have  iuv  fii],  which  indicates  that, 
however  men  may  fail  to  call  and  hear,  those  who 
will  preach  will  certainly  be  sent  forth.  This  turn 
of  expression  seems  to  have  escaped  the  notice  of 
comiiientalors,  but  it  points  directly  toward  the  po- 
Bition  the  Apostle  is  establishing:  the  universality 
of  the  means  |)rovided  by  God  for  the  salvation  of 
men,  whether  they  hear  or  forbear. — R.] 


•  I  Dr.  Hodee :  "  It  is  nn  arifument  founded  on  tho 
principle,  that  if  God  wi'ls  the  oml,  lie  wills  also  the 
mi'an.s."  l£o  projuTly  opposes  CalvinV  view,  th:il  the 
Apostle  is  proving  the  dosiLMi  of  sendiii);  the  ({"spel  to  the 
a^'Utile*  from  the  fact  that  tliey  have  received  it.  Still, 
I>r.  LiinRi-'s  view  (which  is  that  of  l)e  Wette  aud  Meyer) 
Boems  yet  mr re  ex:ict.  frin<'c  the  providiat;  of  the  means  is 
more  marked  in  this  passage  than  their  suoccs. — It.  ] 


Ver.  15.  [And  how  shall  they  preach,  ex« 
cept  they  be  sent?  nwi;  t)i  y.  rjii  i  Iuxt iv  tat 
fi  rj  a  7r  o  (T  T  o  /.i7)(r  i  V  :]  The  definite  preachers 
spring  first  from  the  divine  mission.  But  the  Apos- 
tle proves,  by  Isa.  lii.  7,  that  there  must  be  such  sent 
(apostolic)  preachers. 

As  it  is  written,  How  beautiful,  &c.  The 
Apostle  here  repeats  the  prophet's  announcement  in 
an  abridtred  and  free  manner,  but  yet  in  strict  cou- 
formity  with  tiie  sense ;  following  the  original  text 
more  closely  than  the  LXX.  According  to  Meyer, 
the  prophetic  passage  in  question  speaks  of  the 
happy  deliverance  from  exile,  while  the  Apostle 
has  very  properly  int-.M-preted  it  in  its  messianic 
cliaracter  as  a  prophecy  of  the  gospel  preachers  of 
the  messianic  kingdom.  But  the  full,  mysterious 
messianic  import  of  tlie  prophetic  passage  extends 
beyond  the  meaning  of  a  typical  prophecy  as  verbal 
propliecy.  The  beauty  of  the  feet  of  the  messen- 
gers of  peace  is  hardly  spoken  of,  because  the  feet 
of  the  one  who  approaches  become  visible  (Tholuck), 
but  beciiuse  they,  in  their  running  and  hastening,  in 
their  scaling  obstructing  mountains,  and  in  their  ap- 
pearance and  descent  from  mountains,  are  the  sym- 
bolical phenomena  of  the  earnestly  desired  winged 
movement  and  appearance  of  the  gospel  itself.  Paul 
has  left  out  the  mountains,  and  has  given  the  col- 
lective singular  a  plural  form,  according  to  the 
sense;  peace  has  to  him  the  full  idea  of  the  gos- 
pel salvation;  the  good  things  are  the  rich,  dis- 
played, saving  blessings  which  proceed  from  the 
one  Sidvation. 

Vers.  16-18  :  But  as  the  gospel  is,  on  the  one 
hand,  naiuralli/  free  and  U7iiversal  in  relation  to  the 
antithesis  of  Jeivs  and  Gentiles,  so,  07i  the  other,  it 
is,  according  to  its  i7iwa7'd  nature,  co7idiiioned  by  the 
a/Uithesis  of  faith  and  unbelief. 

Ver.  16.  But  they  did  not  all  hearken  to 
the  glad  tidings  [',•//./.'  o  i'  ndvrn;  vTii^xov 
(Tay  t  m  t  i  a  y  •/ f /.  i  id  .  The  aorist  is  historic; 
during  the  preaching  (Alford).  Hence  the  general 
reference  is  to  be  admitted,  especially  as  the  a/./.d 
contrasts  with  tiie  preaching  to  "  all,"  the  limited 
result. — R.]  Theodore  of  Mopsvcstia  and  Reiciie 
do  violence  to  the  connection  in  reading  the.se  words 
as  a  question.  Fritzsehe  holds  that  they  refer  to 
the  Gentiles ;  and  Meyer,  to  the  Jews.  But  they 
refer  chiefiy  to  the  dirterence  between  believers  and 
unbelievers  in  general,  for  there  were  also  unbeliev- 
ers among  the  Gentiles;  and,  above  all,  the  ques- 
tion was  the  general  establishment  of  the  antithesis  : 
believers  and  unhelicvers,  aud  then  its  application  to 
Jews  and  (Jentiles. 

Lord,  w^ho  believed  our  report?  [KiQir, 
T«';  i  n  icf  X  t  rff  t  V  t  >"j  axo(*  tiiii'tv;  An  exact 
quotation  from  the  LXX.]  This  citation  from  the 
prophet  Isaiah,  ehap.  liii.  1,  is  mainly  a  strong  proof 
of  this :  that  the  preaching  of  salvation  does  not 
meet  with  faith  on  the  part  of  all  to  whom  it  is 
preached,  although  in  this  citation  the  reference  to 
the  Jews  comes  out  more  definitely.  The  hyper- 
bolical expressicm  of  the  prophet  means :  "  Only  a 
few  believe."  The  entire  contents  f)f  Isa.  liii.  prov« 
that  here  we  have  not  only  to  deal  with  a  typical 
prophecy,  but  also  with  a  verbal  one. 

On  the  ditlVrent  interpretations  of  tixo;;,  see  Tho« 
luck,  p.  077:  "  Tha'  which  ix  /ircachel,"  "to  preach 
what  is  heard  from  God."  Meyer:  "  The  preaching 
whicli  is  ap[)rehended;"  or,  in  which  the  stres,s  res'.a 
upon  the  right  .apjtrehension  (the  words  of  obedi- 
ence).— Xot  all.    That  is,  not  all  within  the  reach  of 


CHAPTER  IX.    1-33. 


349 


preaching  {anotj,  nS=l^'^).  [The  word  axoj}  has 
occasioned  much  difficulty.  For,  if  rendered  report, 
prcavhinp,  liere,  tlien  it  would  seem  natural  to  give  it 
the  game  sense  iu  ver.  17.  But  it'  this  be  done,  then 
"  word  of  God  "  must  receive  an  unusual  meaning  (see 
below).  Generally  the  commentators  have  admitted 
this  meaning  here  without  question,  and  then  in 
various  ways  met  the  subsequent  difficulty.  Forbes, 
however,  strikes  at  the  root  of  the  matter,  and  claims 
that  there  is  no  ground  for  rendering  SJ^mtJ ,  report 
— i.  t\^  what  we  cause  others  to  hear.  His  view  has 
been  adopted  by  Hcngstenberg,  and  is  the  most  sat- 
isfactory solution  yet  offered.  '^  x  o  /;' ,  like  the  He- 
brew equivalent,  he  claims  with  reason,*  refers  to 
the  jnessage  viewed  from  the  side  of  the  hearer,  not 
from  tliat  of  tlie  preacher.  The  prophet  is  speaking 
in  the  name  of  his  countrymen,  as  he  does  through- 
out tiie  chapter :  Who  (of  us)  hath  believed  that 
which  we  heard?  (See  Forbes,  pp.  362  flF.)  This 
view  is  more  literal ;  it  does  not  disturb  in  tlie  least 
the  general  drift  of  the  argument,  while  it  relieves 
ver.  17  of  a  great  difficulty.  In  fact,  Meyer,  Alford, 
and  others,  approach  this  sense,  but  too  indirectly ; 
this  is  as  simple  as  it  is  satisfactory. — R.] 

Ver.  17.f  So  then  faith  cometh  of  hearing 
[apa  tj  TiiffTiq  it  ax o^?].  From  the  ay.or'i. 
Explanations :  The  message  preached  (Tholuck, 
Meyer  [Hodge,  and  most]  ) ;  the  act  of  hearing 
(Caiixtus,  Philippi,  and  others)  ;  hearing  with  faith 
(Weller,  and  other  Lutheran  expositors).  As  this 
preaching  does  not  meet  with  universal  faith,  only 
the  announcement  itself  can  be  meant.  [Accepting 
Forbes'  explanation  of  a/.o>'i  in  ver.  16,  we  apply  it 
here :  Faith  comes  from  xvhat  is  heard,  not  the  act 
of  hearing — which  gives  a  different  sense  from  ver. 
16  ;  nor  what  is  preached — which  confuses  this  word 
and  ()7jii(x. — R.] 

And  hearing  through  the  word  of  God  [  ^ 
rfe  ax  oh  dice  ^i^  /( aroi;  ^foT'.  See  Text^ial 
Note  '^  on  the  reading  XqigtovJ]  Different  ex- 
planations of  the  ^^/<a  i9for' :  1.  God's  revealed 
word  (Tholuck,  and  others) ;  2,  God's  order,  com- 
mission (Beza,  Meyer  [Hodge],  and  others).  The 
ground  :  Because  otherwise  uriua  Sfov  would  not 
be  different  from  ctxoi}.  But  strictly  speaking,  both 
definitions  are  indissolubly  united  in  the  revealed 
word  with  which  prophets  and  apostles  were  en- 
trusted. The  Divine  message,  as  such,  is  a  formal 
sending,  or  a  commission  and  a  material  sending ; 
or,  with  these,  also  a  preaching.  Therefore  TI)oluck 
does  not  appear  to  be  correct,  when  he  says  that  to 
ptjua  &foT>  inl  rwa  denotes  not  God's  order,  but 
His  oracles ;  Jer.  i.  1,  &c.  Nevertheless,  there  does 
exist  a  difference  between  this  ^rjfia,  and  the  axotj ; 
a/.ori  is  every  message  of  salvation  to  the  end  of 
the  world ;  but  the  ()^na  &iov  denotes  the  Divine 
sources  of  revelation,  on  whose  effluence  the  au- 
thority and  effect  of  every  message  depend :  The 
word,  and  the  fact,  and  the  effect  in  life  taken  to- 
gether. Therefore  ()ta  ^/y/mTo?.  \^The  thing  heard 
is  through  or  by  means  of  the  revelation  of  God. 


*  [This  is  the  classical  usage,  and  all  the  New  Testament 
passnges  can  be  quite  as  readily  explained  thus.  The 
Hebrew  word  is  not  Iliphil,  yet  the  common  interpretation 
forces  a  Hiphil  sense  unon  it. — R.] 

t  [Stuart  has  a  singTilar  view  respecting  this  verse.  Tie 
finds  i;i  it  the  sucpestion  of  the  Jewish  objector,  whom  he 
has  already  discovered  in  vers.  14,  15,  to  the  effect  that 
"many  of  the  .Tews  are  not  culpable  for  unbelief,  inasmuch 
as  they  have  not  heard  the  gospel,  and  hearing  it  ij  neces- 
eaiy  to  the  believing  of  it." — E.] 


This  is  the  sense,  if  we  adopt  the  usual  meaning  of 
a/.or'j ;  and,  indeed,  it  gives  ^7jfta  a  simpler  sense, 
De  Wetle  suggests  that  ^j/ia  prepares  for  rd  ^ij 
ftara  in  the  next  verse.— R.] 

Ver.  18.  But  I  say,  Did  they  not  hear  9 
[a^.  Ad  ?.eyo),  f>  ij  ov/.  ?/'xo  I'ffcer  ,•]  The  in- 
definite it  [which  Dr.  Lange  supplies]  is  regarded 
by  Meyer  as  denoting  the  a.y.07) ;  and,  according  to 
Tholuck,  as  that  which  has  heretofore  been  the  sub- 
ject under  consideration ;  which  is  sufficient.  [All 
the  difficulty  about  the  verb  here  dit^appears,  if 
Forbes'  view  be  accepted.  There  is  no  necessity  for 
going  back  to  ver.  14,  or  making  the  matter  indefi- 
nite. The  Apostle  has  been  speaking  of  the  neces- 
sity of  hearing,  of  the  thing  heard ;  now  he  says : 
did  they  not  hear  ?  The  universality  of  the  privi- 
lege  is  affirmed. — R.]  Although  reference  is  con« 
stantly  made  to  the  Jews,  the  question  is  neverthe- 
less, principally  and  formally,  concerning  unbelievers 
in  general.  If  unbelievers,  as  unbelieving  people,  can 
excuse  themselves  by  saying  tiiat  tliey  have  not  heard 
God's  message,  the  most  direct  answer  would  be : 
"  Then  they  would  not  be  unbelievers  in  the  specific 
sense."  But  the  Apostle  rather  brings  out  the  fact 
of  the  hicipient  universal  propagation  of  the  gos- 
pel, by  clothing  it  in  the  language  of  Ps.  xix.  4, 
from  the  LXX. 

[Nay,  verily,  fifvovvyt.  Corop.  chap.  ix. 
20.  So  far  from  this  being  the  case,  their  sound 
■went  out  into  all  the  earth,  &c.,  fi?  naaav 
Ttjv  yriv,  y..T.)..  An  exact  quotation  from  the 
LXX.  (Ps.  xviii.  5;  Heb.  xix.  5;  Eng.,  xix.  4. — R.] 
In  the  Psalm,  the  question  is  undoubtedly  the  uni- 
versal revelation  of  God  in  nature ;  therefore  we 
cannot  regard  it  as  a  real  prophecy,  and  as  an  argu- 
ment in  the  usual  sense.  However,  the  Apostle 
seems  to  clothe  his  view  of  the  incipient  univei'sality 
of  the  gospel  in  those  words  of  the  Psalms,  because 
he  perceived  in  the  universal  revelation  of  nature  the 
type  and  gunrantee  of  the  future  revelation  of  sal- 
vation. Then,  his  having  given  to  the  q.&6yyoq 
avxMv  *  another  reference,  also  corresponds  to  this 
freer  application  of  the  passage  (there,  the  sound  of 
God's  works;  here,  the  preacher).  [Dr.  Lange  here 
follows  the  mass  of  commentators  (including  Stuart, 
Hodge).  But  Calvin,  Stier,  Hcngstenberg,  Alford, 
Forbes,  regard  these  words  "  as  possessing  a  real  argu- 
mentative force,  when  interpreted  according  to  their 
genuine  meaning  as  designed  at  first  by  the  Psalm 
ist."  Alford  urges  the  fact :  "  that  Ps.  xix.  is  a  com 
parison  of  the  sun,  and  the  glory  of  the  heavens  with 
the  uor  1  of  God.''''  Calvin  :  "  As  He  spoke  to  the 
Gentiles  by  the  voice  of  the  heavens.  He  showed 
by  this  prelude  that  He  designed  to  make  himself 
known  at  length  to  them  also."  Dr.  Lange,  it  ia 
true,  approaches  this  view,  yet  does  not  find  it  in 
the  Psalm,  but  in  the  Apostle's  use  of  it.  Was  the 
Apostle  likely  to  convince  his  countrymen  by  put- 
ting a  new  meaning  on  their  Scriptures  ? — R.] 

On  the  gross  misconstruction  of  this  passage, 
that  the  gospel  should  extend  everywhere,  even  af 
Paul's  time,  see  Meyer  [p.  408,  4th  ed.]  ;  Tholuck, 
p.  580.  As  for  the  ecstatic  salutation  of  the  uni- 
versality of  God's  kingdom,  then  first  appearing, 
which  often  occurs  in  Paul  (see  Col.  i.  23),  comparu 
the  two  statements  of  Justin  Martyr  and  Tertullian  ; 
Tholuck,  p.  380.    That  which  appears  surprising  in 


♦  [The  LXX.  thus  renders  D1)?,  which  means,  first, 
their  line  :  then,  from  the  string  of  an  aistrument,  Ihtit 
sound. — R.] 


350 


THE   EPISTLE   OF  PAUL   TO   THE   ROMANS. 


the  hyperbolical  form  of  the  Apostle's  statement  of 
the  universal  propagation  of  the  gospel,  disappears 
just  in  proportion  as  that  propagation  is  regarded 
not  quantititliveh/,  but  qualitatively.  Jerusalem  and 
Rome  were  the  centres  of  the  ancient  world.  But, 
in  aildiiion  to  them,  there  were  many  other  general 
centres.  The  error  of  expoumling  the  passage  in 
the  sense  of  a  quantitative  universality  could  not 
hoi  ]  good,  even  if  we  admit  that  the  gospel  had  at 
that  time  reached  America ;  the  whole  of  the  fifth 
grand  division  of  the  world,  as  well  as  all  Africa, 
would  also  have  to  come  into  consideration. 

C.  The  faith  of  ike  Gentiles  and  the  unbelief 
of  Israel.  Vers.  19-21 :  Frophcsicd  already  in  the 
Old  Testament. 

Ver.  19.  But  I  say,  Did  Israel  not  know? 

[fti]  ^laitnij).  ovx  «V'"'.0  The  Apostle  now 
passes  over  to  the  long-prepared  antithesis  of  un- 
believing Israel  and  of  the  believing  Gentiles.  But 
yet,  in  his  representation  of  tliis  fearful  inversion 
(which  stirred  up  unbelieving  Judaism)  of  the  old 
theocratic  relation  —  according  to  which  the  Jews 
were  God's  people,  and  the  Gentiles  were  given  up  to 
themselves — he  has  recourse  to  the  witnesses  of  the 
Old  Testament  respecting  the  beginning  and  prospect 
of  this  inversion.  After  the  first  question  :  "  Have 
\mbelievers  not  heard  the  gospel  ?  "  there  follows 
the  second  :  "  Did  not  Israel  know  it  ?  "  We  may 
now  ask  :  What  is  referred  to  ?     E.iplanations : 

1.  That  the  gospel  should  pass  from  the  Gentiles 
to  the  Jews  (Thomas  Aquinas,  Calovius,  Tholuck 
[Stuart,  Hodge,  Jowett],  and  others).  But  that 
threat  was  only  conditionally  uttered,  and  is  not 
contained  in  the  foregoing. 

2.  The  gospel  (Chrysostom,  and  others).  [Here 
must  be  classed  Calvin  and  Beza,  who  supply:  the 
truth  of  God ;  Philippj  and  Forbes :  the  word  or 
message  of  God  (from  ver.  17).  The  last  named 
defend  their  view,  from  the  emphasis  which  seems  to 
rest  on  Israel  (in  the  correct  reading),  and  from  the 
parallelism  with  ver.  18.  Meyer  opposes,  with  rea- 
son, the  ^lr]-ol'x,  which  anticipates  an  affirmative 
answer ;  nor  is  this  objection  met,  by  saying  that  an 
affirmative  might  be  expected,  that  Israel  ought  to 
have  known  the  gospel.  Paul  knew  too  sadly  that 
the  reverse  was  the  fact. — R.] 

3.  That  the  gospel  should  become  universal,  ac- 
cording to  the  preceding  language  of  the  Psalm 
(Fritzsche,  De  Wette  [Alford],  Meyer).*  Meyer 
places  Tholuck  also  in  this  category.  Tholuck,  how- 
ever, now  declares  for  (1.),  as  follows:  "But  yet 
the  following  prophetic  declarations  do  not  contain 
80  much  the  universality  of  preaching,  as  explana- 
tions of  the  inverted  relation  which  God  will  assume 
towanl  Gentiles  and  Jews." 

At  all  events,  the  citation  immediately  following 
is  not  simply  a  proof  of  the  universality  of  the  gos- 
pel. But  it  oidy  follows  therefrom,  tliat  a  new  state- 
ment is  made  with  the  proof  This  also  holds  good 
of  the  last  (luotation.  The  progress  is  as  follows  : 
a.  Universality  ;  Ps.  x\x.  b.  The  faith  of  the  Gen- 
tiles for  the  awakening  of  the  faith  of  the  Jews ; 
Deut.  xxxii.  21.  c.  The  faith  of  the  Gentiles;  Isa. 
liT.  1.  d.  The  unbelief  of  the  Jews  ;  Isa.  Ixv.  2. 
Therefor«»  we  regard  the  exi)lanation  of  Fritzsche, 


•  [Brotschnoi'lor  nnd  Roichc  tnko  Turael  as  tho  ohjocf  of 
tho  Tnrb,  nnd  ftupply  nmi  an  Buhject.  Did  not  God  know 
Ismolt  Hut  this  is  arbitrary,  and  not  in  aooordanco  with 
the  oontcTt.— R.l 


&c.,  as  correct,  and  all  the  more  striking,  as  the  ful- 
filment of  this  very  ancient  prospect  just  now  becama 
an  offence  to  Israel. — Proof: 

First  Moses  saith  [7TQ<7)Toq  Mi»ra^i 
liyn,.  First,  "  in  the  order  of  the  prophetic  roll" 
(Alford),  with  reference  to  Isaiah,  as  one  among 
the  many  who  spoke  afterward  to  the  same  effect, 
Wetstein,  Storr,  FLtt,  join  tt^jwto?  with  ovt 
'iyv(o,  but  on  insufficient  grounds. — R.]  The  future 
uiuversality  of  the  Abrahamic  blessing  had  been  de- 
clared earlier,  but  it  was  Moses  who  first  declared 
that  there  should  be  no  difference  between  Jews  and 
Gentiles  before  God's  righteousness ;  indeed,  that 
possibly  the  Gentiles,  in  their  good  conduct,  might 
be  preferred  to  the  Jews  in  their  bad  conduct. 
Thus  the  same  Moses  who  communicated  to  Israel 
its  economic  advantages  over  the  Gentiles,  was  he 
who  had  set  up  the  rule  of  faith  by  which  this  re- 
lation could  possibly  be  inverted  in  the  future. 

I  will  provoke  you  to  jealousy  ['£y(i 
nai>a'Zrj).i!}ai»  vfidq.  The  only  variation  from 
the  LXX.  (which  closely  follows  the  Hebrew)  is  the 
substitution  of  vfiaq,  in  each  clause,  for  at'roi'?. 
— R.]  Thus  Moses  speaks  to  Israel  in  the  name  of 
the  Lord  ;  Deut.  xxxii.  21. 

With  those  who  are  no  people  [in'  oi'x 
tOvit..  The  precise  force  of  the  preposition  is 
with  difficulty  conveyed  by  any  English  word.  It  is 
not  =  agiiinst,  although  that  is  implied  ;  nor  =  by 
means  of,  but  rather,  on  account  of.  With  expresses 
the  weaker  shade  of  instrumental  force  sufficiently 
well,  but  the  real  sense  is  :  aroused  on  account  of 
and  directed  toward  a  no-people. — R.]  C5  X53 . 
The  Gentile  nations  were  not  recognized  as  true  na- 
tions in  the  idea  of  the  people,  because  they  were 
devoid  of  that  religious  and  moral  principle  which 
transforms  nature  into  a  moral  nationality ;  see 
chap.  ix.  25  ;  1  Peter  ii.  10.  "'ia ,  from  n'3 ,  de- 
notes, strictly  speaking,  the  increasing  mass  of  nat- 
ural human  beings;  CS,  from  -^7,  a  connection, 
assembly,  community.  [The  words  people,  nation, 
are  used  in  the  E.  V.  to  preserve  the  distinction  be- 
tween the  Hebrew  words.  Despite  the  fact  that  the 
LXX.  has  used  the  same  word  to  render  both,  it  has 
not  been  overlooked  in  the  E.  V.  in  this  passage. — 
R.]  The  explanation  of  the  "  no-people  "  (the  oly. 
denies  the  idea  contained  in  a  nomen  connected  with 
it),  is  found  in  the  following  parallel  : 

By  a  foolish  nation  {IttI  if>vn,  a  aw  I' 
Tru].*  The  religious  and  moral  folly  of  the  Gen- 
tile consisted  in  his  not  seeking  God's  signs  with 
resignation  ;  for  which  reason  they  also  could  not 
seek  Ilim.  Paul,  with  good  ground,  sees  in  the 
thoroughly  prophetic  song  of  Moses,  which  looked 
far  beyond  Israel's  history  in  the  wilderness  and  its 
relation  to  the  Canaanites  (Deut,  xxii.  43),  a  typical, 
and  still  more  than  a  typical  prophecy,  wliich  should 
be  fulfilled  in  many  ways  in  preludes,  and  which  h;i3 
finally  ln'cn  fulfilled  in  the  almost  complete  changes 
of  till'  rclatiim  between  Israel  and  the  Gentiles  in 
relati(m  to  the  irospel.  In  ver.  21,  neither  Israel's 
idolatry  in  tiie  wilderness,  nor  the  Canaanite  people, 
is  meant  alone.  On  the  different  untenable  expJa. 
nations,  including  those  of  Philippi,  see  Tholuck,  p. 
683  [given  above]. 


•  [Xnyos,  In  his  version,  pro«orvo8  tho  namllelism  (4 
the  vort'S ;  vapa^i}  Aucro) ,  napopyia,  ov  Uio  pom* 
phrase  :  /mi/'  ni«r«  j/""  (o  jcalnunj,  J  will  cxcilf  yiu  to  in- 
dignation. — ll.J 


CHAPTER  X.   1-21. 


351 


VeB  ?^  But  Isaiah  is  very  bold,  and  saith 
['ffffa^ot?  rft  aTtoToi-iuoi  xai  /.eyft.  Lange: 
jD«<  Isaiah  even  ventures  to  say  ;  which  is  the  spirit 
of  the  Greek,  Bengel :  Quod  Moses  innucrat,  Esaias 
audader  et  plane  doquiiur. — R.].  The  Apostle  re- 
garded it  as  great  boldness  in  Isaiah  to  say  the  words 
of  chap.  Ixv.  1  and  2  in  the  hearing  of  the  Jews,  as 
'  the  first  verse,  according  to  his  explanation,  ex- 
pressed mercy  to  the  Gentiles,  and  the  second  the 
hardness  and  apostasy  of  the  Jews. 

[I  was  found  by  those  who  sought  me  not, 
E  {'  Q  e  0  Tj  V  T  0  r  c  i  ft  e  ft  ti  LrjToxKTi'V,  x.t.A. 
See  Textual  Note  ",  for  the  text  of  the  Hebrew 
original  and  the  LXX.,  to  the  former  of  which  Dr. 
Lange  refers  so  frequently.  The  Apostle  has  trans- 
posed the  clatises. — R.]  The  question  is  now  raised 
first  of  all  by  the  later  exegesis,  whether  Paul's 
explanation  of  Isaiah's  passage  is  correct  ?  Meyer 
says :  "  In  its  strict  sense,  Isa.  Ixv.  1  (freely  from 
the  Septuagint,  and  with  an  inversion  of  both  the 
pai'allel  members)  treats  of  the  Jercs ;  but  in  a 
typical  sense,  which  Paul  clearly  perceives  in  it, 
they  are  types  of  the  Gentiles,^^  &c.  But  in  this 
case,  Paul  would  have  made  an  exegesis  without 
any  evidence,  and  would  have  exposed  himself  to 
the  legitimate  contradiction  and  censure  of  the  Jews. 
Tholuck  also  remarks,  that  if  the  Apostle,  in  ver. 
1,  referred  directly  to  the  Gentiles,  his  application 
would  have  to  be  regarded  as  having  missed  its  ob- 
ject. In  the  first  place,  namely,  Tholuck  says  that 
rabbinical  expositors  (Jarclii,  &c.)  have  "  simply  and 
satisfactorily  "  explained  vers.  1  and  2  as  relating  to 
the  same  subjects.  He  further  says :  "  Independ- 
ently of  these  rabbinical  predecessors,  the  same  ex- 
planation has  been  adopted  by  Gesenius,  Ewald,  Hit- 
zig,  and  Umbreit,  which  last  writer  translates:  I  was 
to  be  inquired  of."  There  is  just  ground  for  disap- 
proving of  Luther's  confidence  in  inserting  in  ver. 
20  :  to  the  Gentiles,  and  in  beginning  ver.  21  with  a 
for — -for  I  speak,  &c.  Yet  the  exegetical  author- 
ities cited  are  utterly  refuted,  not  only  by  Paul's 
authority — although  we  cannot  even  admit  that  in 
one  of  his  last  sword-thrusts  he  has  made  not  merely 
a  random  stroke,  but  even  wounded  himself — but 
also  by  the  connection  of  the  whole  of  Isaiah's  pas- 
sage, chap.  Ixiii.  7-lxvi.  The  antitheses  in  general 
between  the  strongly  Old  Testament  Jewish  prayer 
in  chap.  Ixiii.  V  ff.,  and  the  prophetical  New  Testa- 
ment answer  of  God  in  chaps.  Ixv.  and  Ixvi.,  are 
first  to  be  considered.  It  is  said  that  the  prayer  is 
undoubtedly  desigTied  to  express  Israel's  state  of 
mind  ;  that  it  contains  angry  and  passionate  ele- 
ments ;  and  that  the  Lord  must  so  reveal  himself 
that  the  Gentiles  will  tremble  at  His  name  (ver.  IV  ; 
chap.  Ixvi.  1).  The  prayer  is  a  conflict  between  the 
profoundest  contrition  and  the  most  painful  dejec- 
tion, and  it  dies  away  in  a  question  which  sounds 
like  a  reproach.  The  Lord  now  answers,  it  is  said, 
in  the  cold  reproach  :  "  I  was  to  be  sought."  And 
this  is  claimed  to  be  the  simplest  rendering  of 
T)C"!'73 .  But  what  does  the  Lord  answer  in  rela- 
tion to  the  people  of  Israel,  and  in  relation  to  the 
Gentiles  ?  In  chap.  Ixiv.  8  fiF.  we  read  :  "  Thou  art 
our  Father ;  we  are  the  clay,  and  thou  our  potter," 
&c.  Finally :  "  0  Lord,  wilt  thou  hold  thy  peace, 
and  afflict  us  very  sore  ?  "  Compare  here  the  an- 
swer in  chap.  Ixv.  2,  and  further.  In  ver.  8  the 
familiar  thought  again  recurs  to  the  prophet:  A  rem- 
nant of  the  people  will  be  saved ;  from  ver.  18  on- 
ward he  explains  by  a  grand  antithesis.     From  this 


antithesis  there  then  arises  the  description  of  the 
new  Israel,  which  was  to  be  called  by  another  name 
(ver.  15).  On  the  Gentiles,  see  chap.  Ixvi.  12,  18, 
19,  21.  But  the  antitheses  between  chap.  Ixv.,  vera. 
1  and  2,  come  still  more  into  consideration.  In  ver. 
1  we  read,  "'la-bx  ;  in  ver.  2,  C5~-K.  The  "'iJ,  in 
ver.  1,  is  '^^l^"^  N^p"i<b ,  which  could  not  very 
well  denote  the  Israelites,  whether  the  people  he 
considered  passive  or  active  (see  Tholuck,  p.  5S6), 
as  the  question  in  both  cases  is  the  ofiicial  form  of 
their  religion  ;  C5  ,  on  the  other  hand,  in  ver.  2,  ik 
designated  as  "'"l^D  ;  it  is  a  people  pledged  to  the 
Lord,  but  is  now  an  apostate  people.  The  antithe- 
sis is  still  stronger,  that  the  Lord  is  now  a  subject 
of  search  on  the  part  of  a  people  ( Goi)  which  had 
never  inquired  after  Him  ;  that  He  is  found  by  those 
who  did  not  seek  Him,  and  must  merely  be  found 
with  the  words  "^JiH  '■}IT) ,  while  He  had  to  spread 
out  His  hands  in  vain  the  whole  day  to  a  rebellious 
people.  In  ver.  1,  a  people  is  spoken  of  which  now 
not  only  inquires  after  the  Lord,  but  even  searches 
after  Him ;  but,  in  ver.  2,  it  is  a  people  which  has 
so  fully  turned  away  from  Him,  that  He  seeks  it  the 
whole  day  in  vain.  Thus  the  ^FiiD'^B  ,  in  ver.  2, 
rather  than  ^FlttJ'n'JS  at  the  beginning,  must  be  read 
as  a  strengthened  preterite.  The  Lord  answers  the 
question,  whether  He  would  afflict  very  sorely,  by 
referring  to  His  compassion  to  the  Gentiles  (Jerome). 
Then  He  explains,  in  ver.  2,  how  this  turning  from 
them  has  occurred.  "  I  have  spread  out  my  hands  " 
(in  vain),  &c.  The  exegetical  abridgment  of  thia 
last  chapter  is  connected  with  an  abridgment  of  the 
whole  of  the  second  part  of  Isaiah.  Tholuck,  not 
satisfied  with  the  def'mce  of  the  older  interpretation 
of  this  passage  by  Hc/igstenberg,  Hofmann,  and  Stier, 
takes  a  middle  position  between  Paul  and  the  ex- 
positors cited,  by  remarking  "  that  the  prophet  did 
not  speak,  in  ver.  1,  of  the  Gentiles,  and  yet  that 
Paul  did  speak,  in  ver.  2,  of  the  Jews."  But  what 
would  the  a7TOTo/./m  then  mean?  Paul  could,  in- 
deed, have  good  ground  for  not  naming  the  Gen- 
tiles, because  a  consequent  exclusion  of  the  chosen 
substance  of  Israel  could  have  been  inferred.  Stier's 
explanation  is  therefore  so  far  correct  as  it  holds 
that,  in  ver.  1,  Israel  is  added,  yet  not  after  its  first 
call,  but  after  its  dissolution  into  the  "  no-people  " 
of  the  Gentile  world.*  [There  is  no  other  view  of 
the  passage,  except  that  which  refers  it,  as  originally 
used,  to  the  Gentiles,  that  consists  with  Paul's  pru- 
dence as  a  reasoner,  much  less  with  his  apostolic 
authority  and  inspiration.  To  the  argument  of  Dr. 
Lange  nothing  need  be  added. — R.] 

Yer.  21.  But  of  Israel  [nQoq  Je  rov 
7(T^a;//].  Erasmus,  ad'xrsus  /  Be  Wette,  [Phi- 
lippi,  Alford  (Meyer,  an)  ],  and  others,  with  resrert 
to  Israel ;  Vulgate  and  Riickert,  to  Israel.  We  adopt 
ti'itfi  respect  to,  since  the  prophet  had  already  made 
the  foregoing  declaration  to  Israel. 

He  saith  [Atyft].  Xamely,  Isaiah,  in  the 
name  of  God. — [All  day  long  I  stretched  forth 
my  hands,  "O^.tjv  ri]v  -fifitQav  i^tniraaa 
TK?  xft()dq  fiov.^  The  spreadinri  out  of  the 
hands,  says  Tholuck,  is  not  (as  Fritzsche  would  have 
it)  the  gestiis  of  the  one  inviting  to  his  embrace,f 
but,  according  to  Chrysostom,  the  gestus  of  the  sup- 

*  f  Stier,  Jetaiat,  nieht  Pseudo-Jesaias,  pp.  797  ff.—  E.] 
t  [So  Conybeare  :   "  The  metaphor  is  that  of  a  mothe* 

opening  her  arms  to  call  back  her  child  to  her  embrace." 

-K.] 


352 


THE   EPISTLE   OF   PAUL   TO   THE   ROMANS. 


pliant.  Between  the  two  meanings  of  this  gcstm 
there  lies  also  a  third  ;  and,  after  all,  one  does  not 
preclude  tlic  other.  The  principal  idea  is  the  [icstus 
of  gracious,  importunate,  and  expressed  admonition, 
of  entreaty,  compassionate  sympathy,  and  continuous 
appeal. 

And  gainsaying  [xat  a  rrt  Af  yo  vtw]. 
Meyer  hohU,  contrary  to  Grotius,  and  most  exi>osi- 
tors,  that  tlie  a.vri./.ty.  must  not  be  understood  as 
tiubborn,  but  contradiclori/.  But  contradiction,  in 
the  sphere  of  religion,  is  tlie  decisive  expression  of 
oppo.siiio7i.  [Philippi  thinks  this  aihled  attributive 
expresses  the  positive  side  of  disobedience ;  tiic  oth- 
er, «/T*t.9  or rra,  the  negative.  If  so,  both  were 
necessary  to  convjy  the  full  meaning  of  the  Hebrew 
word  used  by  the  prophet.  "Tliey  say  to  God,  offer- 
ing them  salvation  :  we  mil  not.'''' — R.] 


DOCTRINAIi  AND   ETHICAL. 

1.  The  intercession  of  the  believer  a  sign  of 
hope  and  salvation  to  those  for  wliom  it  is  made. 

2.  Tiie  bright  and  dark  sides  of  religious  zeal. 
If  it  be  not  purified  by  progressive,  living  knowl- 
edge, it  becomes  pevcrted  into  the  carnal  zeal  of 
liinaticiam.  On  the  first  appearance  of  Jewish  fanat- 
icism, see  the  Commentary  on  Genesis  [p.  564,  Anier. 
ed.]. 

3.  Self-righteousness  has  many  forms.  The  start- 
ing-point is  the  effort  for  the  righteou.sness  of  the 
law,  not  as  it  is  attained  inwardly  by  simplicity  and 
humility,  but  as  it,  by  self-complacency  and  impurity, 
falls  into  externality.  In  this  direction  the  right- 
eousness of  the  law  becomes  the  righteousness  of 
works;  and  from  this  there  results  self-righteous- 
ness, which  branches  out  into  many  forms — into  tlie 
ecclesiastical  and  political  form  of  confessional  and 
partisan  righteousness ;  into  the  ecclesiastical  and 
Bcholastic  form  of  doctrinal  righteousness  (orthodox- 
ism);  into  the  worldly  form  of  moral  righteousness; 
into  the  pietistic  form  of  righteousness  of  feeling  ; 
and  into  the  philosophical  and  brutal  forms  of  the 
denial  of  all  i)ersonal  guilt.  In  all  forms  it  inverts 
the  relation  between  God  and  man — between  the  Cre- 
ator and  the  creature — between  God's  sovereignty 
and  man's  own  will — between  God's  law  and  the  self- 
made  service  and  law — between  grace  and  works — 
and  between  tlie  ground  of  life  and  the  most  out- 
ward false  show.  Its  real  want  is  the  vnint  of  the 
hrarCs  upward  look  at  the  throne  of  God's  eternal 
majesty ;  and  this  want  is  also  the  first  g^iilt ;  the 
positive  nun  connected  therewith  is  the  baseness 
of  the  mind's  look  at  things  below  ;  the  lost  state 
of  tlie  mind's  look  in  the  abject  beholding  of  self. 
But  as  this  self-righteousness  is  so  thoroughly  selfish 
that  it  misunderstands  and  scorns  the  proffer  of 
God's  freely-given  righteousness,  the  gospel  of  grace, 
BO  is  it  likewise  selfish  in  connecting  itself  insepa- 
rably with  fanaticism. 

4.  Clirist  is  the  end  of  the  law,  because  He  is 
the  fulfilment  of  the  law ;  therefore  He  is,  on  one 
side,  the  end  where  the  law  is  changed  into  the  col- 
lective principle  of  the  new  birth  ;  and,  on  the  oth- 
er, He  is  the  end  in  which  it  lays  off  its  eternal  Old 
Testament  form  and  meaning;  just  aa  ripe  fruit  be- 
comes freed  from  its  bondage  in  the  husk.  See 
Jijrer/.  Xti/i's. 

5.  Ver.  5.  The  doctrine  of  eternal  lif;  has  de- 
veloped itself  embryonically  by  stages  :  In  this  life, 
God's  blessing,  God's  glorious  deliverance  from  the 


manifold  danger  of  death,  and,  in  the  future,  th« 
peacel'ul  slumber  of  those  delivered  from  beds  of 
eartiily  suffering,  their  celebration  of  the  marriage- 
sup[)er  of  the  Lamb,  and  their  safety  in  Abraham's 
bosom,  kc.  This  development,  ju>t  as  every  biblical 
doctrine,  has  taken  place  in  organic  conformity  to 
the  law.  According  to  Tholuck,  p.  557,  the  esch»> 
tology  of  the  Jews  of  Palestine  at  the  time  of  Christ 
had  already  attained  to  tiie  idea  of  eternal  life.  Yet 
they  hardly  attained  to  the  idea  of  eternal  life  in  tiie 
Christian  sense.  [It  must  ever  be  remeinbereil  that 
the  ideas,  immortaliti/  and  eternal  Hf\  are  not  iden- 
tical. Ziiit'j  has  a  new  meaning  in  the  New  Testa- 
ment. Comp.  the  thoughtful  remarks  of  Trench, 
Syn.  N.  T.,  %  xxvii.— R.J 

6.  The  righteousness  of  faith  speaks  even  in 
Mo.'se.s,  if  Moses  be  properly  understood  and  ex- 
plained.    [Comp.  Exeg.  Notes  on  vers.  7-9. — R.] 

7.  Tlie  truth  of  the  inward  essence  of  the  law, 
like  that  of  the  gospel,  and  therefore  the  truth  of 
the  whole  saving  revelation  of  God,  is  based  on  its 
inward  character — on  its  inward  union  with  the  most 
inward  nature  of  man.  Its  impregnability  and  in- 
corruptibility also  rest  upon  the  same  basis.  Just 
as  man  must  return  from  all  by-ways  (for  his  salva- 
tion  or  for  his  judgment)  to  the  idea  of  God,  so  also 
must  he  return  to  the  idea  of  the  God-man,  of  guilt, 
the  atonement,  deliverance,  the  new  birth,  and  the 
new  and  eternal  life.  The  objection  urged  against 
revelation,  and  especially  against  Christianity,  that 
this  religion  beclouds  the  earthly  life  by  an  exclusive 
representation  of  heaven,  and  the  present  by  an 
exclusive  assertion  of  the  future,  the  realm  of  the 
dead,  and  duration  after  death,  is  removed  by  a  pas- 
sage which  the  Apostle  cites  and  elaborates  from 
Deuteronomy.  Christ  is  on  the  earth  in  so  far  aa 
Ho  has  become  inseparably  incorporated  with  it  by 
His  historical  presence  and  union  with  humanity  ; 
and  He  is  just  as  much  in  this  life,  and  present  in 
His  judgments  and  bestowals  of  salvation,  aa  He  is 
in  the  eternal  world,  as  the  future  Finisher  of  all 
things. 

8.  Faith  and  confession  ;  see  Exeg.  Notes.  The 
delivering  power  of  confcflsion.  Because  it:  1. 
makes  inward  faith  irrevocable ;  2.  Breaks  loose 
from  unbelief;  3.  LTnites  with  believers,  becomes 
flesh  and  lilood,  and,  in  a  good  sense,  acquires  world- 
ly form,  worldly  power,  and  the  power  of  manifes- 
tation ;  4.  Pledges  itself  to  full  consistency  in  word 
and  deed,  life  and  death.  Christians  have  had  good 
ground  for  holding  martyrdom  in  sucli  high  lionor. 
But  if  martyrdom  can  be  exaggerated  and  overvalued, 
how  much  more  can  a  confessional  righteousness  be 
overvalued,  which  seeks  its  protection  and  peace  un- 
der the  shadow  of  formulas  ! 

9.  The  centre  of  faith  and  the  centre  of  con- 
fession ;  see  ver.  9.  The  centre  of  faith  is  Christ's 
resurrection,  with  all  that  it  comprises ;  the  centre 
of  confession  is  Jesus  as  the  Lord,  and  therefore  not 
"  the  Christianity  of  Christ,"  but  the  Christ  of  Chris- 
tianity, [ileiiee  the  A))ostle  does  not  say :  If  thou 
shalt  confess  with  thy  moiith  my  doctrine,  and  be- 
lieve in  thine  heart  in  justification  by  faith,  thou 
shalt  be  saved  ;  yet  how  often  he  is  represented  as 
saying  this,  and  no  more.  The  living  Christ  is  not 
in  such  a  guspel. — R.] 

10.  'With  the  complete  freedom  of  revelation 
and  of  God's  pi^ople  there  has  also  come  the  full 
protection  of  faith  against  unbelief. 

11.  The  riches  of  the  Lord  to  a  praying  huioaa 
world. 


CHAPTER   X.    1-21. 


353 


12.  The  order  of  the  gospel  message.  Its  ne- 
cessity, its  pronii.se,  its  authority,  its  condition  (the 
Divine  mission  ;  direct  or  indirect).  See  the  inter- 
esting statements  which  Tholuck  makes,  p.  580  ff., 
on  the  assertion  of  the  Lutheran  theologians  of  the 
seventeenth  century,  as  well  as  of  their  latest  com- 
panions in  adherence  to  the  letter,  that  this  text 
(and  the  article  of  the  general  call)  forces  us  to  ac- 
cept the  position  that  the  gospel  had  been  preached 
in  all  the  world  at  Paul's  time. 

13.  We  must  be  careful  to  distinguish,  that  the 
question  here  is  the  necessity  of  the  official  bearers 
or  messengers  of  God's  word,  but  not  of  them  ex- 
clusively. Or,  more  strictly  speaking,  the  sending 
has  two  sides,  and  does  not  consist  simply  in  official 
arrangements  and  forms.  [This  is  even  more  ap- 
parent, if  we  understand  ver.  17  to  refer  to  u'hat  is 
heard,  rather  than  ^rhat  is  preached,  and  then  con- 
sider how  the  Apostle  proves  from  an  Old  Testament 
description  of  the  voice  of  God  in  nature  (ver.  18), 
the  universality  of  this  privilege. — R.] 

14.  The  feet  of  the  messengers  on  the  moun- 
tains, or  the  beauty  of  the  progressive  course  of  the 
gospel. 

15.  Unbelief  in  the  gospel  is  disobedience,  spe- 
cific disobedience  and  rage ;  Ps.  ii.  The  more  grossly 
and  roughly  human  nature  is  apprehended,  the  more 
external  become  the  ideas  of  obedience  and  disobe- 
dience ;  the  more  profoundly,  purelj',  and  inwardly 
they  are  viewed,  the  more  profoundly,  purely,  and 
inwardly  is  this  antithesis  defined  ;.  and,  finally  and 
fundamentally,  faith  in  God's  word  is  specific  obe- 
dience, while  unbelief  is  specific  disobedience,  spe- 
cific rebellion.  [The  LXX.  form  of  Isa.  Ixv.  2  (ver. 
21),  by  dividing  the  idea  of  rebellion  into  disobedi- 
ence and  gainsaying,  only  recognizes  the  connection 
between  refusing  God's  commands  and  contradicting 
His  words :  disobedience  and  unbelief,  acting  and 
reacting  upon  each  other  continually. — R.] 

16.  The  prudent  advance  of  the  Apostle  in  his 
judgment,  that  Israel  has  changed  its  part  with  the 
Gentiles  by  its  unbelief,  and  has  become  an  apostate 
people,  is  here  a  characteristic  of  his  masterly  apos- 
tolic wisdom  of  instruction,  as  well  as  of  his  apos- 
tolic heart,  as,  with  a  shudder  of  inmost  sorrow,  he 
gradually  draws  aside  the  curtain  from  the  ghastly 
picture  of  Israel.  The  argument  from  the  Old  Tes- 
tament is  in  conformity  with  the  law  that  every 
apology  must  be  discussed  from  the  acknowledged 
sources,  statements,  or  principles  of  the  opponent, 
and  that  its  possibility  ceases  where  there  cease  to 
be  positions  in  common. 


HOMILETICAL  AND  PEACTICAIi. 

a.  Vers.  1,  2.  The  benevolent  disposition  of  the 
Apostle  toward  Israel.  It  is  clear :  1.  Frbm  his 
wish  and  prayer  that  they  might  be  saved  ;  2.  From 
his  record  that  they  have  a  zeal  of  God,  but  not 
according  to  knowledge. — A  zeal  for  God  is  good, 
but  it  should  not  exist  without  knowledge  (ver.  2). 
—How  often  ignorant  zeal  occurs :  1.  In  domestic  ; 
2.  In  civil ;  and  3.  In  ecclesiastical  affairs ;  and, 
unfortunately,  it  occurs  most  frequently  in  the  last 
(ver.  2). — The  folly  of  ignorant  zeal.  It  is  foolish  : 
1.  In  regard  to  its  starting-point;  2.  Its  end;  3. 
The  choice  of  means  (ver  2). — Wise  and  ignorant 
zeal. 

Starke  :  Oh,  how  can  men  so  transgress  as  to 
be  led  by  a  blind  rehgious  zeal  to  oppose  the  dear- 
23 


est  truths  of  the  gospel  by  an  imaginary  defence  of 
orthodoxy ;  and  thus  hate,  calumniate,  and  reproach 
Christ  in  His  members,  and  always  think,  with  those 
ancient  enemies,  that,  by  so  doing,  they  do  God  ser- 
vice (John  xvi.  2). — Hedinger  :  The  zeal  of  the 
Jews  crucified  Christ. 

Spener  :  All  the  persecutions  which  have  been, 
and  still  will  be  inflicted  on  pious  Christians,  are 
commicted  by  those  who  do  not  know  the  truth  and 
doctrine  of  godliness  ;  who  regard  others  w^ho  are 
attached  to  it  sis  false  and  wicked  people  ;  and  who 
think  that  they  render  God  a  service  when  they 
persecute  them  (John  xvi.  2) ;  but  yet,  by  this  vei-y 
means,  they  thrust  themselves  into  God's  judgment, 
and  are  not  at  all  excused  lor  their  error  (ver.  2). 

Hkubner  :  What  is  blind  zeal  in  religious  mat- 
ters ?  Whence  does  it  come  ?  If  it  be  wholly  un- 
clean, it  is  self-love,  selfii^ness;  if  it  be  merely 
joined  with  perverse  measures,  then  it  arises  from 
a  weakness  of  understanding,  and,  in  that  case,  has 
also  a  mixture  of  egotism  1  True  zeal  is  pure  and 
clear. — Compare  Paul's  early  Jewish  and  later  Chris- 
tian zeal. 

Besser  :  When  Paul  cherishes,  and  expresses  in 
praying  to  GoJ,  the  hearty  wish  that  they  who  have 
stumbled  against  the  stone  of  offence  may  yet  be 
saved,  he  certainly  has  no  knowledge  of  any  abso- 
lute decree  of  condemnation  on  any  man,  not  even 
on  the  most  stiff-necked  Jews  (ver.  1). — One  of  our 
older  teachers  laments :  "  The  Jews  had,  and  still 
have,  a  zeal  without  knowledge  ;  but  we,  alas,  have 
an  understanding  without  zeal  "  (ver.  2). 

h.  Ver.  3.  Our  own  righteousness,  and  right- 
eousness which  is  of  God  (Luke  xviii.  9-14).  1. 
The  former  is  proud,  and  leads  to  humiliation ;  2. 
The  latter,  on  the  contrary,  is  humble,  and  leads  to 
exaltation. 

Starke,  Lange  :  No  persons  are  farther  from 
God's  kingdom,  and  more  difficult  to  be  converted, 
than  those  who,  when  they  hear  of  the  method  of 
salvation,  have  so  much  of  their  own  righteousness 
as  to  think  that  they  have  long  conformed  to  it. 

Heubser  :  They  are  therefore  devoid  of  an  hum- 
ble recognition  of  their  unworthiness  before  God  ; 
they  would  themselves  be  something,  and  carry 
weight.  Where  this  pride  and  fancy  exist,  there  is 
always  blindness. 

c.  Vers.  4-11.  The  righteousnesss  which  is  of 
faith  is  :  1.  A  righteousness  in  Christ,  who  is  the 
end  of  the  law ;  2.  And  therefore  can  be  obtained 
only  by  faith  in  Him  (vers.  4-11). — The  unbeliever 
asserts  that  Christ  is  far  from  and  unapproachable 
by  man ;  but  the  believer,  on  the  contrary,  knows 
that  He  is  near  us  by  the  word  of  faith  (vers.  5-9). 
— In  order  to  avoid  believing,  men  make  use  of 
empty  evasions  (vers.  5-9). — As  the  law  was  near  to 
Israel,  so  is  the  gospel  near  to  us :  1.  In  the  mouth ; 
2.  In  the  heart  (ver.  8). — What  do  we  preach  ?  1. 
Not  a  remote,  and  therefore  incomprehensible  word  ; 
but,  2.  A  near,  and  therefore  a  very  easily  under- 
stood word  (ver.  8). — The  conditions  of  salvation : 
1.  The  confession  of  the  mouth  that  Jesus  is  the 
Lord ;  2.  The  belief  in  the  heart  that  God  has 
raised  Him  from  the  dead  (vers.  9-11). — The  inward 
interdependence  of  confession  and  faith :  1.  There 
is  no  true  confession  of  the  mouth  without  faith  in 
the  heart ;  2.  But  there  is  also  no  living  faith  of 
the  heart  without  the  confession  of  the  mouth  (vers. 
9-11). — Faith  in  the  heart  must  ever  precede  the 
confession  of  the  mouth  ;  which,  unfortunately,  ie 
not  always  the  case,  and  therefore  so  much  is  said 


354 


THE   EPISTLE   OF   FAUL   TO   THE   ROMANS. 


of  confession,  and  so  little  is  inwardly  believed  (vers. 
9-11). — Tiie  great  confession  of  the  Christian  Church, 
as  exi)res.sed:  1.  In  the  a|)ostolie  confession  of  faith; 
2.  In  the  hymns  of  tiie  church  ;  3.  In  its  prayers ; 
4.  In  its  celebration  of  tlie  Lord's  Supper  (ver.  10). 
— The  confessors  of  the  Christian  Cinu'ch  :  L  In  the 
beginning  (the  time  of  the  first  persecutions);  2.  In 
the  period  of  the  Reformation  ;  3.  At  the  present 
time  (the  martyrs  in  Madagascar,  on  the  South  Sea 
Islan<i.s,  in  B(jrneo,  Syria,  &c. ;  ver.  1<)). 

LuTiiKK  :  lie  who  does  not  believe  that  Christ 
has  died,  and  risen,  in  onler  to  make  us  righteous 
from  our  sins,  aays  :  "  Wiio  shall  ascend  into  heav- 
en, and  who  shall  descend  into  the  deep?"  But 
this  is  done  by  those  who  would  be  justified  by 
work.'j,  and  not  by  faith,  wlien  they  speak  thus  with 
the  mouth,  but  not  in  the  heart.  Emphasis  est  in 
verba  :  in  the  heart. 

Starkk  :  Christ  is  the  essence  of  the  Old  Tes- 
tament Scriptures  also ;  lie  little  understands  them 
who  does  not  find  Christ  in  them.  The  entire  life 
of  the  saints  of  the  Old  Testament  is  a  prophecy  of 
Christ ;  John  v.  46  (ver.  5). — Say  not,  "  Who  has 
been  among  the  dead,  and  has  returned  again,  and 
has  told  us  of  the  condition  of  the  dead  ?  "  Stand 
by  the  gospel  truth,  and  you  will  be  righteous  and 
saved;  Luke  xvi.  31  (ver.  7). — Be  comforted, 
troubled  soul ;  tliough  you  do  not  have  the  joy  of 
faith  just  in  the  hour  of  temptation,  you  will  never- 
theless be  saved,  so  long  as  you  depend  on  Christ ; 
for  God,  who  does  not  lie,  has  often  given  you  the 
assurance  that  you  shall  be  saved  (ver.  11). — Cra- 
mer :  The  mouth  and  the  heart  cannot  be  separated ; 
Ps.  cxvi.  10  (ver.  9). — Faith  must  not  grow  on  tiie 
tongue,  but  in  the  heart ;  Acts  xv.  9  (ver.  10). — 
Hkdi.nger  :  The  heart  without  tlie  mouth  is  timid- 
itv ;  tiie  mouth  without  the  lieart  is  hypocrisy  (ver. 
10).^ 

Spener  :  We  read  that  the  word  is  nigh  ns, 
namely,  that  it  is  declared  to  us ;  that  we  have  it 
in  the  heart — wlicro  the  Holy  Spirit  has  impressed  it; 
and  in  the  mouth,  by  which  we  dechire  it.  Tlicrc- 
■fore,  it  is  not  sometliinir  concealed  in  lieaven,  or  in 
the  deep,  but  we  have  it  witli  us,  and  in  us.  Verily, 
we  may  say  that  the  7i)'>rd  means  not  only  the  word 
itself,  Imt  also  the  blessings  which  that  word  pre- 
eent.s — Christ,  with  all  His  gospel  treasures.  Christ's 
merit,  grace.  Spirit,  aiiti  life  are  not  far  from  us,  and 
cannot  first  be  brought  down  from  heaven,  or  brouglit 
up  from  the  deep ;  they  arc  not  first  to  he  acquired, 
but  are  nigii  us,  and,  if  we  will  accept  them,  in  tlie 
mouth  and  in  tiie  heart.  Thus,  though  the  language 
of  the  Old  Testament  was  not  oh  this  wise,  since  the 
knowledge  of  grace  was  of  a  less  degree,  more  ob- 
scure, and  more  difficult  to  be  obtained,  yet  it  is 
now  very  near  to  us,  for  it  is  impartial  liy  the  great- 
er and  stronger  measure  of  grace  which  is  now  dc- 
clareil  to  us  (ver.  8). 

(JEKt.ACn  :  Christ  is  in  so  far  the  end  of  the  law 
as  He,  1.  Is  its  final  object,  tlie  one  to  whom  it 
leads  (Cal.  iii.  24);  2.  Is  its  fulfilment  (Matt.  v.  17); 
8.  Puts  an  cud  to  the  dominion  of  the  law  (Luke 
xvi.  10)  (ver.  4). — To  become  acquainted  with  ("Jod's 
gracious  counsel,  to  deprive  death  of  its  power  liy 
the  manifestation  of  a  divine  and  holy  life  in  the 
flesh — which  the  carnal  man  was  incapable  of,  since 
he  knew  nothing  except  the  righteousness  which  is 
of  the  law — can  be  efTected  by  the  righteousness 
whi.;h  is  of  fiiith,  which  esfal)lishes  him  in  Christ's 
right,  ami  freely  gives  him  as  his  own  what  the  Son 
of  God  is  and  Uaa.     The  heart  need  only  believe, 


and  the  moulh  only  confess,  in  order  to  be  rightcoui 
and  saved  (vers.  8-11). 

Lisco :  The  Divine  order  of  salvation  is,  there- 
fore :  Justification  succeeds  faith,  God's  assistance 
is  obtained,  and  he  who  courageously  and  persover- 
ingly  confesses  his  faith,  obtains  salvation  (ver.  10), 
— Hkubner  :  Righteousness  is  introduced  as  speak- 
ing, and  is  regarded  as  proffering  it.<elf.  No  super- 
human knowledge,  or  profound  learning.  o«  ascend- 
ing to  heaven  to  see  Christ,  is  neees.sary  to  lonvuice 
us  of  Christ's  resurrection  and  Ilis  sitting  at  God's 
right  hand ;  neitlier  is  it  necessary  to  descend  into 
the  kingdom  of  the  dead,  to  ask  whether  Christ  is 
with  the  dead,  or  riseri  ?  Li  short,  no  view  of  th< 
history  of  Jesus  Christ  himself,  and  no  laboriou: 
and  learned  research,  are  necessary  for  us  to  be- 
lieve. Faith  is  an  affair  of  the  heart.  No  one  can, 
therefore,  excuse  his  unbelief  on  the  ground  of  the 
difficulty  or  impossibility  of  faith  (vers.  0,  7). — Paul 
brings  out  prominently  the  faith  of  the  heart  against 
hypocrites  and  lip-Christians  ;  and  against  the  faint- 
hearted and  desponding  confession — that  is,  the  ex- 
pression, the  demonstration  of  Christianity  by  word 
and  deed  (vers.  9-11). 

Besser  :  Faith  and  confession  are  related  to  each 
other  as  essence  and  manifestation,  as  light  and  ray^ 
as  fire  and  flame.  .  .  .  Salvation  is  the  manifesta- 
tion, the  present  and  finite  revelation  of  righteous- 
ness ;  and  righteousness  is  saFvation  under  cover, 
though  the  covering  is  transparent  and  fragrant, 
just  as  Christ  is  concealed  in  prophecy,  and  the  en- 
during tabernacle  of  God  in  the  Church  on  earth 
(ver.  10). 

d.  Vers.  12-17.  The  gospel  as  a  saving  message 
for  all,  Jews  as  well  as  Greeks:  1.  It  is  preached  to 
all ;  but,  2.  It  is  not  believed  by  all  (vers.  12-17). 
— There  is  no  difl'erence  in  nations  before  the  one 
Lord,  who  is  rich  unto  all  that  call  upon  Ilim  ;  but 
whosoever  calleth  upon  Him  .shall  be  saved  (vers 
12,  13). — How  the  calling  upon  the  true  God — who 
is  perfectly  revealed  in  Christ — and  faith  and  jireach- 
ing,  are  connected  (vers.  13-ir>). — "  Lord,  who  hath 
believed  our  report  ?  "  Thus  Isaiah  once  lamented, 
and  thus  we,  too,  lament  frequently  ;  but  we  can 
oidy  do  it  when  we  are  conscious  that  we  have  per- 
formed our  ministerial  duty  to  the  best  of  our  knowl- 
edge and  conscience ;  that  is,  if  our  sermons  have 
proceeded :  1.  From  thorouglily  searching  into  the 
Holy  Scriptures  ;  2.  From  hearty  prayer  ;  3.  From 
a  full  ac(|uaintance  with  the  necessities  of  our  con- 
gregations (ver.  1<>). — Christian  preaching:  1.  AVhat 
does  it  effect  ?  Faith.  2.  By  what  means  does  it 
come?  By  the  word  of  God  (ver.  17). — Preaching 
stands  midway  between  faith  and  God's  word.  1.  It 
proilaces  the  former ;  2.  It  draws  its  supplies  from 
the  latter  (ver.  1 7). — The  appealing  power  of  preach- 
ing (ver.  17). 

Starke:  All  kinds  of  people  can  have  free  ac- 
cess to  Go<i,  and  so  pray  that  their  petitions  may  be 
answered  (ver.  12). — IlEot.NGER:  Oh,  if  a  man  would 
be  saved,  how  much  depends  on  hearing,  teaching, 
and  calling!  A  l)eautiful  chain;  but  what  isw^inting 
in  it  ?  Hearing  is  defective  ;  proper  and  thorougli 
preaching  is  wanting;  and  many  thousands  are  need- 
ed for  preaching.  Dreadful  harm  thereliy  ensues, 
Ac.  (ver.  1-1). — (jRamer:  The  world  ever  remains 
the  same — as  in  Isaiah's  day,  so  at  the  time  of  Christ 
and  the  Apostles,  and  even  at  this  very  hour.  What 
a  pity  that  the  old  lamentation  must  still  be  repeau 
ed  !  (ver.  ICi.) — Lanok:  Preacher,  see  that  your  dia 
courses  be  delivered  in  simplicity  and  Divine  powM j 


CHAPTER  X.   1-21. 


355 


and  hearer,  see  that  your  attention  is  of  the  right 
kind  (ver.  17). 

Spenkr  :  1.  They  must  call  upon  Christ  if  they 
would  be  saved ;  2.  But  if  they  would  call  upon 
Him,  they  must  beluve  on  Him  ;  3.  If  they  would 
believe  on  Him,  they  must  hear  His  word  ;  4.  But 
if  tliey  would  hear  His  word,  it  must  be  preached  to 
them  ;  5.  But  if  they  would  have  preachers,  people 
must  be  sent  to  them  for  that  purpose.  These  are 
the  successive  links  in  the  ciiain  of  Divine  benefi- 
cence (ver.  14). — Roos :  Here,  as  was  always  the 
case  with  the  Apostle  in  his  charges  against  the 
Jews,  be  cites  passages  from  the  Old  Testament 
Scriptures;  the  first  of  which  is  Isa.  xxviii.  16, 
where  the  "  making  waste  "  has  the  same  force  as 
"  being  ashamed."  .  .  .  The  second  passage  is  in 
Joel  ii.  32,  and  comes  down  lowest  to  the  weakness 
of  men.  Our  advice  to  the  greatest  sinner  who 
stands  on  the  brink  of  hell  is :  "  Call  upon  the 
name  of  the  Lord,  and  thou  shalt  be  saved."  .  .  . 
The  third  passage  is  in  Isa.  lii.  7,  and  is  a  prophecy 
of  the  friendly  and  beautiful  heralds  whom  the  Lord, 
having  previously  spoken  himself,  would  send  out  at 
the  time  of  the  New  Testament,  in  order  to  preach 
peace  and  good-wiJl  to  men.  But  why  ?  Undoubt- 
edly in  order  that  men  might  lay  hold  of  the  peace 
declared  to  them,  and  appropriate  and  enjoy  God's 
good-will  toward  them.  But  because  this  should 
take  place  by  faith,  these  herald.^  lament,  in  the 
fourth  passage,  Isa.  liii.  1  :  "  Lord,  who  hath  be- 
lieved our  report?"  (vers.  11-16.) — Besgel  :  Any 
man  is  worth  more  than  the  whole  world. 

Gerlach  :  God  wills  the  salvation  of  all,  but  all 
do  not  wish  the  salvation  of  God ;  unbelief  is  the 
cause  of  the  ruin  of  all  who  are  lost  (ver.  16). — It 
is  God's  will  that  all  should  believe ;  and  for  this 
reason  He  has  sent  preaching,  whose  import  is  His 
OWE  word  (ver.  17). 

Lisco  :  It  is  Christian  duty  to  send  teachers  to 
the  heathen  world ;  missions  ai'e  necessary,  and  ac- 
cording to  the  Lord's  will  (Mark  xvi.  15) ;  and  it  is 
u  glorious  calling,  to  declare  the  message  of  Jesus, 
deliverance  of  the  captives,  and  the  new  kingdom 
of  God. — Preaching  takes  place  by  God's  word ; 
that  is,  by  virtue  of  the  Divine  call  and  a  doctrine 
revealed  by  God  (ver.  17). 

Heubner  :  Living  preaching  is  God's  chosen 
means  of  instruction  (ver.  14). —  God  must  send 
preachers ;  they  cannot  go  of  themselves  (ver.  15). 
— All  the  eftects  of  grace  are  connected  with  the 
word ;  this  applies  to  fanatics,  enthusiasts,  and  those 
who  despise  the  word  and  preaching  (ver.  17). 

Besser  :  The  Divine  order  of  salvation  admits 
of  no  personal  or  national  distinction  (ver.  12). — 
The  help  of  the  rich  Lord,  as  He  passes  by,  is  in- 
vited by  calling  iipo7i  Him,  though  it  be  not  with 
strong  faith,  yet  with  a  hearty  desire  to  believe  ;  by 
calling  upon  Him,  though  we  do  not  pray  as  we 
ought,  yet  are  supported  by  the  unutterable  groans 
of  the  Spirit  (chap.  viii.  26) ;  by  calling  upon  Him, 
if  not  with  advanced  knowledge,  yet  with  the  loud 
confession  of  Bartimeus:  "Jesus,  thou  Son  of  David, 
ha  3  mercy  on  me  ! "  (Mark  x.  47)  (ver.  12.) — Ben- 
3e..  says :  "  He  who  desires  the  end,  will  also  con- 
tribute the  means.  God  desires  that  all  men  call 
npon  Him  for  salvation. ;  therefore  He  wishes  them 
to  believe ;  therefore,  to  hear ;  and,  therefore,  to 
have  preachers.  Hence  He  has  sent  preachers.  He 
has  done  every  thing  necessary  for  our  salvation. 
His  antecedent  gracious  will  is  universal,  and  is 
clothed  with  energetic  power  "  (ver.  14). — It  is  not 


only  necessary  for  the  real  preacher  in  God's  name 
that  the  word  preached  be  real,  but  also  that  the 
preacher  say :  "  Here  is  the  staff  in  my  hand  ;  thf 
Lord  has  sent  me  "  (ver.  15). 

e.  Vers,  18-21.  The  relation  of  the  Jews  and 
Gentiles  to  the  preaching  of  the  gospel:  1.  The 
former  did  not  wish  to  understand  the  gospel,  al- 
though they  could  understand  it ;  2.  But  the  latter, 
although  they  were  ignorant,  have  understood  it, 
because  they  wished  to  do  so. — 2^he  conclusion  of 
the  whole  chapter :  The  Jews  are  themselves  guilty 
of  their  wretched  fate,  which  took  such  a  lively  hold 
upon  the  Apostle's  .sympathy.  For,  A.  The  gospel 
was  :  1.  Not  far  from  tiiem  ;  2.  It  was  preached  to 
them  ;  3.  They  could  lay  hold  of  it ;  but,  B.  They 
— the  Jews — sought  it ;  1.  Par  off ;  2.  Did  not  like 
to  hear  it ;    3.  Would  not  understand  it. 

Starke  :  Who  will  blame  God  that  so  many  peo- 
ple remain  children  of  Satan,  and  are  condemned  ? 
Behold,  they  are  themselves  the  cause  (ver.  21). — 
Roos,  with  reference  to  chaps,  ix.  and  x. :  From  all 
this  it  is  plain  that  the  word  grace  is  the  most  com- 
forting and  most  severe,  the  clearest  and  the  darkest 
word  in  the  Bible.  It  is  the  most  comforting  word, 
because  it  assures  .salvation  to  the  creature  (to  whom 
his  Creator  is  in  nowise  indebted),  the  sinner  who 
deserves  punishment.  It  is  also  the  most  severe 
word,  because  it  utterly  prostrates  pride,  slays  de- 
fiance, and  completely  destroys  the  notion  of  self- 
righteousness,  which  is  so  natural  to  man.  It  is  the 
clearest  word,  because  it  needs  no  description  ;  but 
it  is  also  the  darkest  word,  because  its  simple  mean- 
ing is  understood  by  only  a  few  humble  souls.  Many 
men,  who  think  that  they  understand  this  word, 
conceive  God's  grace  very  much  as  a  prince's  favor, 
which  always  has  regard  to  service,  and  is  never 
disconnected  from  utility.  But  God  needs  no  serv- 
ice. His  will  alone  is  free.  No  one  can  recompense 
Him.  And  yet  He  is  righteous,  and  acts  according  to 
knowledge.  Whoso  is  wise,  and  he  shall  understand 
these  things'?     Prudent,  and  he  shall  know  them  ? 

Heubner,  on  Ps.  xix. :  The  gospel  and  creation 
are  God's  two  voices  that  reecho  about  us. 

Besskr  :  Quotation  of  an  expression  of  Luther, 
who  compares  preaching  to  a  stone  thrown  into  the 
water.  The  circles  ever  enlarge,  but  the  water  in 
the  middle  is  still. 

Lange  :  The  intercession  of  Paul,  who  was  per- 
secuted by  the  Jews,  for  Israel. — His  witness  for 
Israel:  1.  High  praise;  2.  Great  censure.  —  The 
different  forms  of  self-righteousness.  —  Self-right- 
eousness is  always  opposed  to  God's  righteousness, 
which  is :  1.  Legislative ;  2.  Penal ;  3.  Merciful, 
justifying ;  4.  Awakening  to  new  life. — The  self- 
testimony  of  the  law  and  the  gospel  to  the  inward 
nature  of  man :  1.  The  law,  the  ideal  of  his  life ; 
2.  The  gospel,  the  life  of  his  ideal. — The  twin  form, 
fiiith,  and  confession :  1.  Is  positively  different ;  yet, 
2.  Inseparable. — The  riches  of  the  Lord  to  praying 
hearts — to  the  praying,  sinful  world. — The  univer- 
sality of  the  gospel. — The  freedom  and  limitation 
of  the  message  of  salvation  :  1.  It  is  free  to  ul  m 
the  world  who  call  upon  the  Loi-d  ;  2.  It  is  confined 
to  iiiith,  because  unbelief  contradicts  it. 

[BuRKiTT  (condensed) :  Christ  is  the  end  of  the 
law  :  1.  As  He  is  the  scope  of  it ;  2.  As  He  is  the 
accomplishment  of  it ;  3.  As  He  is  to  the  believer 
what  the  law  would  have  been  to  him  if  he  could 
have  perfectly  kept  it — namely,  righteousness  and 
life,  justification  and  salvation. — The  natural  man  ie 
a  proud  man  ;  he  likes  to  live  upon  his  own  stock 


o56 


THE   EPISTLE    OF   PAUL   TO   THE   ROMANS. 


he  cannot  stoop  to  a  sincere  and  universal  renuncia- 
tion of  his  own  righteousness,  and  to  depend  wholly 
upon  the  rigliteousness  of  anotiier.  It  is  natural  to 
a  man  to  choose  ratlu^r  to  eat  a  brown  crust,  or  wear 
a  coarse  garment,  wiiich"  he  can  call  iiis  own,  than  to 
feed  upon  the  richest  dainties,  or  wear  the  costliest 
rol)es,  which  he  must  receive  as  an  alms  from  an- 
other.— DoDDRincK  :  Let  us  rejoice  in  the  spread 
which  the  gospel  has  already  had,  and  let  us  earnest- 
ly and  daily  pray  that  the  voices  of  those  Divine 
messengers  that  proclaim  it  may  go  forth  unto  all 
the  eartii,  and  their  words  reach,  in  a  literal  sense, 
to  the  remotest  ends  of  the  globe.— Lord,  give  us 
any  plague  rather  than  the  plague  of  the  heart ! — 
Scott  :  Ministers  who  are  faithful  bear  the  most 
affectionate  good-will  to  those  from  whom  they  re- 
ceive the  greatest  injuries ;  and  they  otfer  fervent 
and  persevering  [jruyers  for  the  salvation  of  the  very 
persons  against  whom  they  denounce  the  wrath  of 
God  if  they  persist  in  unbelief. — Clarke  :   Salva- 


tion only  by  righteousness :  1.  The  righteousness, 
or  justification  which  is  by  faith,  receives  Christ  as 
an  atoning  sacrifice,  by  which  all  sin  is  pardoned  ; 
2,  It  receives  continual  supplies  of  gi'ace  from  Christ 
by  the  eternal  Spirit,  through  which  man  is  enabled 
to  love  God  with  all  his  heart,  soul,  mind,  and 
strength,  and  his  neighbor  as  himself ;  3.  This  grace 
is  afibrded  in  sufficient  degrees,  suited  to  all  places, 
times,  and  circumstances,  so  that  no  trial  can  hap- 
pen  too  great  to  be  borne,  as  the  grace  of  Christ  is 
ever  at  hand  to  support  and  save  to  the  uttermost. 
— HonoK  :  It  is  the  first  and  most  prcsft'r.g  duty  of 
the  Church  to  cause  all  men  to  hear  the  gospel.  The 
solemn  question,  "  How  can  they  believe  without  a 
preacher  V  "  should  sound  day  and  night  in  the  ears 
of  the  churches.  The  gospel's  want  of  success,  or 
the  fact  that  few  believe  our  report,  is  only  a  reason 
for  its  wider  extension.  The  more  who  hear,  the 
more  will  be  saved,  even  should  it  be  but  a  small 
proportion  of  the  whole. — J,  F.  U.] 


Third  Section. — The  final  gracious  solution  of  the  enigma,  or  the  overruling  of  judgment  for  the  salva- 
Hon  of  Israel.  Gocfs  judgment  on  Israel  is  not  one  of  reprobation.  God''s  saving  economy  in 
His  Providence  over  Jews  and  Gentiles,  over  the  election  and  the  great  majority  of  Israel,  and  over 
the  concatenation  of  judgment  and  salvation,  by  virtue  of  which  all  Israel  shall  finally  attain  to 
faith  and  salvation  through  the  fulness  of  the  Gentiles.  The  universality  of  judgment  and  mercy. 
Doxology. 

Chap.  XL  1-36. 


T  I  say  then,  Hath  [Did]  God  cast  away  his  people  ?  God  forbid.  [Let  it  not 
be !]     For  I  also  am  an  Israelite,  of  the  seed  of  Abraham,  of  the  tribe  of 

2  Benjamin.  God  hath  [did]  not  cast  away  his  people  which  he  foreknew. 
Wot  [Or  know]  ye  not  what  the  Scripture  saith  of  Elias  [iv  7/P./«,  in  the  story 
of  Elijah]  ?    how  he  maketh  intercession  to  [pleadeth  with]  God  against  Israel, 

3  saying  [<>inu  saying],'  Lord,'  they  have  killed  thy  prophets,  and  [omit  and ; 
inseH  they  liavc] '  digged  down  thine  altars ;  and  I  am  left  alone  [the  only  one],* 

4  and  they  seek  my  life.  But  what  saith  tlie  answer  of  God  [the  divine  re- 
sponse] unto  him  ?  I  have  reserved '  to  myself  seven  thousand  men,  who  have 
not  [wlio  never]  bowed  the  knee  to  the  image  of  {omit  the  image  o/"]    Baal. 

5  Even  so  then  at  [^V,  in]  this  present  time  also  there  is  a  retimant  according  to 

6  the  election  of  grace.  And  [Now]  if  by  grace,  then  is  it  no  more  [no  longer] 
of  works  :  otherwise  °  grace  is  no  more  [no  longer  becomes]  grace.  But '  if 
it  be  of  Avorks,  then  is '  it  no  more  [longer]  grace :  otherwise  work  is  no  more 
[longer]  work.* 

B. 

T  Wliat  then  ?  Israel  hath  not  obtained  that  which  he  seeketh  for  [That  which 
Israel  seeketh  for,  he  obtained  not]  ;    but  the  election  hath  ['»»iy  hath]  obtained 

8  it,  and  the  rest  were  blinded  [liardened],  (  [omii  rar(nthc$ii\  According  as  it  is 
written,  God  "  hath  given  [gave]  them  the  [a]  spirit  of  slumber  {<>r,  stupor], 
eyes"  that  they  should  not   see,  and  ears  that  they  should  not  hear;)   unto 

9  [not  hear,  unto]  this  day.     And  David  saith. 

Let"  their  table  be  ma<le  [become]  a  snare,  and  a  trap, 
And  a  stumbling-block,  and  a  recompense  imto  them  : 
10  Let  their  eyes  be  darkened,  that  they  may  not  see, 

And  bow  down  their  back  alway." 


CHAPTER  XL   1-36.  35-) 


11  I  say  then,  Have  they  stumbled  that  [Did  they  stumble  in  order  that]  they 
should  fall?  God  forbid:  [Let  it  not  be!]  but  ra^Aer  through  [but  by]  theif 
fall  salvation  is  come  imto  the  Gentiles,  for  to  provoke    [in  order  to  excite] 

12  them  to  jealousy  [or,  emulation].  Now  if  the  fall  of  them  [their  fall]  be  the 
riches  of  the  world,  and  the  dimiuishing  of  them  [their  diminishing]  the  riches 

1 3  of  the  Gentiles  ;  how  much  tnore  their  fulness  ?  For  '*  I  speak  [1  am  speak- 
ing] to  you  Gentiles  [:],  inasmuch  [then]  "  as  I  am  the  apostle  of  the  Gentiles, 

1-i  I  magnify  [glorify]  mine  office  :  If  by  any  means  I  may  provoke  [excite]  to 
emulation  them  which  are  [omit  them  which  are]  my  [own]  flesh,  and  might  save 

15  some  of  them.  For  if  the  casting  away  of  them  be  the  reconciling  [reconcilia- 
tion] of  the  world,  what  shall  the  receiving  [reception]   0/  them  be,  but  life 

1 6  fi'om  the  dead.  For  [Moreover]  if  the  first- fruit  be  holy,  the  lump  is  also  holt/ 
[so  also  is  the  lump]  :   and  if  the  root  be  holy,  so  are  the  branches  [also]. 

D. 

17  And  [But]  if  some  of  the  branches  be  [were]  broken  off,  and  thou,  being 
a  wild  olive  tree,  wert  graffed  [grafted]  in  among  them,  and  with  them  par- 
takest  [and  made  fellow-partaker]  of  the  root  and  "  fatness  of  the  olive  tree ; 

18  Boast  not  against  the  branches.     But  if  thou  boast,  thou  bearest  not  the  root, 

19  but  the  root  thee.     Thou  wilt  say  then.  The  "  branches  were  broken  oflf,  that  I 

20  might  be  graffed   [grafted]  in.      Well ;    because  of  unbelief  they  were  broken 

21  oft",  and  thou  standest  by  faith.  Be  not  high-minded,'"  but  fear :  For  if  God 
spared  not  the  natural  branches,  take  heed  [feqr]  lest ''  he  also  spare  not  thee. 

22  Behold  therefore  the  goodness  and  severity  of  God  :  on  them  which  [those 
who]   fell,  severity  ;  ^^    but  toward  thee,  goodness  [God's  goodness],"  if  thou 

23  continue  in  his  goodness  :  otherwise  thou  also  shalt  be  cut  off".  And  they  also 
[moreover],  if  they  abide  not  still  in  unbelief,  shall  be  graffed  [grafted]  in  :   for 

24  God  is  able  to  graff"  [graft]  them  in  again.  For  if  thou  wert  cut  out  of  the 
olive  tree  which  is  wild  by  nature,  and  wert  graffed  [grafted]  contrary  to 
nature  into  a  good  olive  tree  ;  how  much  more  shall  these,  which  be  the  natural 
branches,  be  graffed  [grafted]  into  their  own  olive  tree  ? 


25  For  I  would  not,  brethren,  that  ye  should  be  ignorant  of  this  mystery,  lest 
ye  should  be  wise  in  your  own  conceits,"'  that  blindness  [hardening]  in  part  is 

26  happened  to  Israel,  until  the  fulness  of  the  Gentiles  be  [omit  be]  come  in.     And 
so  all  Israel  shall  be  saved :   as  it  is  written, ^^  There  shall  come  out  of  Sion  the 

27  Deliverer,  and  shall  turn  away  ungodliness  from  Jacob  :    For  this  is  my  cove- 
nant [the  covenant  from  me,  na(/  tfwvj  unto  them,  when  I  shall  take  away  their 

28  sins.     As  concerning  [touching]  ^*  the  gospel,  they  are  enemies  for  your  sakes : 

29  but  as  touching  the  election,  they  are  beloved  for  the  fathers'  sakes.     For  the 

30  gifts  and  calling  of  God  are  without  repentance.      For  as"  ye  in  times  past 
have  not  believed  [were  disobedient  to]  "^^  God,  yet  have  now  obtained  mercy 

31  through  their  unbelief  [the  disobedience  of  these]  :     Even   so  have  these  also 
now  not  believed,  that  through  your  mercy  [i-  e.,  mercy  shown  to  ymi]  they  also  may 

32  obtain  mercy.      For  God  hath  concluded  them  all  [shut  up "  all]  in  unbelief 
[disobedience],   that   [in   order   that]    he   might    [may]    have   mercy   upon   all. 

33  O  the  depth  of  the  riches  both  of  the  wisdom  [riches  and  wisdom]  and  knowl- 
edge of  God  !    how  unsearchable^*  are  his  judgments,  and  his  ways  past  finding 

34  out!      For  who  hath  ^''  known  the  mind  of  the  Lord?    or  who  hath  been  hia 

35  counsellor?     Or'"  who  hath  first  given  to  him,  and  it  shall  be  recompensed  unto 
3G  him  again  ?     For  of  him,  and  through  him,  and  to  [unto]  him,  are  all  things 

to  whom  [him]  be  glory  for  ever.     Amen. 


358  THE   EPISTLE   OF   PAUL   TO   THE   ROMANS. 


TEZTCAL. 

'  Ver.  2.-[Tho  Rfc.  inserts  Afyuv;  eupported  by  x'-  !<.  It  is  omitted  in  N*.  A.  B.  C.  D.  F.,  Tersinns  and  father*, 
The  prohabi  ity  of  an  interpolation  is  so  ^veat,  that  modem  editors  unhesitatinply  reject  it.— Some  MSS.  iiiricrt  &» 
npoiyvM  (from  the  fir^t  clause  of  ver.  :')  in  the  tixsl  clause  of  ver.  2.     The  siiuiiarity  of  the  clauses  readily  explains  Ibis. 

■•I  Ver.  3.— [A  free  citation  from  the  LXX.,  3  (\.)  Kings  xix.   10  (ver.  14  is  alniost  a  repetition  of  ver.   10)      ri 

fioviuTaroi,  Ka'i  fijToOai  Trji"  ipv^V"  f  o"  Ao^eif  ai/Ttiv.  The  Apostle  has  omitted  a  f^-w  unimiiorumt  words,  transi  osec  the 
clause-,  ^ub^tituled  novot  lor  jioi-iuTaTos,  and  the  aorisl  vnt\tiit>$i)v  for  the  perfect.  The  LXX.  follows  the 
Hebrew  clo.-^elv. 

'  Ver.  3.— [Kai  (Rec.  N'.  D.  L.)  is  omitted  in  N".  A.  B.  C.  F.,  by  recent  editors.  The  vivacious  form  of  the 
Greek  is  rt  stored  by  the  alwve  eme-dation.  So  Noyes,  Alford,  Five  Ang.  Clert'ymen,  and  Dr.  Langc  in  his  German 
text.     "  Lord,  they  n.ivc  k  lied  thy  prophets,  they  have  di(;ged  down  thine  altars." 

*  Ver.  3.— [Five  Aiip.  Clerp)-mon  :  Inn';/  am  left.  The  above  emendation  is  more  strictly  literal,  although  it  would 
answer  stiU  better  lo  the  jiofioTaro?  of  the  LXX. 

*  Ver.  4. —[From  I  Kinsfs  xix.  IS,  b\it  varj-ing  from  both  the  Ilobrew  and  the  LXX.;  not  materially,  however. 
The  LXX.  reads  :  »cai  (coToAiii/zeis  (cumplut.  ed.,  (caToAeii/zu))  iy  'lapaijA  iirja  x^\^dSai  avSpCiv,  nama  ydcara  i  ovk 
ixkacrav  yoyv  Tip  BaoA.  Alford:  "The  Apostle  here  corrects  a  mistuke  of  the  LXX.,  who  have,  lor  icaT^Anroi', 
KaToAei'i/zet;.  He  has  added  to  the  Ilcbrcw,  "HTX— [H  ,— ' / /luve  Ufl,'  'kept  as  a  remainder,'— ifiavrw,  a  simple  and 
obvious  filling  up  of  the  sense.— On  rp  B aa A, 'instead  of  t<P,  see  Exe{/.  ^'oles.  The  itjiliciaed  words  of  the  E.  V.  are 
omitted,  although  defended  to  some  extent  by  Ur.  Lange,  who  supplies,  in  his  German  text :  [der  Sduh—7^Z^'0—de^]. 
li  seems  unuecessnry  to  insert  :i  cummiiit  at  such  doubtful  correctness. 

*  Ver.  C— [0//icVwi.s<'  is  sulliciently  correct,  although  tirci,  literally,  means  :  since  in  lliat  case. — Tivrai,  whictl 
ha.s  been  altered  in  one  MS.,  :ind  taken  as  =  iari,  in  most  versions,  is  to  be  rendered  exactly.  On  the  meaning,  see 
Ex'-g.  Nors.    The  simplest  view  is  :  ceaxtth  tn  be  ;  but  Dr.  Lange  finds  more  in  the  expression. 

'  Ver.  6.— [The  whole  clause:  <i  Si  i(  epyuv.  .  .  .  ea-rlv  ipyov,  is  omitted  in  N"'.  A.  C.  D.  F.,  versions  and 
fathers;  it  is  rejected  by  Erasmus,  Grotius,  Wetstiin,  Griesbach,  Scholz,  Lachmann,  Meyer,  Tregelles  ;  bracketted  by 
Alfoid,  and  in  versiim  of  Amer.  Bible  Union  (rejected  by  Five  Ang.  Clergymen).  On  tlie  other  hand,  it  is  f  mnd  (with 
some  variations  noticed  in  tlie  following  notes)  in  N».  B.  L.,  the  older  versions,  in  Chrysostom  and  Theodoret  (text,  not 
commentary).  It  is  retained  by  Bcza,  B( ngel,  Rinck,  Fritzsche,  Reiche,  Tholuck,  by  Tischcndorf  in  later  editions, 
Words  wort  ii,  Ilodge,  Lange.  It  is  ditficult  to  decide,  but  the  critical  ground  for  retaining  it  is  very  strong.  See 
£xeg.  ^\oUs. 

"  Ver.  G.—  [R<c.  :  etrrC,  on  very  slight  authority. 

»  Ver.  6.— [B.  has  x<^P^f  ^o''  <P'yo''i  either  a  mistake  of  the  transcriber,  or  an  attempt  at  explanation.  See 
£x'g.  iV'"/e«. 

">  Ver.  8. — [The  first  clause  is  a  free  citation  from  Isa.  xxix.  10.    LXX  :    on   Trtn-oTticef  u/iot   (cvptot  jn-ev/iaT* 

KocoiT^feios.     Hebrew:    n^'niPl  nil  nin7  CD'^bs   7,03— '3. 

"  Ver.  8.— [It  is  much  disputed  whether  these  words  are  borrowed  from  Deut.  xxix.  4,  or_from_  Isa.  vi  9.  The 
former  passage  reads  thus  (LXX.)  :  icol  oix  eSiuice  .  .  .  ico'i  b<t>6aAnov^  /3A«7retv,  koI  oito  aKOv(^v  fus  t^s  rinfpai  ravrrit. 
The  latter  contains  the  same  idea,  but  still  further  removed  in  form  from  Paul's  language.  Dr.  Lange  thinks  both  were 
in  mind.  In  that  case,  as  well  ;is  if  Deuteronomy  is  cited,  the  parentheses  must  be  omitted,  so  as  to  join  "  unto  this 
day  "  with  the  rest  of  the  verse.  Koyes  tones  down  the  telic  force  thus :  "  eyes  that  were  not  to  see,  and  ears  that 
were  not  to  hear." 

'5  Ver.  'J.— [From  Ps.  Ixix.  23  (E.  V.,  2-.).  The  LXX.  is  followed  more  closely  than  the  Ilebrcw  text.  The  latter 
U  literally  :  *'  Lei  their  table  before  them  be  for  a  snare,  and  to  those  secure  (c^T2lb"C'5),  a  trap."  (The  E.  V.  ti» 
If/cn,  give^<  an  unnecci'sarily  forced  and  circuitous  rendering.)  The  LXX.  renders :  yevri6riTiii  ii  Tpo»r«^tt  ainav  eyiuinoy 
avriiv  ei«  nayiSa,  xal  ti?  avTarroioaiv,  xaX  eU  aKdviaXov.  The  Apostle  follows  the  first  claii.se  quite  closely,  then  inseils 
ti;  Brjpav,  and  putting  CKaviaKov  next,  substitutes  a»T07r64o;i.a  for  the  LXX.  equivalent.  The  main  difficulty 
is  with  the  expression  last  named.  The  Hebrew  word,  accordii  g  to  the  present  pointing  (given  above),  does  not  mean 
rvjuilols,  recnmprme;  "although  this  sense  may  be  deduced  from  the  verbal  root  (cblUj,  and  belongs  to  several 
collateral  derivatives,  it  has  no  existence  in  the  usage  of  the  one  before  us  "  (J.  A.  Alexander).  The  usual  explanation 
Is,  that  the  L^JCX.  pointed  the  word  thus,  Z'w^i'JL'S  ;  for  relribulimis,  and  the  Apostle,  finding  ttiis  meaning  in 
keeping  with  the  spirit  of  the  original,  adopted  it  in  the  varied  form  of  the  text. 

"  Ver.  10.— [The  LXX.  vers  on  of  I's.  Ixix.  24  (23)  is  followed  with  great  exactness.  But  it  varies  from  the 
Hebrew  text  (n^Tin  cn':r"C  ,  make  llnir  loins  to  waver,  or  Inmhlc)  in  the  last  clause.     The  meaning  is  preserved, 

however.    See  Ex  g.  Nolfs. 

'*  Ver.  1!.— [The  Ri-i-.  D.  F.  L.,  tithers,  read  yop ;  6C,  A.  B.,  versions,  &4.  Lange  adopts  the  former,  mainly  on 
excgeticul  grounds;  Lachmann,  Alford,  TrcKcUes,  the  latter.  C.  has  ovv\  hence  Meyer  thinks  it  impossible  to  decide 
which  is  the  genuine  particle ;  nor  is  it  of  importance. 

"  Ver.  I'i.- [In  He.c,  L.,  some  versions  .'ind  fathers,  oSi'  is  omitted  ;  in  D.  F.,  tiiv  oSi';  both  arc  found  in  V.  A. 
B.  C.  De  Wette  and  Tholuck  reject  both,  on  exegetical  grounds;  most  critic.il  editors  retain  ficv,  and  Meyer  accounta 
for  ovv  as  inserted  because  the  corresi'onding  4e  was  wanting.  On  the  whole,  it  is  safest  to  ret;iin  both,  with  Lach- 
m/inn  and  Alford.    Tregelles  brackets  o5v. 

'•  Ver.  17.— [The  Kai  (lit'.)  is  omitted  in  N>.  B.  C,  but  found  in  N'.  A.  L.  Still  another  rending  in  D>.  F. 
Alford  reject»i,  Tregelles  brackets,  but  most  editors  retain  it.  If  retained,  the  note  of  Dr.  Lange  in  loco  ie  correct.--The 
E.  V.  hag  paraphra.sed  <rvvK0ivii>v6<:  :  with  ih'  m  pinlahitl.     The  above  cmenilation  is  more  literal. 

"  Ver.  19.— [The  ariidc  oi  bcfi>re  icAo6oi  is  omitted  In  !C.  A.  ('.  D'.  L. ;  rejected  by  Scholz,  Lachmann,  Meyer, 
"Wordsworth  (who  1  correctiv  cites  B.  as  omitting  it),  Tregelles ;  bnicketled  by  Alford.  It  is  found  in  ii.  1)'. ;  retained 
bv  Ti.'cheiidorf,  Dc  Wette,  Tholuck.  Langc.  Meyer  thinks  it  is  a  mechiinical  repetition  from  vers.  17,  18;  while  De 
Wi  tte  thinks  it  was  omitted  on  account  of  the  euphony  :  it€K\da0i)<Tav  xAaJoi.  In  any  case,  the  reference  is  to  the 
branches  broken  off. 

'"  Ver.  20.— [Instead  of  viliri\o^p6vtt.  (Rec.,  C.  1).  F.  G.),  Lnchmnnn  and  Tregelles  adopt  ui^i)Aa  ^otSvei,  on 
the  author  ty  of  n-  A.  Ii.     The  first  word  is  so  uiiusual  that  it  was  likely  to  be  changed.     Most  editors  follow  the  R^  r. 

'•  Ver.  21.— ['I'he  uncial  anthoritv  is  ngain.st  fi^iruf .  It  is  omitted  in  N.  A.  B.  C,  but  found  in  I>.  F.  L.  It  it 
rejected  by  I/achmann  and  Tregelles,' br.-icketied  by  Alford.  But  the  j)robability  of  an  omission,  because  of  the  f:ture 
(i^<i<r<Tai)  which  follows,  is  so  great,  that  most  cr  tlcal  editors  retain  it.  To  obviate  the  some  difficulty,  the  ubj. 
^ti<Tr]jai  is  sul>sliluteil  in  Ji-c,  but  with  no  uncial  support. 

'•  Ver.  22.— (Instead  of  the  accu-^ative  anoroniav  (Rec,  D.  F.  L.)  most  editors  adopt  the  nominative,  on  the 
authority  of  N'.  A.  B.  C.  The  punctuiition  favora  the  latter,  as  the  former  would  be  Roverncd  by  lie,  which  is  sepa- 
mtcd  from  it  by  a  colon.  The  absence  of  a  predicate  for  the  iiomlnativi-s  led  to  the  change.  So  Lachmann,  Tischi-n* 
dorf,  Mever,  Alford,  l)e  Wette,  'I'legelbs,  Lange.     The  same  remarks  apply  to   y  ptjitt  ot>)«  . 

"'  V'er.  22.— [Instead  ol  xPI^tottito  («"■.,  D>.  F.  L.),  ^p^trroTiif  on  the  authority  of  A.  B.  C.  D'.  v.  !*« 
XPi<rTonrT(>5.  — /'e--.,  D»  '.  F.  Ii.  omii  0<ov,  which  is  found  ui  N.  A.  H.  C.  D'.  The  criticul  eilitors  generally  ad 'Ci  ;t. 
on  the  cround  that  It  wr.s  likely  to  have  been  omitted  as  unnecessary'.  The  later  revisions  retain  and  render  aa  abovo, 
except  Amer.  llibe  Union,  which  follows  the  E.  V. 

'"  Ver.  25.— |/f'i-.,  with  N.  C.  I),  L.,  rcadu  irap'  cavToit.  A.  B.  have  iv.  The  preposition  Is  omitted  in  F.  and 
tome  cursives.    Lachmann,  Tischcndorf,  Alford,  Ilodge,  Trejiellcs,  adopt  «  v ;  but  the  sense  is  much  the  same,  whichuvel 


CHAPTER  XI.   1-36. 


359 


preposition  be  adopted    The  phrase  jrop'  cavrois  is  found  in  chap.  xii.  16,  and  Prov.  iii.  7  (LXX)  ;  hence  the  probabil* 
Ity  of  an  alteration  to  correspond. 

23  Ver.  26.— [According  to  the  view  of  most  of  the  best  expositors,  the  citation  is  from  Isa.  lix.  20,  21  (from  'H  f  e 
to  £  t  a  0  >)  K  I) ,  ver.  i7) ;  the  last  clause  of  ver.  27  is  from  Isa.  xxvii.  9.  The  text  of  the  LXX.,  and  the  more  importanl 
variations  fiom  the  Hebrew,  will  be  found  in  the  Exrg.  JVnles. 

-*  Ver.  2S. — [K  ara,  according  to,  as  respects,  &c.  The  version  of  Five  A-ng.  Clergymen  adopts  as  tuucJiinr/,  in  boti 
clauses ;  Amer.  Bibie  Union  :  as  concerning.  If  a  choice  must  be  made  between  the  two,  the  former  is  preferable, 
ftlthough  neither  is  altogether  exact. 

2*  Ver.  30.— [The  jKtc.  inserts  Kai,  on  the  authority  of  N'.  I..,  and  some  versions.  It  is  omitted  in  N  corr.'  A,  B,  C. 
D'.,  vtrsioi  s  and  fathers  ;  rejected  by  modem  editors  generally.     Scholz  retains  it. 

^^  Ver.  30. — [ibe  E.  V.  confounds  here  the  nearly  related  ideas  of  uiihfHef  and  disohedifnce.  Iiater  revision* 
con-ect  the  rendori-  g  of  both  verb  and  noun.  Ur.  Hodge  claims  that  the  E.  V.  is  correct ;  but  it  is  only  inferentially  to. 
These  remarks  apply  also  to   ajreifleiat'   (ver.  32). 

^'  Ver.  32. — [C'l'nchidid,  was  once  a  literal  rendering  of  avviKKucev;  included  (Amer.  Bible  Union),  while  it 
expresses  a  part  of  the  meaning,  is  not  strong  enough  ;  ddivired  up  (Noyes),  is  an  intcrjiretation  rather  than  a  transla- 
tion, it  seems  best,  then,  to  substitute  the  simple,  literal  Saxon  :  shut  up.  So  E.  V.,  Gal.  iii.  23,  though  cowludtdia 
lound  in  ver.  22. — Instead  of  the  masculine  tous  Tt6.vTa<;,  we  find  to.  irdvTa,  and  iravra  (so  VuJg.),  but  very  weakly 
Bupponed. 

^'s  Ver.  S3. — (Both  ai/ef  epavvijTa  and  avcfep e  vvTjra  are  found.  The  fonner  is  supported  by  N.  A.  B'. ;  adopted 
by  Alford,  Xiegelles  (Meyer,  De  Wette,  adopt  the  latter). 

"8  Ver.  34.— (The  aoiists  of  vers.  34  and  35  are  rendered  by  simple  past  tenses  in  the  Amer.  Bible  Union,  at  the 
expense  both  of  rhythm  and  strict  adherence  to  tlie  sense  of  the  Hebrew  at  least. — The  LXX.  (Isa,  xl.  13)  is  followed 
very  closely. 

30  Ver.  36. — ["  From  Job  xli.  3  (11,  E.  V.),  where  the  LXX.  (xli.  2)  have  rt's  avTicrTijo-eTai  /oioi,  k.  virofievel ;  But 
the  Hebrew  is  cktlJX/l  '';53''^~n  '''C  ,  'who  hulh  anticipated  ((.  e.,  by  the  context,  conferred  a  benejll)  on  me,  that  J 
may  repay  him  t '    And  to  this  tlie  Apostle  alludes,  using  the  third  person  "  (Alford).  — R.l 


EXEGETICAL  AJSD   CEITTOAL. 

Summary. — A.  Israel  is  not  rejected  ;  the  ker- 
nel of  it — the  election — is  saved  ;  ver;?.  l-o.  B. 
The  great  proportion  of  Israel,  all  except  the  essen- 
tially important  remnant,  the  "  rest,"  are  hardened, 
as  was  described  by  the  Spirit  in  the  Old  Testament 
beforehand ;  but  its  hardness  has  become  a  condi- 
tion for  the  conversion  of  the  Gentiles  ;  vers.  7-11.* 
C.  Yet,  on  the  other  hand,  the  conversion  of  the 
Gentiles  is  in  turn  a  means  for  the  conversion  of 
Israel,  and  thereby  for  the  revivification  of  the 
world.  The  saving  effect  of  their  rejection  gives 
ground  for  expecting  a  still  more  saving  effect  of 
their  reception.  Tlie  significance  of  the  first-fruits 
and  of  the  root;  vers.  12-16.  D.  The  very  fact 
that  the  Gentiles  believe,  and  the  Jews  do  not  be- 
lieve, is  largely  conditional.  Gentiles,  as  individu- 
als, can  become  unbelievers  ;  and  Jews,  as  individu- 
als, can  become  believers.  For :  a.  The  Gentiles 
are  grafted  on  the  stem  of  the  Jewish  theocracy 
among  believing  Jews.  b.  They  can  just  as  readily 
be  cut  off  by  unbelief,  as  the  Jews  can  be  grafted  in 
by  faith,  because  the  latter  have  a  greater  historical 
relationship  with  the  kingdom  of  God  ;  vers.  17-24. 
E.  The  last  word,  or  the  mystery  of  Divine  Provi- 
dence in  the  economy  of  salvation.  Every  thing 
will  redound  to  the  glory  of  God.  God's  saving 
economy  for  the  world :  The  unbelieving  Gentiles 
have  been  converted  by  believing  Israel ;  unbeliev- 
ing Israel  shall  be  converted  by  believing  Gentiles. 
The  judgment  on  all,  that  mercy  might  be  shown  to 
all.  Praise  offered  to  God  for  His  plan  of  salvation, 
for  its  execution,  for  its  end,  and  for  its  ground ; 
vers.  25-36.  [Dr.  Hodge  divides  the  chapter  into 
two  parts:  vers.  1-10  and  11-36.  (1.)  The  rejec- 
tion of  the  Jews  was  not  total.  A  remnant  (and 
a  larger  one  than  many  might  suppose)  remained, 
though  the  mass  was  rejected.  (2.)  This  rejection 
is  not  final.  The  restoration  of  the  Jews  is  a  dc- 
eirable  and  probable  event;  vers.  11-24.  It  is  one 
which  God  has  determined  to  bring  about ;  vers. 
26-32.  A  sublime  declaration  of  the  unsearchable 
wisdom  of  Goi,  manifested  in  all  His  dealings  with 
men ;  vers.  33-56.     So  Forbes. — R.] 


*  (Dr.  Lange  divides  the  text  so  as  to  include  only  vers. 
7-10  in  this  paraprraph,  which  is  the  usual  division ;  but 
here,  and  in  the  exegesis,  he  adds  ver.  U. — B..] 


Vers.  1-6  :  Israel  is  not  rejected.  The  real  her 
nel  of  it  is  already  saved. 

Ver.  1.  I  say  then  \^Aiy(,>  ovv^  The  ovv 
may  appear  to  be  merely  an  inference  from  what 
was  said  last :  All  day  long  God  stretched  forth  His 
hand.  But  as,  in  ver.  11,  he  makes  a  further  asser- 
tion, designed  to  forestall  a  false  conclusion,  it  has 
here  the  same  meaning,  in  .antithesis  to  the  strong 
judgment  pronounced  on  Israel  at  the  conclusion  of 
the  previous  chapter.  Meyer  mailitains  a  more  defi- 
nite reference  to  the  ).iy«>  in  vers.  10,  IS,  19. 

[Did  God  cast  a'way  his  people  ?  /.lij 
uTTiiXTaTo  6  &f6i;  xbv  / a 6  v  a  I'l t o  i*  ;  When 
Reiche  remarks  the  absence  of  an  anuvra  from 
/. «o)',and  Semler  an  omntno  from  wTrwaaro, 
they  both  fail  to  a()preciate  the  emphasis  of  tlie  ex- 
pressions. The  people  and  his  people  are  different 
ones,  just  as  an  economic  giving  over  to  judgment 
and  an  eonic  casting  away  (Ps.  xciv.  14  ;  xcv.  7). 
Bengel :  Ipsa  populi  ejus  appellatio  rationem,  ne- 
gandi  conti.net.  The  Apostle  repels  such  a  thought 
with  religious  horror :    ^ij    ytvoiro. 

For  I  also  [xai  ya^  £/"']•  According  to 
the  usual  acceptation,  he  adduces  his  own  call  as 
an  exam()le  ;  but  Meyer,  with  De  Wette  and  Baum- 
garten-Crusius,  on  the  contrary,  hold  that  Paul,  on 
account  of  his  patriotic  sense  as  a  true  Israelite, 
could  not  concede  that  casting  away.*  But  it  was 
just  this  inference  from  a  feeling  of  national  patriot- 
ism that  was  the  standpoint  of  his  opponents.  A 
single  example,  it  is  said,  can  prove  nothing.  But 
by  Paul's  using  the  xai,  he  refers  to  the  other  ex- 
amples which  were  numerously  represented  by  the 
Jewish  Christians  among  his  readers. 

Am  an  Israelite,  of  the  seed  of  Abraham, 
of  the  tribe  of  Benjamin  [  7  <7  (j  a  r^  /.  t  t  »/  c  fl/tti, 
ex  a  n  i  (j  u  ar  0  <;  u^  (i  (j  a  d  fi ,  (f  v  ).Tj  t;  i>  f  r  i  a  - 
fiflv.  The  spelling  Btvi,aulv  (LXX.,  JRec.)  is  poor- 
ly supported  here  and  in  Phil.  iii.  5.]  As  a  true 
scion  of  Abraham  and  Benjamin — the  tribe  which, 
fogether  with  Judah,  constituted  the  real  substance 

*  [V/ordsworth  supposes  that  he  is  speaking  as  an 
Apostle  :  "Po  not  imagine  (he  says  to  the  Jewx)  that  God- 
cast  off  Hi?  sncicnt  people  when  He  admitted  the  Gentiles 
to  the  Churoti.  K'o  ;  I,  who  am  His  chosen  instrument  for 
admitting  them,  am  a  Jew."  But  this  is  an  infercnca 
rather  than  iin  inteiprctation.  He  also  explains  "of  the 
tribe  of  Ikujainin  :"  "the  son  of  Israel  by  his  beloved 
wife  Rai-he!,  tiot  by  Leah,  or  by  one  of  their  handmaids  '  '• 
— E.l 


3G0 


THE    EPISTLE    OF   PAUL   TO   THE   ROMANS. 


of  the  people  which  returned  from  the  captivity — 
he  is  conscious  that  he  does  not  belong  to  the  elec- 
tion as  a  mere  proselj'te ;  if  he  would  speak  of  a 
casting  away  of  God's  people,  he  must  therefore 
deny  himself  and  his  faitli  (Phil.  iii.  5).  [Alford 
distinguishes  between  the  popular  view,  and  another 
which  implies,  "  that  if  such  a  hypotliesis  were  to 
be  conceded,  it  would  exclude  from  Uo'd's  kingdom 
the  writer  /imsc/f,  as  an  Israelite."  This  agrees, 
apparently,  with  Lauge's  view,  but  implies  also  that 
"  his  people  "  is  used  in  the  national  sense,  not  of 
the  xpiriluat  Israel.     See  below. — II.] 

Ver.  2.  God  did  not  cast  away  [  o  r  y. 
xniitaciro  6  Ofo^].  lie  follows  with  a  solemn 
declaration  founded  upon  the  testimony  of  his  own 
con.seientiousness  and  of  examples. 

His  people  [t6v  ).a6v  avTol^.  He  is  as 
definite  in  characterizing /f/.sjoeoyj/e,  Sv  n^oiyvM, 
as  he  is  grand  in  his  declaration  of  the  not  casting 
aicay.  On  the  idea  of  Tr^oytrwir/fn',  see  chap.  viii. 
29.  Two  explanations  here  come  iu  conflict  with 
each  otlier : 

1.  The  spiritual  people  of  God  are  spoken  of, 
the  'JfToaijl  Ok>7'  ;  Horn.  ix.  6  ;  Gal.  vi.  16  (Origen, 
Augustine,  Luther,  Calvin  [Hodge],  &e.). 

2.  Meyer  says,  on  the  contrary :  The  subject  of 
the  whole  chapter  is  not  the  spiritual  Israel,  but  the 
fate  of  the  nation  in  regard  to  the  salvation  effected 
by  the  M.-ssiah.  Tholuck  and  Philippi  [De  Wett(>, 
Stuart,  Alford],  are  of  the  same  view.  But  the  idea 
of  "  i)ei)ple  "  whieh  the  Apostle  presents  is  so  very 
dynamical,  that  it  might  be  said  :  to  him  the  elec- 
tion is  the  people,  and  God's  true  peoi)le  is  an  elec- 
tion. This  is  evidently  the  thought  in  chap,  ix., 
and  also  in  vers.  4  and  5  of  the  present  chapter. 
But  if  we  emphasize  properly  the  idea  of  casting 
away,  the  idea  of  election  does  not  any  more  stand 
in  antithesis  to  it ;  that  Ls,  it  is  not  thereby  .settletl 
that  there  is  an  election.  But  as  the  defenders  of 
view  (1.)  mistake  the  full  import  of  the  further 
elaboration,  especially  ver.  20,  so  do  the  def(;nilers 
of  (2.)  pass  too  lightly  over  the  gradations  made 
by  the  Apostle.  [Against  the  interpretation  :  spirit- 
ual. p"opir^  it  may  well  be  urged,  that  all  along  the 
Apostle  has  been  speaking  of  tlie  nation  ;  that  this 
very  cliapt(.'r  treats  of  the  final  .salvation  of  Israel 
as  a  nation,  and  Paul  says  he  is  an  Israelite,  &c.,  of 
this  historical  (not  s[)iritual)  peoi)le.  Besides,  the 
Scriptures  have  suffered  very  mucli  from  assumjjtions 
respecting  spiritual  references.  The  only  argument 
in  favor  of  this  meaning  is  the  phrase  :  "  Whom  lie 
foreknew."  It  is  held  that  this  defines  the  people 
as  those  referred  to  in  chap.  viii.  29  ff.  ;  but  may 
there  not  be  a  foreknowledge  of  a  nation  resulting 
in  national  privileges,  sucii  as  the  Jews  enjoyi'd,  as 
really  lus  foreknowledge  of  an  individual  and  conse- 
quent blessing?  The  whole  current  of  thought  in 
the  chapter — in  fact,  in  chaps,  ix.-xi. — is  against 
any  sucli  interpretation  na  shall  make  "  His  peojile  " 
=  His  spiritual  Israel,  over  against  Israel  as  a  mi- 
lion.  If  any  limitation  be  made,  it  .should  be  thus 
Ctprcsscd  :  the  real  people  of  God  amonr/  the  Jrwix/i 
people,  recognizing  them  as  the  [nth  and  kernel  of 
the  na'io'i,  not  a.s  isolated  individuals  from  out  tlie 
mas*.  This  seems  to  be  Dr.  Lange's  view,  and  is 
probably  that  of  many  who  are  (|uoted  in  favor  of 
(1)  We  thus  retain  the  weight  of  the  .ipostle's  • 
proof:  For  I  also  am  an  Israrlitr,  and  avoid  weak- 
ening the  main  tiiought  of  the  chapter,  which  un- 
doutitedly  U  :  tin  nllnnale  national  restoration  of 
the  Jews.     Were  it  not  this,  the  whole  argument  of 


chaps,  ix.-xi.  ends  with  a  non  sequitur.  Comp.  At 
ford,  in  loco. — R.] 

What  is  meant  by  God  casting  away  His  people  ? 
1.  There  is  an  election  of  believers,  and  it  is  far 
greater  than  one  of  little  faith  may  think.  (How 
many  Jews  themselves,  of  all  periods,  would  like  to 
have  been  friends  of  Jesus  !)  2.  The  call  of  (Jio 
Gentiles  is  even  designed  iudirecaly  for  the  conver- 
siou  of  Israel,  ami  individuals  can  always  be  gained. 
3.  The  whole  Divine  disposition  is  designed  for  the 
final  salvation  of  all  Israel.  Here,  therefore,  the 
thought  of  the  mercy  controlling  this  whole  econ- 
omy,  comes  in  contrast  with  the  thought  of  the 
great  economical  judgment  of  hardening.  If,  how- 
ever, the  expression  all  Israel  be  urged,  and  there 
be  fwind  in  individuals  of  it  an  assurance  of  the 
salvation  of  the  empirical  totility,  we  would  have 
to  be  indifferent  to  the  idea  of  election  with  refer- 
ence to  Israel  as  a  people,  and  let  it  consist  in  the 
idea  of  an  absolute  restoration. 

Which  he  foreknew  [ov  nijoeyro)'].  Thia 
limits  the  meaning,  in  so  far  as  the  emjiirical  mass 
of  the  ]>eoi)le  is  not  meant ;  but,  on  the  other  hand, 
the  small  em[)irical  number  of  believing  Jews  is  also 
not  meant,  but  the  peojile  in  their  whole  regal  idea 
and  nature.  In  this  eternal  destination  of  Israel, 
(Jod  cannot  contradict  himself.  [Allbrd  (so  Tholuck, 
De  Wette,  Meyer)  thus  paraphrases :  "  which,  in 
His  own  eternal  decree  before  the  world,  He  selected 
as  the  chosen  nation,  to  be  His  own,  the  de  .o>-itnry 
of  His  Ian;  the  vehicle  of  the  theocracy,  from  its 
first  revelation  to  Moso,  to  its  completion  in  Christ's 
future  .kingdom.''''  Toward  this  national  reference 
later  commentators  generally  incline.  See  Hodge, 
on  the  otlier  side. — R.] 

Or  know  ye  not,  &c.  ["H  ovx.  oXi'San  tv 
'HXia,  a.tJ..  "H  introduces  a  new  objection  to 
the  matter  impugned  (Alfbrd).  Comp.  chap.  ix. 
21;  vi.  3. — R.]  Tholuck:  '''Ev  'H/.in,  quotation 
of  the  section  treating  of  Elijah,  as  .Mark  xii.  26  : 
IttI  t^s'  [iccTov.  Examples  from  the  classics  in 
PVitzsclie,  to  which  may  be  added  Thueydides  i.  9, 
and  proofs  from  Philo,  in  Grossmann,"  &e.  (see  1 
Kings  xix.  10,  14).  Incorrect  view :  iv  'H/./a,  of 
Elijah  (Erasmus,  Luther  [E.  V.],  and  others). 
[Upon  this  point  all  modern  commentators  and 
translators  agree,  though  they  differ  about  tlie  proper 
word  to  be  supplied,  whetlier  section,  history,  or 
story  ;  the  last  is  simjilest. — R.] 

Ver.  3.  Lord,  they  have  kiUed  thy  proph- 
ets, &c.  [  Kt'iQ  n  ,  T  o  I'  (,-  ;r  ^  0  if  »)'  t  «  (,•  a  o  n 
antxTfi.rav,  x.t.L  See  Textual  Note  ".]  The 
Apostle  has  (pioted  freely  the  real  meaning  of  the 
words  of  the  text.  It  makes  no  difference  in  the 
thing  itself  that,  in  the  complaint  which  Elijah  makes, 
he  under.stands  by  the  /(ovoi;*  the  only  remaining 
prophet,  while  the  present  pa.s.sage  understands  the 
only  worshipper  of  God.  For  the  ]>r<ipliet,  in  his 
state  of  mind,  was  not  inclined  to  acknowledge  dumb 
or  absconding  worshippers,  of  God  as  (rud's  true 
ioorshijtpers.  But  Paul,  in  conformity  with  his  view, 
hits  transposeil  the  words  meaning  altars  and  proph- 
ets. Meyer  pays  attention  to  the  plural,  the  altars, 
"as  the  temple  at  Jerusalem  was  tlie  oidy  plact;  ex- 
clusively designed  for  service."  But  even  in  the 
temple  ut  Jerusalem  there  were  two  altars.  Yet  the 
question  here  is  concerning  the  kingdom  of  Israel, 
and  therefore  the  remark  of  Estius  is  almost  supeiN 


•  [See   T-xlual   yoie  *  : 


'  I    nm    loft  the  only  one.'' 


CHAPTER  XL    1-36. 


361 


fluous,  that  it  was  even  blasphemy  to  throw  down 
God's  altars  on  the  high  places.* 

Ver.  4.  But  what  saith  the  Divine  re- 
sponse unto  him  ?  a/.}. a  t t  ).iy(i,  avriji  6 
y  (}  n;.KX'T  i(j  ftoq  ;  On  /(>  tj  ft  art  a /n  6c,  see  tlie 
Lexicons.  [The  substantive  occurs  only  here  in  the 
New  Testament.  Tlie  cognate  verb  is  used  in  Matt. 
ii.  1 2,  22  ;  Acts  s.  22  ;  Hcb.  viii.  5  ;  xi.  7,  in  the 
Bcnse :  lo  be  warned  of  God,  as  the  E.  V.  expresses 
it.  The  obvious  meaning  here :  JDivine  responne, 
eeenis  to  have  been  thus  derived :  the  word  tirst 
meant  buxiticss,  then  formal  auilience  given  to  an 
ambassador,  and  then  an  oracular  response,  though 
this  was  not  the  classical  sense.  See  2  Mace.  ii.  4  ; 
xi.  17.— R.] 

I  have  reserved  to  myself  [Kare).i.7iov 
iftavro).  See  Textual  Note  \  To  myself,  as  my 
possession  and  for  my  service,  over  against  the 
apostasy  into  idolatrous  service  (Meyer). — R.]  The 
originul  expression :  "  I  will  leave  me,"  has  been 
changed  by  the  Apostle  into  the  past  tense,  without 
tliereby  altering  the  sense,  as  has  been  done  by  the 
LXX.» 

Seven  thousand  men  [i7ttaxi,i;xi,kiov(i 
ar()(ias].  It  is  sufficient  to  regard  the  number 
seven  as  the  sacred  number  in  relation  to  the  ser- 
vices, and  the  number  thousand  as  a  designation  of 
a  popular  assembly.  Tholuck,  after  Kurtz  (p.  591), 
considers  the  number  seven  as  the  perfect  and  cove- 
nant number.  There  are  dilierent  ideas  of  perfec- 
tion, according  to  which  the  numbers  3,  4,  7,  10, 
and  12,  may  be  together  regarded  as  numbers 
denoting  perfection. f  The  Mohammedan  saying, 
quoted  by  Tholuck,  is  interesting  :  that  "  God  never 
allows  the  world  to  be  without  a  remainder  of 
seventy  righteous  people,  for  whose  sake  He  pre- 
serves it." 

[Who  never  bowed,  o'iri.vti;  olix  exafi- 
T/'ai'.  Alford  remarks  on  otTtvfc;,  which  is  a 
variation  from  the  original,  that  it  gives  "  the  sense 
of  the  saying,  as  far  as  regards  the  present  purpose, 
viz.,  to  show  that  all  these  vere  faithful  men;  in 
the  original  text  and  LXX.,  it  is  implied  that  these 
were  all  the  faithful  men." — R.] 

To  Baal.  The  feminine  ri]  BdaX  has  given 
occasion  for  much  discussion.  '  In  the  LXX.  the 
name  has  sometimes  the  masculine  and  sometimes 
the  feminine  article.  Why  does  it  have  the  lat- 
ter ?  As  the  LXX.  of  this  passage  has  tw  Bua/., 
Meyer  has  admitted  a  mistake  of  Paul's  memory  ; 
Fritzsche  holds  that  the  codex  which  Paul  read,  con- 
tained a  different  reading.  According  to  Olshausen, 
Philippi,  Meyer  [Stuart,  Hodge],  and  others,  the 
feminine  form  may  be  explained  by  the  fact  that 
Baal  was  regarded  as  an  androgynous  deity  ;  but 
this  is  not  sufficiently  proved.  According  to  Gese- 
nius,  the  feminine  form  was  understood  as  a  con- 
temptuous expression  of  idols;  which  view  is  also 
favored  by  Tholuck.  The  elder  critics  (Erasmus, 
Beza,  Grotius)  understood  the  word  as  applying  to 
the  statue  of  Baal.  [So  E.  V.]  Tholuck  replies  to 
this,  by  saying :  without  analogy.     But  the  idol  is 


♦  [Still  with  Estius,  Philippi,  Hodge,  De  Wette,  and 
others,  it  must  be  noted  that,  although  tlie  erection  of  the 
altars  on  the  high  pl.aces  was  originally  forbidden  in  the 
kingdom  of  Israel  (where  Elijah  lived),  tliey  had  become 
the" only  places  of  true  worship;  and  neglect  of  these 
would  be  really  neglect  of  Jehovah.  — R.] 

t  [The  simplest  explanation  is  that  which  takes  this 
as  a  definite  expression  for  an  indefinite  number  (Stunt. 
Hodge,  and  others),  without  attaching  any  special  signifi- 
cance to  the  number  seven. — E,.] 


the  contemptible  image  or  statue  of  the  false  god, 
Yet,  if  we  liold  that  Baal  had  no  reality  as  god  to 
the  Jews,  but  merely  as  an  idol,  the  whole  series  of 
feminine  forms  used  in  designating  Baal  becomes 
clear  at  once  (1  Sam.  vii.  4  ;  Zeph,  L  4  ;  Hosea  ii. 
8).  Meyef  is  of  the  opinion  that,  in  that  case,  it 
woidd  have  to  read  tt]  -ror  Baa). ;  but  this  would 
fully  destroy  the  probably  designed  effect  of  the 
feminine  form.  Tholuck  observes  :  "  In  the  Gothic 
language,  Guth,  as  masculine,  means  God  ;  but  gud, 
as  neuter,  means  idols ; "  and  by  this  means  he 
again  approaches  the  explanation  which,  in  passing, 
he  has  rejected.  He  does  the  same  thing  in  hia 
preceding  remark  :  "In  the  rabbinical  writings,  idols 
are  contemptuously  called  rii5!!<n ."  On  Baal* 
comp.  Winer,  das  Worterbuch  fur  das  ehristliche 
Volk,  and  the  Hebrew  Antiquities,  by  De  Wette, 
Evvald,  and  Keil. 

Ver.  5.  Even  so  then  in  this  present  time 
[ovrox;  ovv  y.al  iv  r oj  vvv  Kav^JM.  AUord 
suggests :  "  even  in  the  present  time,  sc,  of  Israel's 
national  rejection. — R.]  God,  according  to  that 
example,  secures  for  himself  a  certain  remnant 
[Aft,((/(a]  of  the  elect,  according  to  His  constant 
law  of  election — that  is,  according  to  the  election 
of  grace  [  /.  a  t  i  y.  ).o  y  tj  v  y  a.  {>  vt  o  q .  Comp. 
chap.  ix.  11.  Stuart:  "an  election,  not  on  the 
ground  of  merit,  but  of  mercy. — R.] 

Ver  6.  Now  if  hy  grace  [ft  Se  ya.Qt.rv. 
Ji  logical,  lum. — R.]  Namely,  that  a  hT./ifta  ex- 
isted, and  always  continues  to  exist.  Grace,  or  the 
gift  of  grace,  cannot  be  divided  and  supplemented 
by,  or  confounded  with,  a  merit  of  works.  Augus- 
tine :    Gratia,  nisi  gratis  sit,  gratia  non  est. 

[Then  it  is  no  longer  of  works :  other- 
•wise  grace  no  longer  becomes  grace,  o  i'  >e 
6Tt  s'l  tijyMV,  intl  »/  /ccoiq  oi'/.  'iri,  yi- 
vfxai'  yd  {lit; . — But  if  it  be  of  works,  then  it 
L«i  no  longer  grace:  otherw^ise  work  is  no 
longer  w^ork,  il  dk  it  t(j  yoiv ,  o  v  y.  er  i> 
■/dfjui;,  i  71 1 1  TO  t  ()  y  0  V  o  v  x  ixu  tariv 
s^yov.  The  critical  questions  respecting  the  sec- 
ond clause  are  discussed  in  Textual  Notts  \  ''i  °>  and 
at  some  length  below.  The  discussion  requires  ua 
to  insert  the  verse  in  full. — R.]  We  may  now  ask 
how  we  must  understand  the  parallel  clauses  ?  The 
usual  explanation  places  the  following  in  antithesis 
to  each  other  :  Now  if  it  is  by  grace  (that  remnant, 
or  its  causality,  the  election),  then  it  is  simply  not 
by  the  merit  of  works,  otherwise  grace  is  no  more 
grace. — But  if  it  be  by  works,  then  is  it  no  more 
grace,  otherwise  work  would  be  no  true  work,  but 
mercenary  work.  In  connection  with  this  antithesis, 
clear  and"  significant  in  itself,  there  arise,  however, 
three  questions :  1,  Why  does  the  Ajiostle  enlarge 
the  first  proposition  by  the  second,  since  the  latter 
seems  to  be  quite  self-evident  from  the  former?  2. 
What  should  the  ylvtrav  {'/diiii;)  mean,  where 
fffTt  should  be  so  positively  expected  that  the  Vul- 
gate [E.  v.],  and  other  versions,  have  even  substi- 
tuted est?      3.  Why  is   ydQK;   used  instead  of  e« 

*  ["Wordsworth  combines  all  the  explanations  :  "  The 
reason  why  the  Septungint  sometimes  used  X\ie  feminine, 
why  St.  Paul  adopts  it  here,  appears  to  be,  because  not 
only  a  heathen  God,  but  a  goddess  also  {A^iliirie),  was  wor- 
shipped under  the  name  of  Baal,  and  l^ccausc,  by  this 
variety  of  gender,  the  reader  i«  reminded  that  there  was  no 
principle  of  unity  in  tliis  heathen  worship  ;  and  thus  the 
vanity  of  the  worship  itself  is  declared."  The  fact  that 
the  liAX.  u.ses  bcith,  ttems  to  render  the  italics  of  the  E.  V 
unnccessniy,  and  to  render  the  interijrctation  thus  as- 
sumed very  doubtful.— Ii.] 


362 


THE   EPISTLE   OF   PAUL   TO  THE   ROMANS. 


yci^tTo?  [to  correspond  with  ej  e^  yojv]  in  the 
Becond  sentence  ? 

As  far  as  the  first  pohit  ia  concerned,  Tholuck 
Bays :  "  The  genuineness  of  the  antithesis  '  tl  dk  t; 
e^<y(i»»','  &c.,  is  more  than  doubtful.  Its  oldest  au- 
thorities are  Cod.  B.,  Peshito,  Chrysostom,  Tlieo- 
doret  (in  the  text).  On  tlie  contrary,  it  is  wanting 
in  A.  0.  D.  F.  G.,  Origen  (according  to  RuBnus), 
Vulgate,  the  Coptic  Translation,  and  others.  Yet 
Fritzsche  has  undertaken  to  defend  this  reading, 
and  lately  lleiche  also,  in  the  Comm.  Crii.,  p.  07  ; 
Tischendorf  has  preserved  it  in  the  text,"  &c.  Ac- 
cording to  Tholuck,  the  addition  h;is  the  character 
of  a  glossarial  reflection.  This  appearance  of  such 
a  self-evident  amplification  could,  however,  have  also 
occasioned  the  omission.* 

Tiie  yiviTui,  in  the  first  sentence  means,  ac- 
cording to  Tholuck :  to  result,  to  come  out  as.  This 
explanation  is  just  as  doubtful  as  that  of  Meyer:  "in 
its  concrete  appearance  it  ceases  to  be  what  it  is  by 
nature."  [So  De  Wette,  AUbrd,  Philippi.  The  dis- 
tinction between  yivirai  and  lariv  is  ignored 
by  many  commentators. — R.l  The  /a^i?,  in  the 
second  sentence,  must  be  understood,  according  to 
the  current  explanation,  as  the  effect  of  the  /cc^hc; 
in  the  first  sentence.  In  addition  to  tliis,  we  have 
the  question  :  What  is  the  meaning  of  "  work  is  no 
more  work  ?  "  Does  tlie  Apostle  regard  only  merce- 
nary work  as  a  true  work?  We  attempt  the  following 
explanation  :  If  it  is  of  grace,  then  it  is  no  more  of 
works  ;  for  grace  does  not  first  exist,  or  is  not  first 
in  process  of  existence  by  works,  Grace,  according 
to  its  very  nature,  must  be  complete  before  works. 
But  if  of  works,  then  no  further  grace  exists,f  be- 
cause the  work  is  not  yet  complete,  and  never  will 
be  complete  as  meritorious  work.  Works,  consid- 
ered as  meritorious,  are  always  an  incomplete  infini- 
tude. But  if  grace  should  first  be  the  result  of 
works,  it  would  not  be  present  until  the  boundless 
future.  If  we  accept  this  view,  the  literal  expres- 
sion is  saved ;  and  to  the  first  declaration,  that  grace 
and  the  merit  of  works  preclude  each  other,  there 
is  gained  a  second  :  Grace  is  naturally  a  prepared 
ground  before  the  ezUliiuj  work,  &c.  (see  also  tlie 
continiiation  in  ver.  7).  The  reading  of  Cod.  B.  : 
il  ()t  ti  't(jyit)v,  oiixtTi'  •/a.Qi,!;,  Inu  ro  i'fjyov  orxtTt 
ifrrl  -/('toi-i;,  seems  also  to  be  a  special  attempt  at 
an  explanation.  The  real  purpose  of  the  antithesis 
is,  that  t/ie  Apostle  proiren  that  the  election  of  the 
people  could  only  con-nst  of  those  who  establish  them- 
selves on  grace,  but  not  in  the  parti/  wh'ch  extahlishcs 
itself  on  works.  If  the  matter  were  as  those  who 
rely  on  the  righteousness  of  works  desire,  there 
would  not  be  any  grace ;  and  grace  would  never  be 
accomplished,  because  the  righteousness  of  works  is 
never  accomplished,  just  as  little  aa  the  tower  of 
Babel  was  ever  finislied.J 

•  [Alford  well  rornarks  :  "  The  object  beln(r  prfcision, 
it  is  much  more  probable  that  the  Apostle  hIiouIiI  have 
TTrilton  both  clauses  in  their  present  fonnal  pnnilleliKm, 
and  th^vt  the  second  should  have  been  early  nmitted  from 
its  HceminK  Huperlluity,  tlian  that  it  should  have  l)een 
insertcil  from  tlie  marKiii."  The  want  of  exiict  correspond- 
ence is  also  iiR.iinst  tlio  probabilitv  of  an  interpolation,  as 
Fritzsche  has  remarked  :  xapi,Ti — «f  ipyiav  ;  yivtrai  xapit 
— {(rriv  tpyov ;  epyov  at  the  close,  where  tpya  mi({lit  nave 
been  expected. — II.  | 

t  (So  Wordsworth,  who  accepta  the  very  wenkly-mip- 
ported  »<rTi  of  the  llf.e.,  and  accentini;  ii  thus:  ivrt, 
renders  :  "  there  ii  no  lo  iRer  any  place  for  the  existence  of 
pace."    Uiit  this  is  very  doubtful.  —  R.] 

t  [I'hc  follourinK  paraphrase  (abridged  from  Alford)  may 
give  a  clearer  view  :  "  Hut  il  (the  selertitm  lias  t)een  made) 
by  grace,  it  is  no  longer  (wo  exclude  it*  being)  of  works  (aa 


Vers.  7-11.  ?7ie  great  body  of  unbelievers  wha 
have  not  been  able  to  obtain  grace  by  w  ■rks,  are  not 
the  real  subslatice  of  the  people.  They  are  essential- 
ly  an  apostate  remnant  of  hardened  ones.  Yet  their 
stumbling  was  not  designed  for  their  ruin,  but  for 
the  salvation  of  the  Gentile's. 

Ver.  7.  What  then.  Tl  ovv.  This  infer- 
ence,  as  well  as  the  ini,t^ril,  becomes  quitt 
definite,  n  we  refer  to  the  conclusion  of  the  pre- 
vious verse. — That  ■which  Israel  seeketh  for 
he  obtained  not  [o  in  kL.t}T  tl  I  a  ^  at] ).,  ror- 
TO  oi''x  intTv/tv,  The  latter  verb  is  usually 
followed  by  the  genitive ;  rarely,  in  the  classics,  by 
the  accusative,  as  here.  Hence  we  find,  in  lice,  (no 
MSS.),  Toi'^Toi'.  See  Meyer  for  the  authorities  for 
this  use  of  the  accusative.  The  meaning  is  not : 
to  find,  but  to  attain  to,  to  obtain. — R.]  Israel  did 
not  obtain  that  which  it  sought  to  obtain  by  works 
— grace,  as  the  end  of  the  finished  work.  Like  a 
phantom  beyond  the  ever  unfinished  work,  grace 
had  to  recede  ever  further  in  the  distance.  The 
iTtiL/jTHv  can,  at  all  events,  also  mean  zealous 
striving  [Fritzsche,  Philippi,  Hodge]  ;  but  it  is  clear 
that  this  idea  would  not  be  in  place  here.  [Meyer 
says  it  indicates  the  direction. — R.]  The  present 
properly  denotes  "  the  permanence  of  the  effort " — 
the  permanence  of  the  effort  to  find  the  city  of  grace 
at  the  end  of  the  long  road  of  self-righteousness. 

But  the  election  obtained  it  [^  Hk  ixXo- 
yi]  intTv/fv.  The  election  for  tlie  elect,  as  the 
circumcision  for  those  circumcised.  Vivacious  ex- 
pression.— R.]  Meyer  says  :  "  For  they  were  sub- 
jects of  Divine  grace."  Paul  has  already  said,  in 
other  words :  For  the  elect  are  distinguished  by 
having  received  God's  grace  in  faith. 

And  the  rest  were  hardened  [oi  Se 
).o If noi  t7tu)Qm!}rf(Tav.  The  verb  is  rendered 
blinded  in  the  E.  V.,  here,  and  2  Cor.  iii.  14  ;  in 
other  places,  hardened,  which  is  decidedly  prefer- 
able.— R.]  Israel  is  divided  into  two  parts.  One 
part  is  the  t/.).oy>],  although  it  is  the  minority ;  the 
other  is  the  ?.oi,noi,  the  Ttvt'i,',  although  they 
are  the  majority.  Meyer  says,  they  were  hardened 
by  God.  [So  Hodge,  Stuart,  Philippi  (with  a  reser- 
vation), and  Tholuck,  in  later  editions  ;  comp.  chap, 
ix.  18.  The  passive  certainly  includes  this  thought. 
— R.]  Paul  says,  they  have  been  hardened  by  a 
reciprocal  process  between  their  unbelief  and  God's 
judgments.  Tlie  sense  undoubtedly  is,  that  those 
who  remain  for  the  incalculable  periods  of  judgment 
have  become,  "  in  understanding  and  will,  insu.s. 
ceptible  of  the  appropriation  of  salvation  in  Christ " 
(Meyer),  and  iiisuscei)tible,  al>ove  ail,  in  their  heart 
and  spirit ;  because  the  last  sparks  of  the  spiritual 
life  in  them,  which  alone  can  understand  the  gospel 
of  the  Spirit,  have  expired  ;  just  as  a  sapless  plant 
is  no  more  supported  by  the  sunshine,  but  is  reduced 
to  a  dried-up  stalk. 

Ver.  8.  According  as  it  is  written.  [Stuart 
is  disposed  to  find  in  xaOun;  (m.  B.,  Tregelles : 
xaOd/iffi)   yiy()artTai,   a  declaration  of  analogy, 

its  sotirco) ;  for  (in  that  case)  pracc  no  longer  becomes 
(loses  its  efficacy  as)  ijraco  (the  fi-eedom  of  thu  act  is  lost, 
it  having  been  prompted  from  without) :  btit  if  of  works 
(as  the  cause  and  source  of  the  selection),  no  loiiirer  is  it 
(the  act  of  f.rleetion)  (jmco ;  for  (in  that  case)  work  is  no 
ionjrer  work  (work  l)einif  'that  which  enmg  reward,'  itfl 
character  is  contradicted)."  The  same  autlior  remarks,  that 
this  point  is  stated  so  fully  just  here,  because  the  Apoetlfl 
wa.s  to  enter  ujuin  such  an  exposition  of  the  Divine  dfuU 
iuRS  as  reiwb'red  it  necessary  to  show  that  their  scvority  did 
not  contradict  their  general  character  of  grace  and  lovt, 
-U.] 


CHAPTER  XI.    1-36. 


363 


rather  than  a  citation  of  prophecy.  So  Tholuck ; 
but  Fritzsche,  Meyer,  and  others,  hold  the  latter 
view.  "  The  perspective  of  prophecy,  in  stating 
8uch  cases,  embraces  all  the  analogous  ones,  espe- 
cially that  great  one,  in  which  the  words  are  most 
protninently  fulfilled "  (Alford).  See  below,  note 
on  ver.  10.  On  the  free  citation,  see  Textual  Notes 
*.  '". — R.]  The  citation  is  freely  collated  from  Isa. 
xxix.  10 ;  Isa.  vi.  9  ;  Deut.  xxix.  4.  Meyer  denies 
tJiat  Isa.  vi.  9  is  taken  into  consideration  ;  but  if  wo 
compare  the  two  other  passages,  they  do  not  suffice 
for  Paul's  citation,  since  the  assertion  in  Deut  xxix. 
4  contains  merely  negations. 

God  gave  them.  By  no  means  a  mere  per- 
mission (Clirysostom),  but  likewise  not  simply  ac- 
tivitii,  without  something  further.  The  ground  of 
the  judgment  of  a  spirit  of  slumber  \_7ivi:Vfia 
xara  j'i''Sf  o)!,-],  or  of  deep  sleep  (n^il^n  nsn  ), 
on  Israel,  is  definitely  declared,  in  Isa.  xxix.  10,  to 
be  the  guilt  of  the  people ;  ver.  13  if. — But  the  pas- 
sage in  Isa.  vi.  9  fi'.,  which  constitutes  the  principal 
part  of  the  present  quotation,  is  explained  imme- 
diately afterward  in  the  conduct  of  Ahaz,  in  chap, 
vii.  The  third  passage  from  Deuteronomy  brings 
out  more  definitely  the  negative  element  in  this 
hardening  process :  "  Yet  the  Lord  hath  not  given 
you  a  heart  to  perceive,"  &c.  On  the  meaning  and 
interpretations  of  xaTavri'tc,  see  Meyer,  p.  420 ; 
Tholuck,  p.  596.* — [Unto  this  day ;  to  be  joined 
with  what  immediately  precedes,  since  they  are  sub- 
stantially from  Deut.  xxix.  4.  So  modern  editors 
and  commentators  generally. — R.] 

Ver.  9.  And  David  saith.  The  second  pas- 
sage is  taken  freely  from  Ps.  Ixix.  22  (LXX.). 
Meyer  says  :  "  David  is  not  the  author  of  this  Psalm 
(against  Hengstenberg),  which  must  be  judged  anal- 
ogously to  the  expression  in  Matt.  xxii.  43."  Comp. 
on  that  passage  the  Commentary  on  Matiheic,  p.  404. 
First  of  all,  it  is  quite  easy  to  prove  that  the  suffer- 
ings of  the  people  in  exile  could  not  have  been  in 
mind  in  writing  either  the  lamentations  of  Psalm 
Ixix.,  or  the  "imprecations"  on  enenjies.  First, 
the  theocratic  exiles  did  not  say  that  they  had  to 
suifer  tor  tlie  Lord's  sake  (ver.  7),  and  for  zeal  for 
His  house  (ver.  9).  But  they  said  just  the  contrary 
(see  Ps.  cvi. ;  Isa.  Ixiv. ;  Dan.  ix.).  And  though  the 
exile  could  also  invoke  God's  wrath  on  the  heathen, 
and  wish  them  evil  (Ps.  Ixxix.  6  ;  cxxxvii.  9),  the 
prophetic  imprecations  are  very  different,  for  they 
portray  the  judgments  of  blindness  that  are  invoked 
on  the  spiritual  adversaries  of  the  theocratic  faith, 
and  of  the  house  and  name  of  the  Lord,  who  proved 
their  enmity  by  persecuting  God's  servant.  Comp., 
in  this  respect,  Ps.  fix. ;  Ixiv.  ;  Ixix.  22-28  ;  cix. 
In  such  Psalms,  either  the  personal,  collective,  or 
ideal  f  David  chiefly  speaks,  because  David  has  be- 
come the  type  of  God's  suffering  servant.  We  there- 
fore hold,  with  Luther,  Rosenmiiller,  and  others, 
that  the  concluding  words  (from  ver.  32)  are  a  later 
addition. :|: 


♦  [Frifzsche  has  an  Excursns  on  this  word,  pp.  588  ff. 
He  makes  it  =  stupoT,  nunibni-ss,  as  from  stupefying  wine. 
Onlj'  liere,  and  not  in  the  classics.  Incorrect,  accordinfr  to 
thi~  view  ;  CaU-in  :  spiritus  compunctionis  ;  Luther  :  eiaen 
trbiUerien  Geist.  -R.] 

t  [Philijipi  (following  Keil)  says  that  the  subject  in  this 
Psalm  is  "not  the  idoal,  but  the  concrete  person  of  the 
rigiiteoup."  Hcngstenberg  (so  J.  A.  Alexander)  adopts  the 
other  view. — U.] 

X  [The  Psr-m  purports  to  be  written  by  David.  Dr. 
Langc's  remarks  are  in  sup]  ort  of  this  view  of  the  Muthor- 
«hip,  thougli  he  finds  it  nectssary,  in  order  to  sustain  it  by 


The  imprecations  themselves  are  a  prophetico- 
ethical  view,  clad  in  the  sombre  drapery  of  the  Old 
Testament.  [Dr.  J.  Add.  Alexander  remarks,  on  thia 
verse  of  Ps.  Ixix  :  "  The  imprecations  in  this  verse, 
and  those  following  it,  are  revolting  only  when  con- 
sidered as  the  expression  of  malignant  selfishness. 
If  uttered  by  God,  they  shock  no  reader's'  sensi- 
bilities ;  nor  should  they,  when  considered  as  the 
language  of  an  ideal  person,  representing  the  whole 
class  of  righteous  sufferers,  and  particularly  Him 
who,  though  He  prayed  lor  His  murderers  while 
dying  (Luke  xxiii.  34),  had  before  applied  the  words 
of  this  very  passage  to  the  unbelieving  Jews  (Matt, 
xxiii.  38),  as  Paul  did  afterwards." — R.] 

Let  their  table  become  a  snare  [rivti- 
&7]T  w  7]  r  Q  a.  n  fL.a  air  mv  ili;  n  ay  iS  a\. 
PhUippi,  with  Origen,  Tholuck,  and  others,  has  re- 
ferred the  table  to  the  law  and  its  works.  But  when 
Melanchthon  says:  doctrina  ipsoncm,  the  latter  must 
be  very  carefully  distinguished  from  the  law  itself. 
Chrjsostom:  ther  enjoyments ;  Michaelis,  and  oth- 
ers :  the  Jewish  passover  meal,  at  which  the  Jews 
were  besieged,  and  which  was  followed  by  the  de- 
struction of  Jerusalem  ;  Grotius :  the  altar  in  the 
temple  itself.  The  point  of  the  figure  becomes 
blunted,  if  we  hold,  with  Tholuck,  that  table  is  men- 
tioned, because  it  is  at  the  table  that  surprise  by  an 
enemy  is  most  dangerous.  Rather,  the  table,  or  the 
enjoyment  of  life  by  the  ungodly,  becomes  itself 
their  snare,  &c.  Now  this  table  can  be  something 
different  at  different  times  ;  generally,  it  is  the  sym- 
bol of  comfortable  banqueting  in  wicked  security 
over  the  ungodly  enjoyment  of  life  (see  Matt.  xxiv. 
38).  With  the  Jews  of  the  Apostle's  day,  this  table 
was  their  statutes,  and,  above  all,  their  illusion  that 
the  earthly  glory  of  the  kingdom  of  Israel  would 
be  manifested  by  triumph  over  the  Romans.  It  is 
a  fact  that  the  table,  the  ungodly  enjoyment  of  life, 
becomes  a  snare  for  the  ruin  of  the  adversaries  of 
the  Holy  One ;  just  as  the  pious  man's  table  be- 
comes a  sign  of  blessing  and  victory  (Ps.  xxiii.). 
While  they  think  they  are  consuming  the  spoils  of 
their  earthly  sense,  they  become  themselves  a  spoil 
to  every  form  of  retribution  ;  just  as  the  bird  is  led 
into  the  snare,  and  the  deer  is  hunted,  or  perishes 
by  a  stumbling-block — that  is,  a  trap. 

[And  a  trap,  and  a  stumbling-block,  and  a 
recompense  unto  them,  y.a  i  tli;  -9  7iq  av  x a » 
fii;  axdv<ia/.ov  xal  avranodo  f^  a  avroTc. 
See  Textual  Note  "'. — R.]  Paul  has  freely  elabo- 
rated the  original  forms  still  further,  by  inserting 
xai  fit;  S?'j(jav.  Likewise  axcivdaXov  fol- 
lows avra7i6doai,q  in  the  LXX.  The  Vulgate  inter- 
prets St'jQa  by  captio;  Fritzsche  and  Meyer  adopt 
the  same,  while  Tholuck  and  Philippi  prefer  tlie 
instrument  [Ewald,  Alford  :  net']  of  hunting,  which 
applies  to  both  the  other  means  of  capture,  and  not 
merely  as  a  "  hunting-spear."  Meyer  is  incorrect  in 
saying  that  this  ruin  is  explained  in  what  follows. 
For  the  following  words  describe  the  ir.tvard  relations 
of  the  judgment  of  the  ungodly,  in  antithesis  to  the 
judgment  in  the  outward  relations  of  life,  which  have 
been  described  by  the  foregoing  words. 

Ver.  10.  Let  their  eyes  be  darkened,  that 
they  may  not    see    [a  x  o  x  t,  a  &  tj  r  o)  a  a  it    ot 


internal  evidence,  to  admit  the  later  addition  of  the  con« 
cludins  verses.  The  question  of  authorship  dues  not,  in- 
deed, affect  the  question  of  the  propriety  of  the  phrase  : 
David  sititli ;  but  when  it  is  so  liliely  that  David  did  write 
the  Psalm,  inventing  theories  to  prove  that  he  did  noti 
seems  to  be  useless  ingenuity.— H.] 


364 


THE   EPISTLE    OF   PAUL    TO   THE    ROMANa 


o  (/' .9-ft  A  J!  o  t  avToiv  to?  /t^  ft/.tTinvl.  Spirit- 
ual bliiulness  is  one  form  of  the  inward  judgment, 
and  total  de.s|)oiideiicy  of  spirit  is  tlie  otiicr. 

And  bow  dowrn  their  back  edway  [xal 
rov  voiTov  auTMV  ()(■«  ;r«vT6i,"  (Tvyxa/t- 
r^'ov.  Se2  Textual  Note  ".— R.]  The  LXX.  has 
translated  tiie  words  of  the  original  text,  "and  malie 
their  loins  continually  to  shake,"  by  :  "  make  their 
back )  crooked  always ;  "  a  change  to  which  the 
Apostle  adheres,  probably  because  it  gives  the  ex- 
pression of  permanent  dejection  a  somewhat  more 
general  character. — By  bowed-down,  b  icks,  Meyer  un- 
derstands spiritual  slavery,  while  the  early  expositors 
understood  Roman  slavery.  Yet  this  would  be  an 
important  deviation  from  the  original  text.  But,  in 
reality,  the  bowed-down  backs  should  mean  the  same 
thiiig  as  shaking  or  tottering  loins. 

Tiioluck  and  Pliilippi  have  correctly  observed, 
against  Fritzsche,  and  others,  that  in  ver.  8  (and  the 
same  tiling  applies  also  to  ver.  9)  the  question  is  not 
the  citation  of  a  prophecy,  according  to  which  the 
unbelief  of  the  Jews  at  the  time  of  Christ  must  be 
a  necessary  result.  Yet  this  remark  does  not  suffice 
to  show  that  the  quotation  takes  place  as  in  the  cita- 
tions in  Matt.  xiii.  14  ;  John  xii.  40  ;  Acts  xxviii. 
26  ;  which  "  refer,  vi  analof/ice,  to  the  classical  pas- 
sage for  the  unbelieving  conduct  of  Israel  toward 
God,  in  Isa.  vi."  The  most  direct  practical  purpose 
of  these  citations  in  the  New  Testament  is  to  prove 
to  the  Jews,  from  their  own  Holy  Scriptures  and  his- 
tory, that  there  was  always  in  Israel  an  inclination  to 
apostiisy  ;  and  that  it  is  therefore  not  contrary  to 
faith  in  propliecy  to  charge  the  present  Israel  with 
apostasy  (see  the  defence  of  Stephen).  But  then  a 
really  typical  prophecy  also  underlies  this  purpose  ; 
yet  it  is  not  a  fatalistic  prophecy,  but  the  idea  of  the 
consequence  of  ruin  even  to  its  historical  consumma- 
tion (see  .Matt,  xxiii.  32  ff.). 

Ver.  11.  I  say  then,  Did  they  stumble  in 
order  that  they  should  fall  ?  [A  t'y"'  ovr,  /irj 
inr  at.(Tav  'iva  n i (j m  (j u  v  :'\  A  quail fieation  to 
guard  against  a  false  conclusion.  They  have  cer- 
taitdy  stumbled  ami  fallen  ;  but  the  purpose  of  their 
guilty  stumbling  and  falling  under  the  previously  de- 
scribed judgment  of  hardness  was  not  that  they 
should  fall,  in  the  absolute  sense,  into  the  ruin  of  the 
dTTo'ihta.  Their  falling  is  economically  limited,  and 
economically  turne<l  and  applieil,  to  the  salvation  of 
the  Gentiles  (see  chap.  ix.  17,  23).  The  stumbling 
of  the  hnnoi  took  place  against  the  stone  of  offence 
(chap.  ix.  a2,  33;  x.  11).  The  iva  denotes  the 
final  purpose  of  the  Divine  ju<licial  government,  and 
is  not  merely  i/.pa.ri,/.uy;,  as  Chrysostom,  Augustine, 
and  others,  would  have  i*..*  Tholuck  makes  the 
noteworthy  remark,  that  nrnln,v,  to  stumble  (which 
must  not  be  referreii,  with  Dc  Wette,  and  others,  to 
the  <r /Av<)a).()v  mentioned  in  ver.  9,  but  rather  to 
the  /.I'.Vo,-  7io(n;y.i')tiiiuToq  in  cha[).  ix.  33),  has  the 
Bense  of  iiioral  stumbling  ;  James  ii.  10  ;  iii.  2  ;  an<l 
that  ninrnv,  on  the  contrary,  hits  this  ethical/;/ 
figurative  sense  neither  in  the  Ilebrew,  nor  Greek, 
nor  Latin,  but  only  the  sense  of  yielding  to,  sinking 
under. 

But  by  their  fall   [iAAa  rot   nvtiov   net- 


♦  (Althouirh  ii'a  Is  telif,  n«  i«  now  held  by  most  oom- 
tnontaloro,  the  ouiphasis  doen  not  rout  iiixin  it,  aa  though 
only  till!  purposo  wcro  doiiirtl,  and  the  fact  admiitod.  Tak- 
init  oi  Aoiiroi  as  ri'presfnt«tive8  of  the  whole  nation, 
the  .\po-tle  admilH  the  stmn'd'np,  and  denies  the  lina!  fall, 
int)ni:ilin?  liy  his  use  of  'iva,  that  another  purpose  iras  m- 
rolvcd,  viz.,  the  salvatiun  of  the  (ieutiles.— ll.j 


(ianiMfiati.  On  Ttaftdnrutfia,  see  p,  184,  Dr. 
Schaff  s  note. — R.]  Meyer  has  no  ground  for  not 
finding  in  nai>ctnx.  tiie  meaning  of  falling,  but  only 
the  dcih-1u)ii  (Vulgate)  [so  Alford],  for  they  hav6 
really  fallen,  yet  that  was  not  the  object  (see  also 
Tholuck,  p.  600).  Tholuck  properly  opposes,  dso, 
the  view  that  here  the  principal  thought  is,  that 
Israel  siiould  be  restored,  although  an  intimation  of 
the  restitution  of  Israel  is  included  in  the  words.  It 
is  evident  that  the  conversion  of  the  Gentiles  is  pri- 
marily designated  as  the  final  object  of  Israel's  tall ; 
with  this  final  object  there  is,  indeed,  again  asso« 
ciated  the  final  object  of  the  preliminarily  isolated 
and  of  the  finally  total  conversion  of  Israel.  The 
7ra()a7iT.  here  can  as  little  mean  a  mere  "  passing 
away,"  as  a  mere  infor/uniuin,  which  Reiche  and 
Riickert,  with  otliers,  would  render  it.* 

Salvation  is  come.  'H  rr or //(</«.  fiyovf* 
must  be  supplied,  according  to  the  connection.  The 
Apostle  cannot  have  regarded  this  tragical  condition 
as  an  absolute  necessity;  but  he  may  very  well  have 
consideied  it  an  historical  one.  Israel,  having  been 
placed  in  its  existing  condition  by  its  own  guilt,  did 
not  desire  the  Gentiles,  under  the  most  favorable 
circumstances,  to  participate  in  the  messianic  salva- 
tion, except  as  proselytes  of  the  Jews ;  and  still 
more  did  it  indulge  the  thought  of  vengeance  on, 
and  dominion  over,  the  Gentiles  ;  t)ut  it  was  impos- 
sible for  Christianity,  as  Jewish  Christianity,  to  be- 
come universal  in  tlie  Gentile  world.  In  addition  to 
this  came  the  experience  of  the  Apostle,  that  he  w;i3 
always  driven  more  decidedly  to  missionary  labors 
among  the  Gentiles  by  the  unlielief  of  thi-  Jews ; 
Matt.  xxi.  43  ;  Acts  xiii.  46  ;  xxviii.  28.  The  nega- 
tive condition  of  this  transition  was  apostolic  preach- 
ing, and  especially  that  of  Paul. 

In  order  to  excite  them  to  jealousy  [ft? 
TO  naua^>j  ).i7tfj  at,  avrovi;.  Instead  of  j'al- 
onsy,  we  may  substitute  emulation,  as  the  word  is 
not  used  in  a  bad  sense  (Hodge).  The  clause  is 
telic ;  the  purpose  was  not  the  total  fall,  but  that 
their  moral  fall  naight  be  used  to  further  the  salva- 
tion of  the  Gentiles,  and  this,  in  turn,  bring  about 
their  own  salvation  as  a  nation. — R.]  This  purpose 
was  associated  from  the  outset,  and  the  mention  of 
it  is  here  in  place  for  the  removal  of  the  fatalistic 
thought,  that  their  fall  was  decreed  for  their  ruin. 

Vers.  12-16,  As  the  unbelief  of  the  Jews  hat 
been  the  means  of  effecting  the  conversion  of  the 
Gentiles,  so  shall  the  conversiim  of  the  Gentiles  be 
still  more  not  only  the  means  of  effedinr)  the  belief 
of  the  Jews,  but,  with  this  nturn  of  Israel,  still 
greater  things  shall  occnr. 

Now  if  their  fall  .  .  .  and  their  dimin- 
ishing the  riches  of  the  Gentiles  [ft  iM  ro 
7T ctQct  n  r  i<>  II  n  amov  .  .  .  to  rlrrrjiin  «r- 
TiTiv  nloTrot;  ifYvuiv.  In  order  to  exj^ain  this 
difficult  verse,  we  must  start  with  the  tjTTiiiia  in 
Isa.  xxxi.  8,  which  does  not  occur  in  classical  lan- 
guage, but  is  there  represented  by  lyrTce  [Attic  for 
r(taa,  a  defeatl,  the  contrary  of  vixr^.  In  the  pas- 
sage cited,  iJTrtjfia  means  not  merely  the  being 
overcome,  but  the  military  diminution  which  is  the 
result  of  defeat.     At  all  events,  it  is  to  be  taken 


♦  rThe  /nil  here  must  t>c  taken  »s  a  le!«9  strong  oxprei»- 
(rion  than  the  verh  which  precedes,  if  the  view  he  nilonled 
that  denies  the  faet  of  a  final  fall.  AVe  must,  then,  li.dU 
thai  the  national  fall  into  utier  ruin  is  den-ed  throiiifliout, 
while  I  he  stumhlin);  and  the  moral  fall  of  the  individualt 
are  admitted.    So  Alfurd.— It.] 


CHAPTER  XL   1-36. 


365 


here  as  diminution  in  captivity,  according  to  the 
original  text,  for  menial  servitude,  Liiiewise,  in 
I  Cor.  yi.  7,  the  word  means  a  moral  loss,  a  diminu- 
tion of  the  power  of  believers  in  opposition  to  the 
world.  We  therefore  hold  that  the  expression 
ijrrrjua  places  the  two  other  ideas  in  a  more  defi- 
nite light,  and  th;it  the  whole  expression  allud(?s  to 
the  scene  of  a  routed  army.  Even  in  military  affairs, 
the  dynamical  aiitithi'sis  of  broken  power  and  of  the 
full  sense  of  power  is  connected  with  the  ideas  of 
numerical  diminution  and  numerical  fulness ;  as,  in 
the  present  instance,  the  weakening  is  connected 
with  the  loss  of  men,  and  full  power  with  the  com- 
plete number.  Tholuck  bases  his  explanation  on  the 
meaning  of  n ).>•()(<)/( a  in  ver.  25. 

Explanations  of  the  iJTTTjfia:  diminutio  (Vul- 
gate) ;  minority,  defectus  (Chrysostom,  and  most 
commentators) ;  injury,  loss,  fall  (De  Wette,  and 
others).  De  Wette  brings  this  explanation  in  exclu- 
sive antithesis  to  the  first,  with  reference  to  2  Cor. 
xii.  13.  Fritzsche :  Diminution  of  mes^anic  salva- 
tion. Philippi :  The  damage  to  God's  kingdom  by 
their  falling  away.  But  Meyer  remarks,  with  good 
reason,  that  the  thrice-repeated  aim'iv  is  in  the  same 
relation,  the  subjective  genitive.  Tholuck :  Reduced 
state.*  According  to  Tholuck,  Meyer's  explanation 
is :  the  minority ;  but  Meyer  himself  pronounces 
against  this  explanation,  and  understands  the  word 
to  mean,  sinking  and  ruin.  Ulfilas  has  interpreted 
the  word,  which  means  at  the  same  time  the  loss  of 
men  and  the  weakening,  by  the  deficiency.  There  is 
a  real  difference  made  by  the  reference  to  the  be- 
lieving Jews  as  the  minority  of  believers  [paucitas 
Judworum  credentium  ;  Grotius),  and  the  antitheti- 
cal body  of  unbelievers,  the  moral  field  of  the  dead, 
or  the  captured,  those  subjected  to  slavery.  But 
here,  too,  both  parts  cannot  be  separated.  The 
ai'Tot  are  the  whole  people  ;  the  believers  are  the 
sound  remainder  of  the  army ;  while  the  Unbeliev- 
ers,  the  same   as  the   fallen,  or   captives,   are   its 

How  much  more  their  fulness  [ttoitw 
l.i5.).).ov  TO  7T ).  1] Q 0) ft ct  a II T air].  The  nXij- 
^ «)/(«.  Explanations  ;  The  whole  body  (Tholuck) ; 
the  full  number  (Meyer) ;  the  restoration  of  Israel 
to  its  proper  position  (Riickert,  KoUner) ;  [Hodge  : 
their  full  restoration  or  blessedness ;  Alford :  their 
replenishment. — R.]  Philippi :  the  filling  up  of  the 
gap  caused  in  God's  kingdom  by  their  unbelief.  The 
latter  view,  which  was  first  set  forth  by  Origen,  is 
discussed  at  length  by  Tholuck,  p.  606  ff.  But  this 
view  confounds  in  a  twofold  way :  1.  The  idea  of 
the  full  number  of  God's  eternal  community  in  gen- 
eral, and  the  idea  of  material  fulness  {n).rj()i<)fia),  the 
whole  number  of  the  Jewish  people  ;  2.  The  idea 
of  the  economic  completeness  in  the  present  passage, 
and  that  of  eonic  completeness. f 

Tholuck  very  properly  calls  attention  to  the  ap- 

•  [So  Hodge,  Alford  :  their  impoveri.shment.  The  nu- 
merical idea  is  quite  objectionable,  although  Dr.  Lanpe 
seems  to  think  it  is  included  also.  The  whole  verse,  ac- 
cording to  this  view,  means  :  "  If  their  uubelief  {i.  e.,  of 
one  part  of  them)  is  the  world's  wealth,  and  their  small 
nuraber  {i.  e.,  of  believers,  the  other  part  of  them)  the 
wealth  of  the  Gentiles,  how  much  more  their  full  (restored) 
number?"  This  arbitrarily  changes  the  reference  of  avTojv, 
puts  a  forced  meaning  on  jJTnjino,  and  really  weakens  the 
force  of  the  argument,  which  is  :  if  their  sin  has  done  so 
much,  how  much  more  their  cotiversinn  f — R.] 

t  [The  numerical  idea  is  lexically  admissible  in  TrA^poi- 
aa,  whence  it  has  been  transferred  to  ^TT»)na,  but  even 
here  it  is  not  the  prominent  one.  It  is,  however,  to  be 
Understood,  that  the  spiritual  fulness  will  necessarily  include 
the  convereion  of  the  nation  as  a  whole. — E..] 


parent  tautology  in  nlovros;  xofffiov,  n/.otrot;  i& 
vo)v,  which  has  been  very  much  neglected  by  exposi- 
tors. In  zoff/fo?,  he  says,  there  seems  to  be  com- 
prised the  idea  of  the  whole  extent  of  humanity  j 
and  in  n'/.avt.  ISv.  there  appears  the  more  concrete 
designation  :  "  The  reduction  of  the  chosen  people 
turned  to  an  enrichment  of  the  profane  nations." 
The  former  definition  regards  the  qualitative,  inten* 
sive,  and  teleological  relation  in  an  altogether  univer- 
sal  sense  :  Tlie  fall  of  the  historical  Israel  redounded 
to  the  advantage  of  the  world,  even  including  the 
ideal  Israel.  The  latter  definition  describes  the 
quantitative  and  extensive  character  of  the  histori- 
cal course.  Jewish  tribes,  or  Jewish  communities, 
drop  out  of  the  people,  while,  on  the  other  hand, 
whole  heathen  nations  are  gained.  But  if  their  fall 
has  thus  been  a  gain  to  the  world,  how  much  more 
their  fulness — that  is,  a  believing  Israel ! 

Ver.  13.  For  I  am  speaking  to  you  Gen- 
tiles [  i'  /t  r  V  d  i  ).iyo)  T  0  1 1;  t  d  v  e  a  t,  v .  The 
sense  is  the  same  whether  we  read  yaQ  or  (5e.  A 
colon  should  follow  this  clause  ;  the  pointing  of  the 
E.  V.  obscures  the  proper  connection. — R.]  The 
declared  prospect  of  the  full  conversion  of  Israel 
leads  him  to  the  further  explanation,  that  he  regards 
even  the  conversion  of  the  Gentiles,  though  an  ob- 
ject in  itself,  as  a  means  for  accomplishing  the  object 
of  Israel's  conversion.  [According  to  Alford,  this 
verse  answers  the  question  :  "  Why  make  it  appear 
as  if  the  treatment  of  God's  c^psen  people  were 
regulated  not  by  a  consideration  of  them,  but  of  the 
less  favored  Gentiles?" — R.] — You  Gentiles;  that 
is.  Gentile  Christians.  —  [Inasmuch  then  i  ^ ' 
o(Tov  fi i.v  ovv.  See  Textual  Note  ".  The  cor- 
responding dt  is  wanting,  as  often  in  the  Apostle's 
writings. — R.]  ''E<f  oaov,  not  quamdiu  (Origen, 
Vulgate,  Lutiier). 

I  glorify  mine  office  \^r?iv  S i-axov l av 
fi 01'  doici'Co>'\.  Not:  I  praise  my  office  (Luther, 
Grotius,  and  Reiche) ;  but :  I  strive  to  glorify  my 
office  by  its  fiiithful  discharge  (De  Wette,  Meyer, 
and  others) ;  in  which,  indeed,  he  also  says,  that  he 
esteems  his  office  as  a  glorious  one.* 

Ver.  14.  My  own  flesh  [^lov  rtjv  ad^xa. 
On  MO  I'  in  this  pecuUar  position,  see  Meyer.  D.  F. 
put  it  after  the  noun.  It  is  sufiBciently  emphatic  to 
justify  the  emendation,  my  oiv7i  fiesh. — R.]  An  ex- 
pression of  inward  participation  with  Israel  in  natu- 
ral  descent.  Theodoret :  The  word  leads  us  to  un- 
derstand the  denial  of  spiritual  participation.  '  Ver. 
28  proves  that  this  antithesis  is  not  very  remote ;  yet 
the  inward  attachment  to  his  people  here  appears  in 
the  foreground. 

Ver.  15.  For  if  the  casting  aw^ay  of -them 
[ft  yct^  ana  ^0  ?.tj  arrwj'].  'A  tto  fio  ).ij, 
throwing  away,  an  antithesis  to  7i^6ir/.?jfixi't.<; ;  see 
ver.  17.  Therefore  not  their  diminution  (Vulgate, 
Luther).  [So  Bengel,  Pliilippi,  who  find  here  also 
an  allusion  to  the  loss  in  numbers  sustained  by  the 
kingdom  of  God. — R.]  Tholuck  alludes  to  the  use 
of  language  in  the  LXX.,  and  the  Church  (aTro- 
^o).?],  expulsion). 

Be  the  reconciliation  of  the  w^orld  [xc»- 
raf.Xayij  x 6(t,h  on].  Xot  as  causality,  but  as 
condition,  without  which  the  word  of  reconciliation 
did  not  reach  the  Gentiles  without  obstruction.     [It 

*  [Meyer  thus  paraphrases  :  "  I  seek,  indeed,  inasmuch 
as  I  am  fie,  who  has  ibe  apostolic  mission  to  the  Gentiles 
(notice  the  emphatic  e  y  w  ),  to  do  honor  to  mine  office,  but 
purpose  therewith  to  excite  my  kinsmen,"  &c.  This  bring! 
out  the  force  of  fieV,  and  the  connection  of  thought.— B.] 


i66 


THE   EPISTLE   OF   PAUL   TO   THE   ROMANS. 


is  perhaps  to  express  this  shade  of  thought  that  the 
E.  V.  renders :  reconcibng  ;  but  reconciliation  is 
more  literal,  and  shows  how  important  Paul  deemed 
the  faet  in  question,  which  could  thus  be  character- 
ized.— R.J  In  this  free  use  of  language  Paul  also 
Bays  (Td'iac),  in  ver.  14,  because  he  is  the  herald  of 
(Tontjtjin. 

What  shall  the  reception  of  them  be  [  t  t  q 
ti  nti6(;/.iinH'i';].  Reception  to  salvation,  and  to 
participation  in  salvation  by  their  conversion. 

But  life  from  the  dead?  [d  fiij  Cw^  ix 
r*x4»(*)v;]  It  is  clear  that  the  Apostle  awaits  a 
boundless  effect  of  blessing  on  the  world  from  the 
future  conversion  of  the  Jews.  We  ask,  What  is 
it  ?  We  must  first  look  at  the  antithesis :  Their 
casting  away  became  the  reconciling  of  the  world ; 
that  is,  only  condilionnlly^  therefore  as  if,  and  indi- 
rectlij.  Thus,  we  continue,  the  conversion  of  the 
whole  people  of  Israel  will  also  be  conditionally,  as 
if,  and  indirectly,  a  life  from  the  dead.  With  the 
appropriated  xaTa/.).ayt'j,  there  now  begins,  first,  the 
spiritual  resurrection,  which  is  succeeded,  second, 
by  the  future  bodily  i-esurrection.  Hence  different 
explanations : 

1.  Figurative  expression  of  the  new  spiritual  life 
(Augustine,  Calvin,  and  others)  of  the  Gentile  world, 
or  of  the  world  in  general,  but  not  of  the  Jews  (as 
Cocceius,  Bengel,  and  others,  explain),  since  the 
new  life  of  the  latter  is  regarded  as  an  antecedent 
means.  But  this  new  life  is  also  regarded  in  differ- 
ent senses :  The  further  extension  of  God's  king- 
dom, and  the  new  subjective  vivification  (Philippi, 
and  others),  increase,  and  advance  of  piety  (Bucer, 
Bengel).  *'  A  new  life  in  the  higher  charismatic  ful- 
ness of  the  Spirit  shall  extend  from  God's  people  to 
the  nations  of  the  world,  compared  with  which  the 
previous  life  of  the  nations  must  be  considered 
dead  ;  "  Auberlen  (calculated  to  mislead,  and  over- 
drawn, so  far  as  the  Christian  life  of  the  previous 
world  is  meant).     Other  modifications  :  Highest  joy 

EGrotiiLS,  Ilodge  apparently],  highest  blessedness. 
Stuart:  something  great,  wonderful,  surprising,  like 
to  what  a  general  resurrection  of  the  dead  would  be. 
He  thinks  it  probable  Paul  had  in  mind  Ezekiel's 
vision  of  the  dry  bones. — R.] 

2.  The  literal  view:  Tiie  resurrection  of  the 
dead  is  meant — the  oMest  ecclesiastical  explanation 
(Origen,  Clirysnstoin,  Riickert,  Tlioluck,  Meyer,  De 
Wette,  &c.).  Tlioluck  says  that  the  meaning  of  this 
view  is,  that  the  conversion  of  Israel  is  regarded  as 
the  final  act  in  the  world's  drama ;  but  then  he 
makes  the  objection,  that  uioi;  ly.  vmQ.  nowhere 
stands  in  the  New  Testament  for  tlie  «i'«fTTrt»T«;, 
and  tluis  the  expositor  fiiuls  himself  compelled  to 
prefer  the  metaphorical  exi)Osition. 

But  it  has  not  been  sufficiently  considered  how 
very  conditional  the  first  proposition  in  the  compari- 
son is :  for  if  the  casting  away  of  them  be  the 
reconciliation  of  the  world.  As  this  is  a  fact  which 
is  realizeil  first  up  to  and  in  the  conversion  of  the 
Plermna  of  the  Gentiles,  and  then  of  the  Jews,  so 
is  the  conse(]uence  of  their  reacceptancc  a  fact 
whicii  is  continuccl  from  the  higher  spiritual  new  life 
of  the  world  to  its  consummation,  particularly  in  the 
first  resurrection.  To  the  Ajjosile,  the  ideas  of 
Bpiritual  resm-rection  and  Itodijy  resurrection  do  not 
lie  so  far  apart  (wee  chap.  viii.  11)  as  to  our  exposi- 
tors ;  therefore  rtlshaiisen  is  right  in  applying  the 
word  to  a  spiritual  re-^urrectiou,  wliich  takes  place  in 
the  bodily  resurrection.  [Alfordalso  coml)ines  the 
two  views:  "Standing  as  it  docs,  it  must  be  qmiU. 


tative,  implying  some  further  blessed  state  of  th* 
reconciled  world,  over  and  above  the  mere  recon» 
ciliation.  This  might  well  be  designated  '  life  from 
the  dead,^  and  in  it  may  be  implied  the  glories  of 
the  first  resurrection,  and  deliverance  frum  the  bond- 
age of  corruption,  without  supposing  the  words  tc 
be  =  the  resurrection  from  the  dead." — R.] 

Ver.  16.  Moreover,  if  the  first-fruit  be 
holy,  so  also  is  the  lump  [fi<()e  tj  anaQyij 
ayia,  xcci  to  qtviJafta.  Lange :  das  Ei^sl- 
lingshrod,  tlie  bread  of  the  first-fruits — i.  e.,  the 
portion  of  the  dough  taken  as  a  heave-offering. — R.]. 
After  the  Apostle  has  disclosed  his  prospect  of  the 
glorious  results  of  Israel's  conversion,  he  returns  to 
the  grounds  for  the  hope  of  this  conversion  itself. 
He  uses  two  similes.  The  first  is  taken  from  the 
significance  of  the  bread  of  the  first-fruit  (Num.  xv. 
19-21).  '^47ta()-/rj  can,  indeed,  denote  the  first-fruit, 
as  well  as  the  bread  of  the  first-fruit ;  but  it  receives 
this  meaning  from  the  corresponding  idea  of  the 
harvest;  \|hile,  on  the  other  hand,  the  baking  of 
the  first-fruit  must  correspond  to  the  gr^az/a,  the 
kneaded  dough.  Therefore  the  expression  here  can 
neither  mean  first-fruit  (Estius,  Olshausen,  and  oth- 
ers), nor  the  grain  for  the  bread  of  the  first-fruit 
(Grotius).  But  tlie  ana^ytj  in  general  denotes  the 
representative  offering  by  which  the  whole  mass,  to 
which  anaqytj  belongs,  is  consecrated  to  God. 
Thus  is  the  consecration  of  the  first-born  to  the 
priesthood  (with  which  Levi  was  charged),  the  con- 
secration of  the  people ;  the  consecration  of  the 
first-fruit  is  tlie  consecration  of  the  harvest ;  and 
the  consecration  of  the  bread  of  the  first-fruit  is  the 
consecration  of  the  whole  lump,  which  was  after- 
wards prepared.  [So  Stuart,  Hodge,  Alford,  De 
Wette,  Tholuck,  Meyer.  ^u4na(j/TJ  is  necessarily 
defined  by  its  correlative  term  <fi<Qan  a,  the  mass 
of  dough  for  baking. — R.] 

And  if  the  root  be  holy,  so  are  the 
branches  also  [xal  i  i  t;  pita  ayia,  xni 
oi  xXditoi].  This  second  sinule  is  clear  in  itself: 
The  branches  correspond  to  the  root  (anomalous  ex- 
ceptions to  this  agreement,  whicli  may  be  found  iu 
nature,  do  not  here  come  into  consideration).  The 
general  fundamental  thought  of  both  figures  is,  un- 
doubtedly, as  Reicho  holds,  that  the  whole  people  is 
designated  as  good  by  its  first-fruits  as  well  as  by 
its  root.     Interpretation  of  the  particular  parts  : 

1.  Both  figures  mean  the  same  thing.  The 
ana()yt]  are  the  patriarchs  (Abraham,  &c.) ;  to 
ipvQaiun,  is  the  whole  body  of  the  people.  The 
same  relation  applies  to  root  and  branches  (the 
Greek  fathers,  Erasmus,  Calvin,  Tholuck,  Meyer 
[Stuart,  Ilodge,  Alford],  &c.). 

2.  The  figures  are  different.  The  second  figure 
undoubtedly  applies  to  the  patriarchs  and  their  jjos- 
terity  ;  but  the  first,  by  a7Tn(>xti,  describes  the  be- 
lieving Jews,  and,  by  qron/m,  the  rest  (Toletus, 
Cramer,  and  others.  [So  Wordsworth,  who  under- 
stanils,  by  ({{(laim,  the  whole  mass  of  the  world 
which  is  to  be  converted. — R.]  Also,  in  reference 
to  the  first  figure,  Ambrosius,  and  others).  Modi- 
fications :  According  to  Oiigen  and  Tlioo<lorot. 
a7Ta(i//j  means  Chri.st  himself,  and  (f  v  (>  a  fi (t , 
Christians.  Meyer  has  two  objections  to  the  iliffer- 
ent  rendering  of  the  figures.  First,  it  is  contrary  to 
the  parallelism  of  the  two  j)as.sages.  But  apart  from 
the  fact  that  Paul's  prose  is  not  subject  to  the  rides 
of  the  ])oefical  parallelism  of  the  Old  Testament, 
this  reasoning  betrays  a  defective  idea  of  tlic  Old 
TesiaiiK'iit   ])arrtlleli3m  itself.      Ilis  second   rcasou, 


CHAPTER  XI.   1-36. 


367 


that  the  Apostle  elaborates  the  second  figure  only, 
is  of  just  as  little  force  ;  for,  with  the  further  re- 
sumption of  the  second  figure,  there  is  presented  a 
perfectly  new  thought.  The  most  untenable  expla- 
nation is,  that  ^i'Ca  means  the  original  Christian 
Church,  and  xkddoi,  are  the  individual  believing 
Jews. 

We  hold  that  the  antithesis  is  very  decided. 
From  what  follows,  it  is  clear  that  the  ideal  theocra- 
cy, though  represented  by  the  patriarchs,  yet  not 
identical  with  them  (see  Isa.  xi.  1,  10 ;  Rev.  v.  5  ; 
x.\ii.  16),  must  be  regarded  as  the  root  of  Israel. 
In  fact,  from  the  foregoing  citations,  the  same  Christ 
is  certainly  the  root  of  the  old  theocracy,  as  He  is 
the  ci^///  in  the  ana^xtj  of  the  new  Jewish  believ- 
ing Church,  and  the  carina  effici.ens  of  the  sanctifica- 
tion  of  both.  But  according  to  the  antithesis  here 
presented,  \)ita,  is  the  patriarchal  foundation  of  the 
theocracy  as  the  natural  disposition  consecrated  to 
God ;  while  the  anaiJ/i],  on  the  contrary,  is  the  first 
Jewish  body  of  believers  prepared  by  God  as  the 
bread  of  the  first-fruit  for  the  first  harvest  festival 
of  the  time  of  fulfilment,  the  Christian  Pentecost. 
The  present  passage  is  related  to  Rom  ix.  5,  the 
fathers  being  regarded  as  the  root,  and  Christ  as  the 
miraculous  fruit  of  the  branches. 

[It  is  evident,  from  Dr.  Lange's  note,  how  diffi- 
cult it  is  to  support  the  twofold  sense  of  the  verse. 
As  Tholuck  remarks,  the  ayi-oTtji;  is  the  point  of 
comparison.  Holy  here  means  not  only  as  conse- 
crated to  God,  but  as  actually  pure.  If  a  distinction 
must  be  made  between  tlie  two  figures,  it  seems 
natural  to  find  these  two  ideas  of  holiness  given 
prominence  in  each  respectively.  Those  certainly 
miss  the  point  of  both  figures,  and  the  argument  of 
the  Apostle  as  well,  who  do  not  find  here,  in  "  lump  " 
and  "  branckes,"  a  reference  to  Israel,  considered  as 
the  people  of  God.  Alford  :  "  As  Abraham  himself 
had  an  outer  and  an  inner  life,  so  have  the  branch- 
es. They  have  an  outer  life,  derived  from  Abraham 
by  physical  descent.  Of  this  no  cutting  off  can  de- 
prive them.  But  they  have,  while  they  remain  in 
the  tree,  an  inner  life,  nourished  by  the  circulating 
saD,  by  virtue  of  which  they  are  constituted  living 
parts  of  the  tree.  It  is  of  this  life  that  their  sever- 
ance from  the  tree  deprives  them  ;  it  is  this  life 
which  they  will  reacquire  if  grafted  in  again."  This 
obviates  some  difficulties,  and  is,  on  the  whole,  the 
simplest  explanation. — R.] 

Vers.  1*7-24.  JTie  conditionality  of  the  new  an- 
tithesis of  believing  Gentiles  and  unbelieving  Jeics. 
The  figure  of  the  wild  and  the  good  olive  tree. 
Warning  for  the  Gentiles,  and  hope  for  the  Jews. 

Ver.  17.  But  if  some  of  the  branches  were 
broken  off  [ft  Si.  rovft:  r mv  y.kaHtnv  itf- 
iikdad  rjaav.  The  E.  V.  is  too  conditional  in  its 
form. — R.]  Although  there  were  many  of  them, 
they  were  nevertheless  a  small  minority,  compared 
with  the  incorruptible  tree  of  God's  kingdom.  With 
this  fact,  the  heathen  should  also  prize  the  value  of 
the  theocratic  institution  itself. 

And  thou  being  a  ■wild  olive  tree  [av  Sk 
ayQ tekai-oq  wv].  As  the  expression  dyQuik- 
atot;  wr  can  mean,  as  a  substantive,  the  wild 
olive  tree  itself,  but,  as  an  adjective,  the  belonging 
to  the  wild  olive  tree,  we  prefer,  with  Fritzsche  and 
Meyer,  this  latter  view  to  the  former,  which  is  de- 
fended by  Luther,  Philippi,  and  Tholuck,  witli  this 
explanation  :  The  address,  "  thou  being  a  wild  olive 
tree,"  views  the  individual  Gentiles  as  a  collective 


person.*  Meyer  objects  to  this,  by  saying,  that 
"  not  whole  trees,  and  also  not  quite  young  ones 
(against  De  Wette),  are  grafted  in."  Against  thu 
we  may  remark  :  1.  That  the  wild  olive  tree  of  the 
Gentile  world  is  destined  to  be  transferred,  in  all 
its  branches,  to  the  good  olive  tree ;  2.  This  has 
already  taken  place  incipiently  by  Paul's  mission  to 
the  Gentiles.  Meanwhile,  the  Apostle  was  as  far 
from  supposing  a  total  apostasy  of  the  Gentile 
Church,  as  from  admitting  the  possibility  of  a  total 
apostasy  of  the  Jews.  Likewise,  he  speaks  of  a 
being  grafted  in  having  already  occurred,  with  refer- 
ence to  the  probable  boasting  of  Gentile  Christians 
over  Jewish  Christians.  Besides,  the  Apostle  con- 
siders the  wild  olive  tree  to  be  converted  in  all  its 
branches  just  as  little  as  in  the  case  of  the  good  olive 
tree.  Likewise,  ver.  24  must  be  kept  in  mind,  where 
the  same  subject  is  not  the  wild  olive  tree  itself,  but 
only  one  branch  of  it.  On  the  wild  olive  tree,  or 
oleaster,  comp.  Natural  History  of  the  Bible,  and 
the  Dictionaries.  Pareus :  oleaster  habet  quidem 
formam  olece,  sed  caret,  succo  generoso  et  fructibus. 

On  the  Oriental  custom  of  strengthening  olive 
trees  that  had  become  weak  by  grafting  them  with 
the  wild  olive,  comp.  the  citations  in  Tholuck,  p. 
61*7 ;  in  Meyer,  p.  343.  Now,  if  this  custom  were 
frequent,  and  occurred  in  various  ways,  there  would 
be  apparently  an  incongruity  in  the  figure,  in  so  fat 
as  the  cuttings  of  the  wild  olive  are  designed  to 
strengthen  the  olive  tree ;  but  the  question  here  is 
a  communiciition  of  the  sap  of  the  good  olive  tree 
to  the  branch  of  the  wild  olive.  Therefore  Tholuck 
remarks  :  "  Paul  was  either  not  acquainted  with  the 
arboricultural  relation  of  the  matter,  or — which  is 
more  probable,  when  we  look  at  the  triviality  of  this 
notice — he  designed  to  say,  that  has  here  taken  place 
by  grace,  which  otherwise  is  contrary  to  nature."  f 
But,  in  our  opinion,  this  does  not  settle  the  ques- 
tion. First,  the  tertivm  comparaliovis  does  not  lie 
in  the  breaking  off  and  grafting  in  of  the  brandies. 
In  relation  to  this  point,  the  figure  is  of  perfect  ap- 
plication. Secondly,  though  the  branches  of  the  wild 
olive  tree  communicate  to  the  good  olive  tree  a  new 
and  fresher  life,  and  a  vegetative  vital  nourishment 
(such  as,  for  example,  the  Germans,  at  the  time  of 
the  Reformation,  gave  to  the  Christian  Church),  this 
does  not  preclude  the  necessity  of  their  receiving 
from  the  root  and  stem  of  the  olive  tree  the  good 
sap  and  productive  power  which  produce  the  olive 
fruit. 

Wert  grafted  in  among  them  [ivexfv- 
rQiffd-tjq  iv  ai'ToTi,'].  The  tv  avroTi;  is  differ- 
ently rendered.  The  most  simple  rendering  is : 
among  them.  [So  Meyer,  Alford,  and  most.  Stu- 
art, De  Wette,  Olshausen :  in  place  of  them.     The 

*  [There  is  a  lexical  objection  to  taking  ay  p.  u  i>  as  an 
adiective,  since,  when  tims  used,  it  means  :  made  out  of 
the  wood  of  the  olive  (Alford).  The  reason  for  adopting 
this  view  is  to  escape  from  the  thought  that  the  whole  Gen- 
tile woild,  as  such,  w.ns  grafted  in.  This  is  done  quite  as 
properly  hy  supposing  the  whole  tree  here  put  for  a  hranch 
of  it.  The  tree,  moreover,  is  introduced  to  reropnize  tbo 
fact  of  a  distinctively  Gentile  life  existing  as  a  whole.— E.] 

t  [This  last  view  is  that  of  the  majority  of  the  best  com- 
mentators, and  is  so  natural  and  obvious,  that  notmng  is 
gained  by  departing  from  it.  Meyer  intimates  that  tht 
Apostle's  illustration  must  be  taken  in  accordance  with  the 
fad — i.  e.,  the  fact  respecting  the  coining  in  of  the  Gentiles 
— which  was  undoubtedly  the  grafting  of  wild  branches  on 
a  good  tree,  to  partake  of  the  life  and  bear  the  fruit  of  that 
good  tree.  Furthrrniore,  as  a  fact,- there  was  no  new  and 
fresher  life  imparted  bi/  ihr  Genliles  at  that  time,  as  Dr. 
Lange  intimates.  The  Roman  and  Greek  civilization,  con- 
tinually decaying,  was  only  preserved  so  long  by  tho  noT» 
religious  life  from  the  patriarchal  root. — E.j 


368 


THE   EPISTLE    OF   PAUL   TO   THE   ROMANS. 


former  is  preferable  on  account  of  triyxoivwros. — 
K] 

And  made  fellow-partaker  of  the  root  and 
fatness  [xitt  a  r  yiui.ro)  riii;  r/ys'  (J'>-"';s'  ><«' 
rtji;  THoTrjTOi;.  See  Textual  JVotc  ^^. — K.]  Not 
If  di,a  ()iolv  (Grotius,  and  others).  Tlie  communi- 
cation with  the  root  secures  pariicipation  in  llie 
good  sap. 

Ver.  IS.  Boast  not  against  the  branches 
[/<jy  xataxaii/t7)  rmv  x/cic)wv].  The  Jews 
ill  general  were  the  branches  of  the  olive  tree ;  thus 
Jewish  Christians  are  as  much  meant  as  the  unbe- 
lieving Jews ;  not  the  latter  alone  (according  to 
Chrysostom  [Alford,  Stuart,  De  Wette],  and  olliers), 
but  rather  the  Conner  principally,  as  is  indicated  by 
Jlie  iv  ai'Toii;.  [Meyer :  the  Jews  in  general.  He 
rightly  adds,  that  not  all  Jews,  who  were  not  con- 
verts as  yet,  were  to  be  regarded  as  broken  oti'; 
only  tiiose  who  had  rejicted  Christ. — R.] 

But  if  thou  boast  [tl  de  xaraxai/d- 
a  a  I,.  Th.3  verb,  occurring  twice  in  this  verse,  is 
nnusual. — R.]  Meyer  :  Triumphcst  af/ainst  them. 
According  to  the  assumed  figure  of  the  wild  olive 
tree,  they  could  be  tempted  to  boast  that  the  mem- 
bers of  the  Jewish  believing  Church  had  received 
new  life  through  heathenism,  just  as  the  boast  has 
been  made  that  Germanism,  and  especially  Lutheran- 
ism,  ha.s  reformed  Christianity  itself;  while  Chris- 
tianity, operating  from  its  very  foundation,  has  re- 
formed, and  still  reforms,  its  phenomenal  forms. 
[.^fittutis  mutandis,  of  special  application  every- 
where.— R.] 

Thou  bearest  not  the  root  [or  av  xtjv 
^i^av  fiucTTd'^ifiq  .  Su])ply :  know  that,  or,  let 
thi/>  humbU  thee,  that.  See  Winer,  p.  575. — R.] 
Thou,  as  a  grafted  branch,  standest  in  no  more 
favorable  relation  to  the  root  than  those  which  are 
broken  off  and  remain  standing.  Thou  remainest 
thoroughly  conditioned  by  an  inward  fellowship  with 
the  root,  which  must  be  confirmed  in  the  humble 
knowledge  of  tliis  dependence,  and  in  inward  union 
with  the  natural  branches.  The  brief  explanation 
is  strengthened  by  the  fact  that  it  forms  an  imme- 
diate conclusion.  Tholuck  remarks :  Such  a  pre- 
sumption toward  the  branches  could  not  be  without 
pre.-iumption  toward  the  root. 

Ver.  1  'J.  Thou  wilt  say  then,  The  branch- 
es were  broken  off,  &c.  [t(<fri,-  otv  '/'-|f- 
x}.n(T 0- tjtrctv  [oi]  x/.o()ot,  x.t.L  See  7'ext- 
u  il  Note  ".]  The  genuineness  of  the  article  o  I 
is  rendered  very  prol)able  by  the  intention  of  the 
Gentile  speaking.  After  this  religious  warning,  he 
will  appeal  to  a  religious  decree,  to  a  fait  accompli 
of  predestination.  He  accordingly  abuses  the  truth 
which  the  Apostle  himself  has  taught,  by  saying, 
negatively :  the  fate  of  the  branches  is  irrevocal)ly 
settled — there  is  no  more  salvation  for  the  Jewish 
people ;  but  he  also  abuses  it,  positively,  by  believ- 
ing that  he  himself  stands  firm  through  the  privi- 
legij  which  he  presumes  he  has  acquired.  Ilere, 
then,  WL'  clearly  see  how  the  Apostle  dismisses  such 
a  predestinarian  presumption. 

Ver.  20.  Well  [xre/irii,].  Ironical,  as  if  he 
would  say :  a  fine  application  of  the  doctrine  of 
Divine  i)redestination,  by  overleaping  the  ethical 
elements  brought  into  the  account  by  it  1  [With 
Stuart,  Uoilge,  Meyer,  Alford,  and  others,  it  must 
be  held  tliat  tiie  A|)ostle  here  admits  the  purpose  in 
the  breaking  off,  as  stated  in  ver.  19  ;  but  he  admits 
it  only  to  protest  against  the  wrong  use  made  of  it. 
-R.] 


Because  of  unbelief  they  were  broken  ofl 

[ttj  dnifTria  iit/./.nfrOtjaav.  On  the  da 
tive,  see  Tholuck  and  Alford  iti  loco.  The  latter 
suggests  their  uiibchef,  thji  fath  (so  Amer.  Bible 
Union),  but  it  seems  better  to  t;ike  the  nouns  as  ab. 
stract. — R.]  The  earnest  declaration.  That  is,  bo- 
cause  of  unbelief,  expressed  in  strengthened  form 
by  the  dative.  That,  tlieretore,  is  the  decisive  cause 
of  their  hurt,  the  real  hindrance  to  their  salvation. 

[And  thou  standest  by  faith,  a'v  it  ti- 
n'tart).  e'ffr //xcti,-.]  And  thus  thou  also  staudes* 
and  endurest  on\y  by*  faith.  The  standing  means 
here  the  being  grafted  in,  and  not,  standing  in  the 
absolute  sense,  as  Meyer  correctly  observes,  a<;ainst 
Tholuck,  and  others.  For  the  oppo^ite  of  it  is  not 
falling,  but  the  being  cut  off.  Es.sentlally,  the  idea 
certainly  coincides  with  slutuUny  and  falling, 

[Be  not  high-minded,  /<  ij  vii>  tj'/.oii^ovit 
See  Textual  X<Ae  ". — R.]  Be  not  therefore  proud 
of  an  imaginary  privilege,  but  fear  [«/./«  tfo- 
/i'or]  ;  that  is,  be  all  the  more  afraid  of  falling,  be- 
cause thou  art  inclined  to  boast.  Beugel :  timor 
opponitur  non  fiduciie,  sed  snperc>li<>  et  sicnritati. 

Ver.  21.  For  if  God  spared  not  the  natu- 
ral branches  [fi  ya^  6  &  f  6  q  r  oi  v  xarti 
(fiiatv  x/.di)iiiv  ovx  «(/'fi(7aTo].  Nature  here 
evidently  denotes  the  elevated,  consecrated,  and  en- 
nobled nature  of  the  Abrahamic  race. — Lest  he 
also  spare  not  thee  [ /<  r] tt m t;  o r <) e  (Tor  qti- 
(TfTat.  See  Textual  Xote  '^  Su|)ply  J'<ar,  or, 
it  is  to  be  feared.  See  Winer,  pp.  442,  470,  556. 
On  the  future,  Buttmann,  N.  T.  Gram.,  p.  303. — 
R.]  Thou  at  least  hast  no  claim  to  this  genealo^- 
cal  nobility  of  Israel.  Meyer :  "  The  future  is  more 
definite  and  certain  than  the  conjunctive." 

Ver.  22.  Behold  therefore  the  goodness 
and  severity  of  God  [i'di  orv  /!>  t;rr tot  t; ret 
xai  drtoroiiiav  (->'for].  The  usual  predesti- 
narian system  would  say  :  The  grace  and  justice  of 
God.  Paul  says  something  quite  dillerent.  The 
period  [Vj.  V.,  colon]  gives  grammatical  support  to 
the  reading  unoroina,  &c.,  accepted  by  Lachmann. 

On  those.  'Eni  /liv  tots'.  The  goodness, 
as  well  as  the  severity  or  sharpness  of  God  in  con- 
tinual movement,  corresponds  to  human  conduct. — 
[Severity,  (£,toto/(  «'a.  See  Teu-lual  J^'ote  ". 
-R.] 

[But  toward  thee,  God's  goodness,  e  tt  i 
dk  at  yotiOTOTtjii  &foT'.  See  I'exlnal  Note^, 
The  nominatives  give  an  elliptical  construction : 
tliere  is  severitji,  tht  re  is  the  r/oodiiess  of  God. — R.] 
—  If   thou   continue    in   his    goodness    [idv 

f  ;T  (•  /I  f  t  J'  TJ  ?     T  fj    X  l^)  >l  (TT  (IT  rjT  I..         Hint    gnodu  ess. 

Alford :  //"  thou  abide  b;i. — R.]  On  the  living 
ground  of  God's  free  grace  ami  meix-y.  Meyer : 
Wilt  have  continued.  Should  the  goodness  have 
first  begun  tlien  ? — Otherwise  thou  also  shalt 
be  [iTifi  xai  ail  ixxontjai].  Comp.  ver.  6. 
The  E.  V.  conveys  the  correct  meaning  of  inti. 
— R.]  Meyer  very  ajipropriately  calls  attention  to 
the  stronger  expression  :    ixxon  t]rsi]. 

Ver.  23.  [And  tliey  moreovier,  xaxtlvo* 
Si.     This  is   the   reading  adopted   by  Griesbacb, 


•  [Both  dntlvrs  are  rendered  :  dutch,  by  T)r.  Lanfre. 
The  K.  v.,  however,  varies  from  becaure  of  to  hy.  Alford 
\\i\K  the  followingdiscrimlnating  note  :  "  'Tlirouph '  indioatoi 
hotter  the  pinniplmg  cmire  of  a  definite  act — '6y'  tliu  »«»• 
taininn  ermrtilinn  of  a  eanthnied  sliilf.  Tlnis  we  Hhould 
iilwiiys  wiy  tlint  we  are  juHiified  llimugh,  not  ii/,  fiiith  ;  but 
thill  we  .sUmd  by,  luit  ihrongU,  f.iith."  Ileiiee  the  projirietj 
of  the  rendering  of  thU  vemc  in  the  £.  V.— K.  1 


CHAPTER  XI.    1-36. 


son 


Scholz,  Lacbruann,  Tischendorf,  and  critical  editors 
g;encriilly,  on  t!ie  authority  of  j^.  A.  B.  C.  D.  F. 
Tlie  rendering  is  that  of  Alford,  who  is  unusually 
Lappy  in  expressing  the  exact  force  of  dt. — K.] 
—For  God  is  able  to  graft  them  in  again 
[()i'ii«t6<;  yd^  ecTTH',  x.t./..].  He  will  not 
apply  His  power  to  compel  unbelievers  to  believe ; 
but  if  iliey  only  do  not  continue  in  unbelief,  He  will 
graft  them  in  again.  He  is  not  wanting  in  power, 
and  certainly  He  will  not  be  wanting  in  the  applica- 
tion of  it.  The  becoming  strong  for  faith,  and  in 
faith,  as  well  as  the  being  planted  in  again,  is  exer- 
cised by  the  power  of  Divine  gi-ace.* 

Yer.  24.  For  if  thou  ■wert  cut  out.  The 
y«(>  serves  to  establish  the  dirarbq  j'«^  (Meyer). 
Likewise  the  stronger  expression  here  :  iSi/.onr]^. 
— Of  the  olive  tree  -which  is  wild  by  nature. 
This  is  the  idea  of  the  oleaster,  or  wild  olive. — 
And  wert  grafted  contrary  to  nature  [xal 
7Ta(ja  (pv(Ti,v  ivfy.fvr^itT&rji;^.  We  doubt  the 
propriety  of  translating  Tia^a  qvai.v  exactly  by 
against  nature  {contra  naturam  ;  Vulgate).  Corap. 
chap.  i.  26,  p.  87.  There  exists  no  absolute  opposi- 
tion between  the  oleaster  and  the  good  olive  tree  ; 
othervdse  the  grafting  in  would  have  no  result. 
The  application  is  clear.f 

How  much  more.  Nevertheless,  a  greater 
natural  relation  exists  between  the  branches  which 
are  cut  out  of  the  good  olive  tree,  and  this  olive 
tree  as  peculiar  to  them  ;  so  that  they,  after  all,  can 
be  grafted  more  easily  into  thorn  than  the  branches 
of  the  wild  olive  are  grafted  into  it.  The  difficulty 
which  arises  from  the  consideration  that  the  (Jew- 
ish) ohdnratio  is  more  difficult  to  be  overcome  than 
the  (Gentile)  iffnorantia,  is  removed  by  Tholuck, 
when  he  says  that  he  regards  the  yd^  of  the  pres- 
ent verse  as  co(irdinate  with  the  (hvaroq  yd^,  so 
that  it  would  relate  to  the  iy/.fvT(Ji,<TO /'jaovTai.  (ver, 
23).  But  this  changes  the  matter  very  little  ;  the 
Apostle's  supposition  is,  that  the  economy  of  God's 
government  will  accomplish  the  dissolution  of  the 
Jewish  ohduratio. 

[Alford  clearly  defines  the  meaning :  In  the  case 
of  the  Gentile,  the  Apostle  sets  the  fact  of  natural 
growth  over  against  that  of  engrafted  growth  ;  here, 
the  fact  of  congrulty  of  nature  (t^  ifiicc  tXaia) 
is  set  against  inco7i^7ruiti/,  as  making  the  reingralt- 
ing  more  probable.  Hodge  :  "  The  simple  meaning 
of  this  verse  is,  that  the  future  restoration  of  the 
Jews  is,  in  itself,  a  more  probable  event  than  the  in- 
troduction of  the  Gentiles  into  the  Church  of  God." 
-R.] 

Vers.  25-36.  The  iast  word,  or  the  mystery  of 
the  Divine  governmevt. 

Ver.  25.  For  I  would  not,  brethren.  The 
yoiQ  confirms  the  previous  noam  /nd/J.ov;  accord- 
ing to  Tholuck,  the  address,  "  brethren,"  is  directed 
this  time  to  the  Gentile  Christians.     But  why  not  to 


*  [As  Stuart  well  remarks,  this  verse  speaks  of  what 
can  be  done  ;  the  next,  of  what  will  be  done.  It  is  greatly 
to  be  doubted  whether  the  verse  has  any  bearing  on  tlie 
questions  of  persevrrancr,  cnnvrrsio  resistibilis,  &c.,  which 
Meyer,  and  others,  find  involved  here. — R.] 

I  I  There  seems  no  good  ground  for  departing  from  the 
common  rendering.  Dr.  Lange's  idea  about  rtal  fresh  life 
In  the  brnuchei  is  not  admissible.  For,  although  fresh 
physical  and  intellectual  life  lias  again  ai  d  again  come 
into  ths  Church  from  new  races,  it  has  always  been,  for  a 
time,  at  tL?  exjicnse  of  spiritual  vigor.  Kot  until  tue  new 
spiritual  life,  contrary  to  nature,  had  been  felt,  was  there 
any  gain  bj-  sueh  grafting.— B..] 


24 


all?     01  .  .  .   ayvofiv,   Rom.  i.  13  [p.  TO],  &c. 
An  announcement  of  an  important  communication. 

Of  this  mystery.  7'6  fi  vattj^iov  toTto. 
[See  Tholuck  and  Alford  in  loco  on  the  word  my»- 
tery. — R.]  On  the  basis  of  the  general  mystery  of 
the  Christian  tlaffitia,  1  Tim.  iii.  16,  revealed  to 
Christians  by  their  becoming  believers,  there  are  di». 
played  the  individual  mysteries  which  concern  the 
development  of  Christian  life  in  the  world,  particu. 
larly  the  universal  d(;velopment  of  Christianity.  In 
regard  to  these,  the  Apostles  are  illuminated  in  ad- 
vance by  revelation,  in  order  to  connnunicate  them 
to  the  Church.  Thus  Paul  communicates,  in  many 
ways,  to  believers,  the  mystery  that  the  Gentiles 
shall  be  joint-heirs  of  life,  without  legal  conditions, 
Eph.  iii.  6  ;  also  the  mystery  that,  in  the  last  times, 
the  transformation  of  persons  still  living  will  take 
place,  1  Cor.  xv,  51  ;  and  so  here  he  communicates 
the  mystery  of  the  Divine  economy  in  relation  to 
the  results  of  the  conversion  of  Jews  and  Gentiles, 
and  especially  of  the  final,  universal  conversion  of 
Israel. 

Lest  ye  should  be  wise  in  your  ow^n  con- 
ceits [tr«  /( //  tjTf  iv  ecii'roT<;  g(jdrt/(Ot. 
See  textual  Note  "\ — R.]  Meyer:  According  to 
your  own  judgment.  The  Apostle  foresees  that,  in 
the  Gentile  Christian  Church,  there  will  arise  respect 
ing  Israel's  future  contemptuous  decisions  of  the  un- 
illuminated  and  self-sufficient  judgment.  [Calvin, 
Beza,  Stuart,  refer  it  to  pride  in  their  own  position ; 
but  Meyer,  De  Wette,  Hodge,  and  most,  agree,  with 
Dr.  Lange,  in  applying  it  to  a  wrong  view  of  the 
exclusion  of  the  Jews. — R.] 

That  hardening  in  part  is  happened  to 
Israel  [ort  Troi^oJirn;  d  n  6  /te'^oct;  tw 
7cr^a/)A  yiyovfv.  On  tko (j w a i, i; ,  see  ver.  7. 
— R.]  L-Ztto  ficQovq;  according  to  Calvin,  quali- 
tative,  quodatnmodo,  and  not  total  hardening  ;  yet  it 
evidently  refers  to  the  unbelieving  portion  of  Israel. 
[De  Wette,  Meyer,  Hodge,  join  it  with  ytyovtv, 
not  with  TT (I) ()  0)  an;  or  r  iTi  'J  a (>  « tj ).  (Estius, 
Fritzsche) :  Hardening  has  happened  in  part.  Most 
commentators  now  adopt  the  extennve,  rather  than 
the  intensive  signification. — R,]  This  hardening  of 
a  part  has  befallen  all  Israel 

Until  the  fulness  of  the  Gentiles  [a-/()i,<; 
0(1  TO  nli'jQiOfta  Twr  t&vi~)v\  For  then  the 
hardening  shall  cease.  Meyer :  "  Calvin's  ita  tit  is 
alleged,  in  spite  of  the  language,  to  remove  the 
thought  of  a  final  object ;  on  which  account  Calo- 
vius,  and  most,  elaborate  here  a  good  deal,  in  order 
to  bring  out  the  sense  that  partial  blindness,  and 
therefore  partial  conversion,  will  last  until  the  end 
of  the  world."  [With  Tholuck,  Hodge,  Alford,  and 
others,  we  must  insist  that  a  terminus  ad  qucin  is 
here  affirmed. — R.] 

The  fulness  of  the  Gentiles.  Interpretations : 
1.  The  completion  of  the  Israelitish  people  of  God 
by  believing  Gentiles  (Michaelis,  01shau.«en,  and 
others) ;  2.  The  great  majority  of  the  Gentiles 
(Fritzsche)  [Stuart,  Hodge :  the  multitude  of  the 
Gentiles. — R.]  ;  3.  Meyer,  strikingly  :  "  The  filling- 
up  of  the  Gentiles — that  is,  that  by  which  the  body 
of  the  Gentiles  (only  a  part  of  whom  have  as  yet 
been  converted)  is  full — the  fulness  of  the  Gentiles." 
[So  De  Wette.  This  makes  it  =  n'/.rjQtoan:. — R.] 
As  the  Apostle  could  not  have  meant  an  indefinite 
mass  of  Gentiles,  nor  yet  all  the  Gentiles  down  to 
the  last  man,  he  evidently  had  in  view  an  organically 
dynamic  totality  of  the  heathen  world,  in  which  ho 
unquestionably  bethought  himself  of  the  conversiji. 


R70 


THE   EPISTLE   OF   PAUL   TO   THE   ROMANS. 


of  the  Gentile  world.  [Alford  :  The  totality  of  the 
Geiitile^i,  as  naiiuiis,  not  as  individuals.  Tiiia  is  sub- 
stantially the  view  of  Lange,  and  differs  but  little 
from  that  of  Meyer.  "  Tlie  idea  of  an  eleet  num. 
ber,  however  true  in  itself,  does  not  seem  to  belong 
to  tiiis  pa.«sage."  Wordsworth  is  not  likely  to  favor 
a  predestinarian  view,  and  yet  he  finds  in  7i).tn>Mtioi 
the  notion  of  the  complement  of  a  ship's  crew — i.  e., 
of  the  Church,  the  Ark  of  Salvation  1 — R.] 

Come  in  \^fi(s i).& i\.  Shall  have  come  in 
(Noyes)  ].  In  the  absolute  sense ;  therefore,  into 
the  kin-dom  of  God  (Matt.  vii.  13,  &c.).  Meyer 
Bays,  oddly  enough  :  "  The  kingdom  of  the  Messiah, 
the  establishment  of  which  is  later,  is  not  yet  in 
question."  [Meyer  refers  to  the  personal  reiyn  of 
the  Messiah,  beginning  with  the  Second  Advent. 
This  period,  on  which  he  lays  great  stress  in  his 
commentary,  will  come  in,  he  thinks,  after  the  event 
here  predicted. — R.] 

Ver.  "20.  And  so.  Oi'tox;,  in  this  order  and 
Bucccssion,  and  in  this  mode  of  accomplishment ; 
after  the  conversion  of  the  Gentiles,  and  by  means 
of  it. 

All  Israel  [nciq  'J a Qarj}.'].  This  is  not 
spoken  of  all  Israel  in  isolated  examples,  nor  of  the 
"  totality"  without  exception.  The  former  supposi- 
tion, for  example,  that  oidy  the  elect  part,  the  true 
htiiiiu,  is  meant  (Bengcl,  Olshausen,  and  others), 
or  only  the  greater  number  and  mass  (Riickcrt  and 
Fritzschc),  does  not  arrive  at  the  idea  of  the  nation, 
which  here,  in  its  totality,  as  all  Israel,  comes  just 
in  antithesis  to  the  mere  hi/i/ia.  The  latter  sup- 
position (Gennailius,  Jlcyer,  and  others)  transcends 
the  idea  of  the  Pltruma,  which  will  sulfiee  hCre  in 
the  ca.se  of  the  Jews  as  in  that  of  the  Gentiles. 

This  simple  apostolic  prophecy,  pronounced  di- 
rectly in  the  future,  has  been  much  criticized,  and 
mucii  fanaticism  has  played  about  it. 

Definitions  narrowing  the  meaning :  (1.)  The 
spiritual  Israel  of  the  elect,  from  Jews  and  Gentilt;s 
(Augustine,  Thoodoret,  Calvin,  Bengal,  Olshausen 
[Wordsworth],  &e.) ;  (2.)  An  election  from  Israel 
will  be  saved  in  the  millennial  kingdom  (Baldwin, 
Bengel).  "  The  one  hundred  and  forty-four  thou- 
sand of  Rev.  vii.  4,  in  which  the  number  is  literally 
interpreted  as  the  principal  citizens  of  the  city  of 
Jerusalem;"  (3.)  Israel  uiU  be  abk  to  be  saved 
(Episcopius,  Semler,  and  others);  (4.)  The  proph- 
ecy has  already  lieen  fuHillcd  by  the  myriads  of 
Jews,  of  whom  Eusebius  speaks,  chap.  iii.  35  (Wet- 
Stein,  and  others);  (5.)  Luther,  as  Jerome  before 
him,  has  fallen  into  gbiring  contradictions  in  rela- 
tion to  this  question  (see  Tholuck,  pp.  629,  630, 
and  the  quotation  in  Meyer,  note,  on  j).  439) ;  and 
on  this  point  Melanchthon  has  proved,  ))y  his  vacil- 
lations, his  fear  of  Luther's  decisive  dechirations  on 
the  hopelessness  of  the  Jews  (Tholuck,  p.  030).  On 
the  fui'ther  shape  which  Lutheran  exegesis  has  taken 
on  this  point,  see  the  same.  With  Spener  there 
came  a  change. 

In  opposition  to  all  these,  there  are  definitions 
exafffierntinff  the  nx-aning :  (1.)  The  nrit;  must  be 
po  much  emphasized,  as  to  lead  us  to  suppose  that 
Israel,  dying  in  unbelief,  will  be  raised  from  the  dead 
for  the  realization  of  this  hope  (Pcter.sen,  Mi/stiitchc 
Posaunr ;  see  Tholuck,  p.  628).  (2.)  We  do  not 
Include  here  the  idea  of  a  return  of  the  main  part 
of  the  Israelites,  as  a  nation,  to  Palestine,  but  the 
ideas  that  a  special  Jewish  Church  will  again  arise — 
that  a  temple  will  b(.'  liuilt  in  .lernsalen),  in  which  a 
eort  of  restitution  of  the  Israelitish  worship  will  take 


place,  and  that  then  the  Jewi'^h  people  will  stand  ai 
the  preferred  priestly  and  noble  people  ::.  the  midst 
of  the  believing  Gentile  world  (comp.  Tholuck'a 
quotations,  p.  625,  in  addition  to  whidi  many  others 
might  be  easily  collected). 

These  fanatical  apologists  for  Judaism  should  not 
forget  that  Israel  has  fallen  so  deeply,  just  because 
of  such  aristocratic  and  priestly  claims  to  the  mes- 
sianic sphere  of  salvation,  and  that  the  only  help 
for  it  is  to  acquiesce  modestly  in  the  glory  of  tho 
New  Testament  sj)irit  of  Christ,  and  to  take  its  place 
among  the  Gentile  Christian  nations  as  a  fully  author- 
ized Christian  nation,  without  legal  privileges,  out 
full  of  an  humble  sense  of  its  long  apostasy,  yet  in 
the  power  and  demonstration  of  the  Spirit,  which 
will  then  be  imparted  to  it  according  to  its  gift— 
that  is,  according  to  its  great  natural  state  trans- 
formed by  grace.  The  scholastics  Abelard,  Thomas 
Aquinas,  and  others,  had  in  view  the  proper  mean, 
a  conversion  of  the  collective  tribes,  or  tribal  frag- 
ment, of  the  nation,  but  not  the  conversion  of  each 
individual,  which  is  qnaUtied  as  such  by  free  self- 
detei'niination.  The  hope  of  Israel's  conversion  has 
been  warndy  defended  in  the  Reformed  Church ; 
first  by  Beza.     See  Tholuck,  p.  629  If.* 

The  question  of  the  source  from  wliich  Paul  drew 
this  fir(TT>'j()i,ov  has  engaged  much  attention.  Tho- 
luck, following  in  the  wake'of  others,  properly  calls 
attention  to  the  fact  that  the  Apostle's  quotations 
from  the  prophets  were  given  by  him  as  a  warrant 
of  his  hope,  but  not  as  its  ground  ;  p.  025  If.  Paul, 
as  an  Apostle,  was  also  a  prophet,  apart  from  the 
consideration  that  he  could  already  find  the  germs 
of  this  prophecy  in  the  gospel  tradition  (see  Matt, 
xxiii.  39  ;  John  xii.  32).  However,  we  take  for 
granted  that  he  could  have  drawn  his  warrants  from 
the  Old  Testament  as  freely  as  he  desired,  though 
Tholuck  raises  the  question  why  he  did  not  do  this, 
but  contented  himself  with  citing  two  passages  not 
belonging  to  that  class,  and  of  doubtful  relevancy 
(the  declarations  cited  by  Auberlen,  p.  625).  We 
must  here  refer  to  biblical  theology,  as  well  as  to  the 
writings  which  have  treated  especially  on  this  escha- 
tological  i)art  of  the  theology  of  the  Old  Testanient.f 
There  shall  come  out  of  Zion,  &c.  ['HJf» 
in  ^Kov,  x.T.A.  See  Textual  JS'ote '^\  and  below. 
Forbes  makes  tho  four  lines  of  the  quotations  corre- 
spond alternately  :  covenant-promise — removal  of 
sin. — R.]  The  two  connected  quotations  are  from 
Isa.  lix.  20  and  xxvii.  9  ;  not  (according  to  Cal 
vin  [Stuart],  and  others)  from  Jcr.  xxxi.  33,  al- 
though there  is  a  kindred  sense.:};     They  are  freely 


♦  [Thn  view  now  Rcnpmllv  adopted,  and  sunported  by 
Beza,  Kstius,  Kopiio,  Ueielio,  fciUner,  Mover,  Tholuck,  D« 
Wetle,  llo<l(:o,  Stuait,  Alford,  and  a  host  of  dhers,  is: 
thiif  tlio  MH'  ient  people  of  (lod  (so  mnrvcUously  preserved 
in  their  distinctive  hfe,  ns  if  in  earnest  of  tlilc)  shall  be 
restored,  us  a  iKi'inii,  to  God's  favor.  With  nil  the  raodifl- 
cntions  of  this  view  from  oilier  prissagcs,  wi-  have  not  to  do. 
Thus  much  ought  to  ho  ndmitted  by  nil  fair  rules  of  exe- 
gesis.—H.]  . 

t  [The  Liternture  on  this  subject  is  very  extensive.  The 
passages  lienring  on  this  particular  point  nre  grouped  by 
Uemnrest  and  Gordon,  Christncracy,  pp.  231  ff.  Coicp. 
Mevcr,  pp.  442  f — K.] 

}  (So  Thol\ielt,  ])e  Wcttc,  Meyer,  Alford.  I)r.  Hodga 
thinks  it  probiiblc  "that  hero,  as  elsewhere,  ho  docs  not 
intend  to  refer  exclusively  to  any  one  predict  inn,  but  to 
give  the  genernl  sense  o"f  many  specific  dechuntions  of 
the  ancient  pniphetn."  Tho  objections  urired  throuphout 
against  such  a  view  of  the  Apostle's  clt'itinns  nre  apphcabls 
here.— rhtlipi>i  remarks  that  these  citations  support  th« 
nfflrmntion  •  "so  nil  Israel  shall  be  saved,"  not  the  con- 
tinunnce  of  the  hnrdening  "  until  the  fulness  of  tho  Qca» 
tiles  come  in."— K.] 


CHAPTER  XI.   1-38. 


371 


treated,  and  joined  together  (from  the  LXX.).  Yet, 
'jn  reality,  the_y  perfectly  answer  to  their  application. 
We  must  not  forget  that  the  armor  of  deliverance 
which  the  Lord  puts  on,  according  to  chap.  lix.  17 
&.,  is  a  further  enlargement  of  the  armor  of  the 
Messiah  in  Isa.  xi.  5  ff.  Now,  if  we  adhere  to  the 
position  that  prophecy  makes  no  retrograde  move- 
ment— that  therefore  Jihovah,  instead  of  the  Mes- 
sixh,  must  denote  a  progress — the  passage  cannot  be 
understood  merely  to  denote  the  first  appearance  of 
the  iMessiah,  as  Isa.  xi.,  but,  in  any  case,  the  escha- 
tological  appearance  of  Jehovah  is  also  conjoined  in 
..he  Messiah.  This  is  favored  by  the  grand  expres- 
sion in  ver.  19.  The  Apostle,  with  his  usual  mas- 
terly skill,  therefore  makes  use  of  the  proper  pas- 
sage here,  sinnlarly  to  the  exegesis  of  Christ,  which 
has  also  been  a  subject  of  surprise  to  many  exposi- 
tors. 

7%e  original  text  (Isa.  lix.  20,  21)  reads :  "  And 
the  God  (Redeemer)  shall  come  to  Zion,  and  unto 
them  that  turn  from  transgression  (  y\tE  )  in  Jacob, 
saith  the  Lord.  As  for  me  (on  my  side),  this  is  my 
covenant  with  them,  saith  the  Lord  :  My  Spirit,"  &c. 
The  Septuagint :  xctl  ijhfi,  tvfKfv  Zuhv  6  ^ro/fft'ot;, 
xat  ano<TT()f'i'fi'  afTffitiaq  and  Jaxu'ijS,  dntv  xv- 
Qio^;.  Kal  avTtj  avroTi;  rj  nctQ  i/iov  diaOi^xr/, 
tintv  y.i''()toc,  to  nvtvfia  to  ifiov,  x.r.k.  Chap, 
xxvii.  also  treats  of  the  restoration  of  IsraeL  Ver. 
6  gives  the  more  definite  starting-point.  The  sense 
of  ver.  8  is :  God  punishes  Israel  with  moderation. 
The  form  of  this  punishment  is  hardening,  and  being 
carried  off  as  by  an  east-wind  storm.  Then  we  read : 
"  Therefore  (by  this  means)  shall  tlie  iniquity  of  Ja- 
cob be  purged  ;  and  this  is  all  the  fruit  (the  use)  to 
take  away  his  sin."  The  LXX.  :  Aia  lovro  oKfat,- 
QfiO tjfTfTai.  /}  ai'o/iia.  Ja/.o)^,  y.al  rovro  tanv  ^ 
nO.oyia  ai'ToT',  orav  aqjihoficct,  ai'ToT'  Ttjr  af«x(j- 
rkiv.  Paul  took  into  consideration  three  modifica- 
tions :  (1.)  From  Zion,  instead  oi  for  Zion,  in  which 
we  mu.st  not  forget  that  also  in  Isaiah  Jehovah  must 
come  from  Zion  for  Zion ;  (2.)  The  original  text 
a-ssumes  conversion  at  the  announced  redemption ; 
with  the  Apostle  it  was  self-evident  that  the  redemp- 
tion precedes  the  conversion  ;  (3.)  The  Apostle,  de- 
scribes the  new  covenant  with  Israel,  by  inserting 
the  pa.ssage  from  Isa.  xxix. ;  that  is,  he  here  de- 
scribes the  purging  and  taking  away  of  Jacob's  sin 
as  the  essential  part  of  the  covenant,  instead  of  the 
promise  of  the  impartation  of  the  Spirit,  in  Isa.  lix., 
because  he  knows  that  both  are  indissolubly  connect- 
ed. Yet  these  modifications  of  form  do  not  prevent 
the  citation  from  being  a  jjroof,  as  Tholuck  sup- 
poses. See,  on  the  further  exposition  of  this  pas- 
sage, Tiioluck,  p.  631. 

[Tiioluck  :  "How  came  the  Apostle,  if  he  wished 
only  to  express  the  general  thought  that  the  Mes- 
siah was  come  for  Israel,  to  choose  just  this  citation, 
consisting  of  two  combined  passages,  when  the  same 
is  expressed  more  directly  in  other  passages  of  the 
Old  Testament ?  I  believe  that  the  r^tft,  gave  occa- 
sion for  the  quotation :  if  he  did  not  refer  tliis 
directly  to  the  second  coming  of  the  Messiah,  yet  it 
admitted  of  being  indirectly  applied  to  it." — R.] 

Ter.  28.  As  touching  the  gospel,  they  are 
euemies  [  x  a  t  a  n  kv  to  fvayyi).i,ov  i  /- 
Sfioi^.  As  enemies,  they  are  said,  by  Meyer  and 
Tholuck,  to  be  hostilely  treated  by  God  [Alford, 
Hodge]  (Tholuck  :  invisi  deo).  But  it  is  difficult  to 
fstablish  the  antithesis,  that  they  can  be  simultane- 
ouslv  odious  to,  and  beloved  by,  God,  except  in  dif- 
ferent relations.     See  the  Exeg.  Notes  on  chap.  v.  10 


[p.  165].  Other  explanations  :  regarded  by  Paul  a£ 
enemies  (Grotius,  Luther) ;  enemies  of  God  (Thoma«i 
Aquinas,  Bengel).  According  to  the  gospel — that  is, 
according  to  the  relation  of  the  gospel  to  believers 
and  unbelievers — they  are  enemies ;  this  means  not 
merely  that  they  are  adversaries  of  the  gospel  (Chry. 
sostom,  and  others),  but  that,  as  adversaries  of  the 
gospel,  they  are  regarded  by  God  as  adversaries,  and 
then  by  His  messengers  also — for  your  sakes 
[dt'  I'/iaq]  :  from  the  ground  of  the  saving  ecou- 
omy  already  set  forth. 

But  as  touching  the  election,  they  are 
beloved  [zaTw  dk  r iiv  ly.Xoyrjv  ayanrj- 
Tot].  We  would  here  also  protest  against  the 
favorite  division :  beloved  of  God,  or  of  the  Apos- 
tle, or  of  Christians.  They  are  enemies  in  their 
falling  out  with  the  gospel,  yet  they  are  favorites 
according  to  the  election,  but  simply  lor  the  sake  of 
their  connection  with  the  fathers. — For  the  fath< 
ers' sakes  [(Jta  rove  nart^aq^.  Meyer  says  : 
in  favor  of  the  patriarchs ;  the  sense  is,  because 
they  are  included  in  general  in  the  election  of  the 
fathers  ;  according  to  ver.  28,  are  made  partakers  in 
the  gifts  ol  the  fiithers,  in  the  call  of  Israel.* 

Ver.  29.  Without  repentance  [a,iifTafii- 
Xijta.  The  reference  here  is  evidently  national, 
not  individual,  though  tlie  proposition  is  general  iu 
its  form  and  force. — R.].  Unrepented.  Irrevocable 
in  tlie  sense  of  a  Divine,  ethical,  and  self-conditional 
result  (see  2  Cor.  vii.  10). 

Ver.  30.  For  as  ye,  &c.  [oxrneQ  ya^ 
vfi  f  r<;.  See  Tcxtiial  Notes  ".  "'.]  The  Gentiles.— 
Formerly  disobedient.  The  d^r  KXTta  is  anfid  tva 
toward  God's  word,  which  was  pi'omulgated  to  the 
Gentiles  by  the  creation  (Rom.  i.  21).  [Forbes  finds, 
in  vers.  30-32,  a  six-lined  stanza,  two  lines  in  each 
verse,  with  the  alternating  thoughts:  Disobedience  — 
mercy,  recurring  three  times. — R.] 

Ver.  31.  That  through  the  mercy  shown 
to  you  they  also  may  obtain  mercy  [ri^ 
{if(friQO)  ekifu  'iva  xal  avroi  ikftjOoiaw. 
We  accept  (with  E.  V.,  Hodge,  Meyer,  De  Wette, 
Alford,  and  most)  a  trajection  of  tiie  Ira. — R.] 
Meyer  would  join  n'l  i/ttreiio)  D.ift,  to  what 
follo^vs :  "  In  order  that,  by  the  mercy  manifested 
to  you  (which  mercy  provokes  them  to  jealousy  of 
your  faith;  ver.  11),  mercy  might  be  shown  to  you." 
This  construction  must  be  rejected  outright,  because 
by  it  the  Apostle  would  say  to  the  Gentiles  what  is 
both  ill-bred  and  untruthful,  namely,  that  their  con 
version  was  merely  a  means  for  the  purpose  of  the 
further  conversion  of  the  Jews.f  The  opposite  con- 
struction :  no7i  creduiei'iint  in  vesirain  misericordiam 
(Vulgate),  emphasizes  the  conversion  of  the  Gentiles 
as  an  end  in  itself,  and  then  makes  the  further  pur- 
pose of  the  conversion  of  the  Jews,  thereby  brought 
about,  to  follow. 

*  [The  obvious  meajiing  is,  that  the  election  of  Israel 
ae  the  people  of  God  involves  such  a  hope  of  Messing  to 
the  chihlrcn  of  Abraham,  that  the  mcrcj*  will  at  last  come, 
even  after  "thousands  of  g'ejio'nCinHS."  If  the  Abrahamie 
covenant  is  abrogated,  the  Apostle's  words  have  little  force. 
-U.] 

t  [Notwithstandin:;  this  very  strong  assertion  of  Dr. 
Lnnee,  on  the  ground  of  the  parallelism,  as  well  as  on  ao 
count  of  the  general  thought  of  the  whole  passage,  the 
construction  of  Meyer  is  to  be  preferred.  The  trajection 
gives  emphasis  to  r<Z  ifi.  i\.  The  other  views  are  :  TItey 
am  disobedient  throvgh  the  nirrcy,  &c.  (Calvin,  and  others); 
the;/  have  imt  hflifved  on  the  merry  shoion  lo  you,  &c.  (Lu- 
ther, Estius,  Lange).  But  to  these  there  is  the  same  gram- 
matical objection.  Tholuck  says  :  with  the  same  mercy ; 
which  obviates  Dr.  Lange's  difficulty,  but  is  against  tha 
parallelism. — R.  ] 


37a 


THE   EPISTLE   OF   PAUL   TO   THE   ROMANS. 


Ver.  32,  For  God  hath  shut  up  all  under 
disobedience  [a  i  vix  /.n-n  iv  yci(j  6  &i6i; 
TO  IS  ,T(<i'rrts  »(<;  anfiO-ftav.  Oa  the  verb, 
comp.  <ial.  iii.  22,  23,  Tixtual  Note  "',  and  below. — 
R.j  Tlr.it  is,  the  Jews  as  well  as  the  Gentiles.  Ae- 
corilitig  to  .Meyer,  ail  and  ever;/  Gentile  and  Jew  are 
meant,  and  not  merely  the  ma.sses  of  both  (accord- 
ing to  Tholueiv,  and  otliers).  Ti-ue,  the  ma-sses  are, 
in  a  certain  sense,  the  all-concludmg ;  yet,  strictly 
enii)lia.>ized,  all  and  every  one  cannot  be  spoken  of, 
because  the  question  is  not  simply  the  fall  of  man, 
but  the  generic  consequences  of  the  fall  (Vulgate 
and  Luther  have  the  neuter).  [The  neuter  is  proba- 
bly borrowed  from  (ial.  iii.  22.  The  sense  is  the 
same,  whether  we  accept  tlie  view  of  Meyer  or  that 
of  Tholuck  ;  but  by  premising  the  former  in  the  sec- 
ond clau.se,  a  conclusion  might  be  inserted,  which 
Me.ver  liiraself  does  not  accept,  viz.,  the  actual  exer- 
cise of  saving  mercy  in  the  case  of  every  individual. 
-K.] 

But  what  does  shut  up  mean  ?  Meyer  would  ex- 
plain it,  according  to  the  peculiarity  of  the  later 
Greek  :  to  give  over  to,  or  under,  the  effective  power, 
but  not  merely  a  declarative  (Clirysostoni,  and  oth- 
ers), or  permissive  power  (Origen,  and  others). 
[Meyer,  Alford,  and  others,  remark  that  the  ai'v 
in  composition  .strengthens  the  .simple  verb,  without, 
however,  introducing  the  idea  of  shutting  up  to- 
yelha: — K.]  The  real  explanation  of  the  expres- 
sion is  contained  in  Rom.  v.  12  and  Gal.  iii.  22. 
The  state  of  the  totality  of  mcii  (their  being  shut 
up  under  disobedience)  is  based  on  the  organic 
(generic,  social,  political,  and  si/inpnthetical)  convec- 
tion. By  the  organic  connection,  all  men  are  shut 
up  in  the  conseciuences  of  tlie  fall.  Then,  by  the 
organic  connection,  the  Gentiles  are  first  shut  up  in 
the  process  of  unbelief  (see  chap,  i.) ;  and  in  the 
Same  way  are  the  Jews  also  shut  up  by  means  of' 
this  organic  connection  (chap.  ii.).  In  the  collective 
character  of  the  history  of  the  world,  this  makes 
a  collective  conclusion  \_Z/isarninengeschlos.<i>-nhei/'\. 
Thus  the  Jews,  by  their  organic  connection  (accord- 
ing to  Gal.  iii.  22),  were  .shut  up  under  the  law,  as  it 
were,  in  a  prison  or  place  of  custody  *  ( £(/•("" '4' or - 
fifffa  (Tiyxtx/.n^uiiiyoi,);  although,  after  the  confine- 
ment was  abolished,  it  turned  out  that  they  consist- 
ed of  two  parts,  the  children  of  the  bondwoman  and 
the  children  of  the  freewoman.  Thus  it  could  only 
come  to  pass,  by  the  fearful  power  of  the  connec- 
tion of  the  universal  curr.ents,  that  sin  should  be 
consummated  in  unltelief  under  (iod's  judgment,  in 
order  that  sinners  might  become  receptive  of  Divine 
mercy  (Rom.  v.  20  ;  vii.  13). 

In  order  that  he  may  have  mercy  upon 
all  [iva  Toi's'  /tuvrai;  *Af//rT7]].  The  pur- 
])ose  of  this  authoritative  judgment  of  God  (that  is, 
of  this  Divine  hardening,  which  was  carried  con- 
stantly further  by  the  reciprocal  action  with  human 
guilt)  was,  first,  that  fulfilment  in  the  ancient  time, 
when  the  lieatlien  world  wim  ripe  for  mercy,  and  will 
be  hereafter  the  fulfilment  of  the  New  Testament 
time,  when  Israel  shall  l)C  ripe  for  mercy. 

[Alford  remarks  on  roin;  n  civ  rat;  in  the  two 
clauses :  "  Are  they  the  same  ?  And,  if  so,  is  any 
support  given  to  the  notion  of  an  unnxaTdrrTafru; 
of  all  men  f  Certainly  they  are  identical,  and  sig- 
nit'y  all  men,  without  limitation.  Rut  the  ultimate 
jilierence  between  the  all  men  who  are  shut  up  un- 
ier  disobedience,  and  the  aV.  men  upon  whom  the 

*  [Comi).  Langc's  Convn.  Oalalians,  p.  85  ff.— R.) 


mercy  is  shown,  is,  that  by  all  men  this  mercy  is  not 
accepted,  and  so  men  become  self-excluded  from  the 
salvation  of  God.  God's  act  remains  the  same, 
equally  gracious,  equally  universal,  whether  men 
accei)t  His  mercy  or  not.  This  coii'.ingeucy  is  liere 
not  in  view,  but  simply  God's  act  itself.  We  can 
hardly  understand  the  ol  navrni  nationally.  The 
marked  universality  of  the  expre.-*sion  recalls  the  be 
ginning  of  the  Epistle,  and  makes  it  a  solemn  con- 
elusion  to  the  argumentative  portion,  after  which  the 
Apostle,  overpowereil  with  the  view  of  the  Divine 
mercy  and  wisdom,  breaks  forth  into  the  .sublimest 
apostrophe  existing  even  in  tiie  i>ages  of  Inspiration 
jt.-<elf"     Comp.  Dortr.  Note  21.— R.] 

Ver.  33.  Oh  the  depth  of  the  riches,  and 
wisdom,  «fcc.  [o>  fid  Dot;  n/.ovrov  xal  «to- 
(f'iui;,  x.r.)..  In  the  English,  that  interpretation 
has  been  followed  which  regards  the  three  genitives, 
nlovTov,  ffo (//«<,-,  yvii'irTnoi;,  as  co  irdinate. 
0(0 V  is  joined  with  all  three. — R.]  Construc- 
tions : 

A.  What  a  depth:  1.  Of  riches;  2.  Of  wis- 
dom ;  3.  Of  knowledge  (Chrysostom,  Grotius,  01s- 
hausen,  Philippi  [Hodge,  Alford,  De  Wette],  &c. 

B.  What  a  depth  of  riches :  1.  Of  wLsdom ; 
2.  Of  knowledge  (Luther,  Calvin,  Reiche).*  Meyer 
says,  in  favor  of  the  first  construction  :  "  As  vers. 
33  and  34  portray  the  aoqia  and  yvwan;,  but  vers. 
35  and  '66  the  ti/.ovtoi;  OtoT',  the  former  construc- 
tion is  preferable."  Besides,  the  depth  of  the  riches 
would  be,  in  a  certain  measure,  tautological.  But 
fidO  ot;  can  also  not  (according  to  the  same  writer) 
mean  "  the  great  fulness  and  superabundance,"  be- 
cause there  would  merely  result  such  a  tautology. 
The  depth,  whose  outward  figure  is  the  ocean,  is  also 
a  spiritual  depth  (see  the  quotations  in  Meyer). 
There  is  also  another  sort  of  fulness,  a-s  a  rich  and 
fruitful  plain.  Ilere  God's  miracles  are  obscured  by 
a  holy  darkness.  But  the  riches  of  God  are  not 
merely  God's  riches  of  grace  in  the  special  sense, 
for  the  fulness  of  creation  and  the  treasun-s  of  re- 
demption constitute  a  more  geiieral  unity  in  the  all- 
sufficiency  of  God.  This  is  the  entire  ontological 
and  soteriological  foundation  of  God's  kingdom.  If, 
now,  (T07(Vt  be  defined  as  the  exercise  of  (Jod's  <fe- 
signing  attribute,  the  idea  also  usually  includes  the 
knowledge  and  choice  of  means  ;  here,  however  (ac- 
cording to  M'-yer,  for  example),  yvmaii;  denotes  the 
knowledge  of  means.  Proof:  «('  oiVoi  alrnv.  His 
measures,  must  be  refj^rred  to  the  latter.  But  the 
wni/x  have  just  as  decided  a  relation  to  the  starting- 
points  as  to  the  final  points,  and  we  would  here  also 
liold  to  the  distinction  :  yvi'-.au;  relates  chief  g  to  the 
d[i-/ai  and  its  consequences,  and  ao'/ia  chiefly  to 
Tt}.fi  atnl  their  premises. j- 

How  unsearchable,  &o.  [I'li;  «  r  f  J  f  p  a  i'  - 
vrra,  x.r.)..  See  7'extual  Note  ".  Meyer  refers 
«!■  o()ol  ai'ToTi  to  j'i'(7)(Ti.?,  Tot  x(tl/iaTa  av- 
TO  I'  to  anifia;  the  former  in  the  sense  oi  His 
modi's  of  dealing.  His  economies,  the  latter,  His  ju- 
dicial decisions  (as  ver.  32).  So  Tholuck,  but  the 
distinctions  are  very  sulHle.  See  below. — R.]  The 
most  unse  irchable  character  of  God's  judgments  con- 
sists in  His  causing  redeeming  acts  to  arise  from 
them  (Gen.  iii.  :  the  flood  ;  the  Egyptian  plagues ; 
the  Babylonian  captivity  ;  the  cross  of  Christ) ;  and 

•  Tlolche's  nrsranionts,  and  the  nnswcre  given  by  Tho« 
luck,  will  lie  fdiiiul  in  Alford  in  Inco.—R.] 

t  [HenKcl  ;  Satikntia  dirigit  omnia  ad  ftnrm  opllmuml 
COQNITIO  novit  Jliicin   lUi/m  U  txil-jm.     See  Doclr.  ^'ole  ** 

-u.] 


CHAPTER  XI.   1-36. 


873 


the  peculiarity  of  His  ways  as  pant  finding  ovt,  con- 
sists ill  His  leading  the  minds  which  He  has  created 
through  byways,  circuitous  paths,  apparently  con- 
irary  roads,  and  even  impassable  roads,  safely  to 
their  object  (see  Job  v.  9  ;  ix.  10  ;  xxxiv.  24). 

Ver.  34.  For  who  hath  known  the  mind 
of  the  Lord?  &c.  [t<<,-  yce^  ayvn)  vovv  xv- 
^ior:  /..T.L]  Isa.  xl.  13,  "  ahnost  exactly  "  from 
the  LXX.  The  mind  took  knowledge  of  the  object ; 
the  counsel  tooli  knowledge  of  the  ways.  Or,  the 
former  word  applies  to  the  yviTi(fi,<;,  the  latter  to  the 
<ro(/('a  (Theodoret,  and  others).  In  wisdom  He  is 
ejsalted  even  above  the  understanding  of  man  ('*  My 
thoughts  are  not  your  thoughts  "),  with  respect  to 
Uis  counsel,  above  the  necessity  of  man's  being  a 
counsellor  with  Kim  ;  finally,  with  respect  to  His 
riches,  no  one  has  enriched  Him  or  given  to  Him  so 
that  He  had  to  recompense  unto  him  again ;  He  is 
the  absolute  source  of  all  good  things. 

Ver.  35.  Or  who  hath  first  given  to  him, 
and  it  shall  be  recompensed  unto  him  again  ? 
[  //  r  iq  7i()  0  i  f)  (oxfv  avr  iji  x  « t  arranodo- 
&i;afTai,  avr (o ;  See  Textual  Xote  '",  for  the 
text  of  the  Hebrew  and  LXX. — R.]  From  the  origi- 
nal text  of  Job  xli.  11.  No  gift  must  be  regarded 
as  a  recompensing  of  God. 

Ver.  36.  For  of  him,  and  through  him 
[oTt  £4  ai'Toii  aal  cVt'  at'ToT].  The  nega- 
tion of  the  previous  proposition  is  carried  out  posi- 
tively in  the  completion  of  the  doxology.  All 
thingx  are  of  Him.  He  is  the  original  fountan, 
original  ground  and  author. — TTirough  Him.  Pre- 
servation, government,  redemption. 

And  unto  him  [y.al  fit;  ai'/Tor].  Toioard 
Him  US  end.  That  He  may  become  all  in  all  (1  Cor. 
XV.  28) ;  He  is  glorified  in  all,  and  all  is  glorified  in 
Him.  Meyer  says :  "  In  so  far  as  every  tiling  serves 
God's  purposes  (not  merely  God's  honor,  as  many 
■would  have  it)."  But  every  thing  always  serves 
God's  purpose.  Yet  the  final,  absolute  glorification 
of  God  cannot  be  separated  from  the  purpose  of  the 
revelation  of  His  doja  in  Christ,  and  by  Him  in  His 
children.  His  inheritance. 

Ambrose,  Hilary,  Olshausen,  Philippi,  and  oth- 
ers, have  regarded  this  passage  as  an  expression  of 
the  relation  of  Father,  >o?i,  and  Spirit.*  Meyer 
opposes  this,  by  urging  that  neither  Chrysostom, 
fficumenius,  Theophylact,  Calvin,  nor  Beza,  have  re- 
ferred to  the  Trinity  in  their  expositions.  The  con- 
text speaks  simply  of  God  the  Father.  Yet  it  can- 
not be  doubted,  if  we  take  into  consideration  other 
passages  of  the  Apostle  (for  example,  1  Cor.  xv. ; 
CoI.L),  that  Paul  here  had  in  mind  at  least  the  dif- 
ference of  the  revelations  of  the  Father,  the  Son, 
and  the  Holy  Spirit.  It  is  certain  that  the  view  of 
God's  absolute  unity  predominates  here,  but  not 
therefore  in  the  exclusive,  doctrinal  definiteness  of 
God  the  Father.  The  Trinitarian  relation  lies  be- 
yond subordinationism. 


*  [Alford,  who  is  unusually  happy  in  his  comments  on 
this  chapter,  remarks  :  "  If  this  be  rit'htly  understood — 
not  of  a  fiirmal  allusion  to  the  three  Persons  in  the  Holy 
Trinity,  but  of  an  implicit  rcfcrenci'  (as  Tholuck)  to  the 
three  oMnhutes  of  Jehovah,  respectively  manifested  to  us  by 
tlis  three  coequal  and  co-tcmal  Persons— there  can  hardly 
be  n  doubt  of  its  coiTectness."  "  Only  those  who  are  doL'- 
matically  prejudiced  can  miss  seeing  "that,  though  St.  Paul 
has  never  d-finilively  expressed  the  doctrine  of  the  Holy 
Trinity  in  a  definite  formula,  yet  he  was  conscious  of  it  as 
ft  living  reality."— E.] 


DOCTRINAL  AND    ETHICAL. 

1.  While  the  whole  of  Paul's  Epistle  to  the  Ro 
mans  has  been  called  a  "  christological  philoGophj 
of  the  history  of  the  world  and  of  salvation,"  th« 
term  applies  more  specially  to  the  section  chap,  ix.- 
xi.,  and  preeminently  to  chap.  xi. 

2.  God  has  not  cast  away  His  people  :  Proofs ; 
(1.)  The  public  histoiy  of  Israel :  Paul  and  his  Jew- 
ish companions  in  faitii  ;  (2.)  Israel's  cone  a  led  his- 
tory, disclosed  by  God's  declaraiion  to  Elijah ;  (3.) 
The   teleology  of   the  partial  blindness  of   Israel : 

a.  a  condition  for  the  conversion  of  the   Gentiles ; 

b.  then  this  a  condition  fur  the  conversion  of  the 
Jews  ;  c.  then  this,  finally,  a  condition  for  the  com- 
pletion of  God's  saving  work  on  earth  ;  (4.)  God's 
exercise  of  judgment  on  all  humanity  has  always  a 
merciful  purpose — that  is,  deliverance  and  ^e^stora- 
tion.  The  histoi-y  of  proselytes  proves  that  the 
attraction  of  the  Jews  to  faith  is  constantly  fulfilled 
in  the  individual. 

3.  The  history  of  the  seven  thousand  hidden 
worshippers  of  God  at  the  time  of  Elijah,  a  type  of 
similar  cases  in  all  ages.  Not  merely  the  heroic  wit- 
nesses for  God's  honor  are  His  people,  but  all  who 
do  not  bow  the  knee  to  idols.  The  kingdom  of  God 
has  not  merely  its  hons,  but  also  its  doves.  The 
mildness  of  the  Divine  judgment  on  the  remnant  of 
piety  on  earth,  in  antithesis  to  the  severity  and  in- 
dignation of  the  human  zeal  of  the  well-meaning 
servants  of  God. 

4.  God  preserves  at  all  periods,  even  in  the 
worst,  a  Xfliifia  xar'  l/.  /.o  y  f;  v  /d()  it  oq. 
When  the  enemies  of  the  gospel  think  that  Chris- 
tianity will  soon  decline,  they  miscalculate,  especial- 
ly on  two  or  three  points  :  (1.)  They  do  not  observe 
that  the  bliglit  of  division  is  unavoidable  in  their 
own  camp  ;  (2.)  That  a  new  Divine  seed  of  Divinely 
chosen  children,  of  sincere  adversaries  converted 
and  led  by  God,  and  of  courageous  witnesses  for 
God,  are  in  His  plan  ;  (3.)  That  every  direction 
which  apostasy  takes,  leads  to  a  dispersion  and  taint 
like  that  of  the  Jews,  while  the  deep  current  of  the 
world's  history  takes  its  course  with  God's  kingdom. 
This  confidence  is  resplendent  even  throughout  the 
Old  Testament,  and  especially  in  the  prophets. 

5.  Vers.  6,  7.  The  unanswerable  syllogism  of 
the  evangelical  Church  against  the  decree  of  the 
Council  of  Trent  (see  Hxeg.  Notex).  To  seek  grace 
beyond  works  is  an  Int^i^fjT flv,  comprising  in 
itself  a  self-contradiction. 

6.  Vers.  8-11.  The  twofold  judgment  of  blind- 
ness :  a.  By  external,  seeming  happiness  (see  chap, 
ii.  4) ;  b.  By  inward  disobedience,  whose  fundamen- 
tal characteristics  are  presumptuous  blindness  and 
inconsolable,  cowardly  despondency  in  relation  to 
the  highest  good. — On  the  process  of  hardening  as  a 
continual  reciprocity  between  human  offence  and 
God's  sovereign  judgment,  see  Exeg.  Notes  on  chnp. 
ix.  On  Jelaledin  Rumi's  doctrine  of  predestina- 
tion, see  Tholuck,  p.  595. 

7.  From  the  fact  that  judgments  on  unbelievers 
are  remedial  judgments,  which  are  the  means  of  pro- 
ducing  faith  in  the  elect,  there  follows  the  expecta^ 
tion  that  the  judgments  are  not  of  an  eonic,  but  of 
an  economic  nature.  God  always  seeks,  through  the 
believers,  indirectly  to  reach  again  the  unbelievers. 
Therefore  the  messengers  of  salvation  must  shake 
the  dust  from  their  feet  when  they  are  not  received. 
That  is,  they  must  go  farther  and  farther  /     Th« 


374 


THE   EPISTLE   OF   PAUL   TO   THE   ROMANS. 


gospci  went  from  Mesopotamia  to  Jerusalem,  from 
Jerusalem  to  Rome,  from  Rome  to  Wittenberg  and 
Geneva ;  and  in  roundabout  ways  and  circles  it 
igain  goes  from  New  York  to  Jerusalem  and  Meso- 
potamia. Nearness  and  farness  iu  God's  kingdom 
art  not  determined  by  geograpliical  and  national 
proximity  and  remoteness,  but  by  the  relations  of 
spiiituai  life. 

8.  The  idea  of  the  temporary  filling  up  of  the 
breaches  made  by  the  unbelief  of  the  Jews  by  means 
of  the  lieatlieii,  lias  penetrated,  though  in  obscure 
form,  even  the  Talmud  (see  Tlioinck,  p.  600), 

9.  Oil  the  reflection  of  the  truth  of  the  histori- 
cal character  of  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles,  in  ver.  11, 
see  Tholuck,  against  Baur,  p.  602.  See  the  same, 
p.  606,  for  Origcn's  view  tliat  tlie  number  of  saints 
is  deGnite ;  which,  indeed,  only  has  an  incidental 
importance  for  the  question  before  ua  (see  Exeg. 
Notes). 

10.  The  tragical  fate  of  the  Jews.  Their  fall  the 
riches  of  the  world,  notwithstanding  they  number 
nmong  tliem  the  richest  people  ;  tlicir  casting  away 
the  reconciling  of  the  worLl.  This  latter  thought 
refers  to  the  crucifixion  of  Christ.  Such  a  tragical 
judicial  fate  is  such  a  profound  enigma  of  Divine 
sovereignty,  tliat  not  only  the  whole  course  of  the 
world,  but  also  the  future  world  and  eternity,  belong 
to  its  full  glorification  in  the  light  of  Divine  mercy. 

11.  As  the  wild  olive  tree  enters  into  a  relation 
of  exchange  with  the  good  olive  tree  by  giving  to  it 
earthly  nutriment,  or  nutriment  for  development  and 
for  strengthening  the  stock,  while,  on  its  part,  its 
branches  are  made  good,  so  have  the  nations  brought 
new  organs  to  Cln-istianity,  in  order  to  receive  from 
it  the  Divine  spirit  of  lile.  Germany  may  exult,  in 
a  special  sense,  in  having  done  this,  but  nothing  fur- 
ther. If  we  arrcgifilij  identify  German  Christian- 
ity with  Lutheranisrn,*  the  boast  has  a  German 
Catholic  sound  ;  it  is  a  boast  of  the  branches — of 
o<ily  the  grafted  branches  against  those  branches 
previously  standing — yea,  against  the  root  itself. 

12.  The  figure  of  the  relation  between  the  root 
and  the  branches  condemns  that  entire  theory  of  the 
development  of  Christianity,  wliich  the  school  of 
Baur  has  colored  according  to  the  Hegelian  princi- 
ples of  history. 

13.  Vers. '20,  21.  Tholuck:  The  predestinarian 
view  here  becomes  involved  in  difficulty,  in  so  far  as 
it  traces  not  only  faith,  but  also  unbelief,  to  the 
Divine  causality.  Evidently,  the  exclusion  of  the 
Jews  is  here  designated  as  the  result  of  their  own 
guilt,  &c. 

14.  On  the  possibility  of  falling  from  grace,  see 
Meyer,  p.  4.'i5,  on  ver.  2.3.  Sealed  believei-s  are  not 
here  specially  spoken  of,  but,  in  a  general  way,  the 
called^  the  awakened. 

15.  There  subsists  not  only  an  antithesis  and  a 
relation  of  degree  between  the  wild  olive  tree  and 
the  good  olive  tree,  but  also  a  natural  affinity,  which, 
as  well  as  the  heterogoneousness,  comes  into  con- 
sidirration  in  the  application  of  the  figure. 

16.  On  the  discussions  of  recent  theology  re- 
specting the  relation  of  the  Old  Testament  to  tlie 

*  [Lu'hrrlhitm :  Ln'hrrhm,  rathor  than  Lutherrmism. 
Thnrp  in  no  thousrht  of  tho  liUthoran  Church,  ns  surh,  but 
of  that  K|)irlt  wliioh  traces  nil  cvniiKclical  Christliinity  to 
tlif  uro^it  roformor  and  hi.s  n.sHociati-9.  If  tho  flRuro  of  tlio 
ApoHIo  ha«  nny  sporial  appficatinn  now,  It  is  ii(fninst  that 
illnifiisil  ultra- Protestantism,  whii'h,  on  Ihi-  one  hand, 
Incists  itself  a^jain-it  tlio  m"diiev.il  Christ i.inity,  and,  on  fli« 
other,  denies  thnt  any  ndviince  can  he  nvule  hevond  tho 
theolot^cul  thought  of  the  suventoenth  century.— R.J 


propliecy  of  the  Apostle  about  the  restoration  o£ 
Israel,  see  Tholuck,  p.  625. 

17.  In  spite  of  the  Apostle's  warning,  the  graft- 
ed branches  have  in  many  ways  boasted  against  the 
natural  branches.  Under  this  head  belong  the  con- 
duct of  Christians  toward  the  Jews,  the  judgmenU 
passed  upon  tlie  capabilit;/  of  the  Jews  for  conver- 
sion, and,  finally,  the  opinion  pronounced  on  con- 
verted Jews.  Here  belong  also  the  predestinarLin 
appeals  to  God's  decree,  under  a  disregard  of  the 
ethical  conditions. 

1 8.  The  myderj/.  Tholuck  :  "  According  to  the 
ecclesiastical  definition,  rea  captuin  humance  nUioni* 
turn  regenilce  quiun  irregeniite  transcendenx  (Quen- 
stedt,  i.  44).  According  to  the  later  expositors,  on 
the  contrary,  it  means,  at  least  in  Paul,  unknown 
truths,  hitherto  concealed  from  humanity,  and  only 
known  by  revelation  (Riickert,  Fritzsche,  Meyer,  and 
Philippi)."  The  latter,  or  formal  idea  of  the  mys- 
tery, underlies  the  former,  the  material  one.  This 
is  proved  by  1  Tim.  iii.  16.  But  it  is  dear,  from 
ver.  ;^3,  that  a  mystery,  in  the  material  sense,  is  so 
called  because  it  is  of  unfathomable  depth  ;  not  be- 
cause it  merely  extends  beyond  the  human  under- 
standing in  the  abstract  sense — or,  in  otlier  words, 
because  it  is  not  attainable  by  the  understanding — 
but  only  by  the  believing  intellectual  perception,  be- 
cause it  ever  reveals  itself,  in  its  Divine  depth,  in  hu 
finituin,  but  not  because  it  should  remain  iu  infini- 
turn  an  unsolved  enigma. 

19.  Meyer  acknowledges  that  the  conversion  of 
all  Israel  has  not  yet  taken  place  ;  but  he  adds,  that 
it  lies  in  a  very  distant  time,  although  the  Apostle 
has  regarded  the  matter  as  already  near  at  hand  ;  p. 
442.  This  is  the  usual  misconception  arising  from 
the  failure  to  distinguish  between  the  religious  and 
chronological  idea  of  the  nearness  and  remoteness 
of  time  ! 

20.  On  the  different  renderings  of  ynfiirriia  and 
x?.7j(rii:,  see  Tholuck,  p.  633.  A  series  of  insufficient 
explanations  of  the  at'ri/J.nafv  in  ver.  32,  is  on  p. 
635  ;  and  discussions  on  the  meaning  of  roig  ndv' 
Tai,-,  on  p.  637. 

21.  It  is  worthy  of  note,  that  the  usual  doctrine 
of  predestination,  as  well  as  the  doctrine  of  restora- 
tion, has  been  coimected  with  the  present  chapter, 
particularly  with  ver.  33.  This  contradiction  is  ad- 
justed, if,  with  Schleiermacher,  we  regard  predesti- 
nation as  economical,  and  restoration  as  conic.  True, 
even  in  that  case,  the  consequence  of  the  former 
idea  is  strongly  afl^ected  by  the  reference  to  faith 
and  unbelief  as  ethical  motives  for  the  Divine  sov- 
ereignty. Against  the  latter  idea,  viz.,  the  usual 
doctrine  of  the  (xTToy.aTri.aTam.i:,  Meyer  observes, 
that  the  universality  of  the  Divine  intention  does 
not  preclude  the  partially  finite  non-realization  of  it 
through  the  guilt  of  liuman  individuals.  But  this 
observation  applies  also  to  yesterday  and  to-day. 
Important  weight  rests  upon  the  fact  that  the  frrr^- 
xAnfTtv,  wliich  is  similar  to  fate  in  the  organic  con- 
nection of  mi'n  (for  example,  a  Jewish  cliild,  liorn 
in  a  Jewish  alley,  &c.),  shoidd  be  reniDved  by  God's 
sovereign  grace  ;  yea,  that  the  currents  of  unbelief 
should  give  place  to  a  current  of  faith.  Judius  haa 
proved  that  a  false  individual  can,  at  all  events, 
swim  against  the  stream  of  Salvation.  The  eons  of 
(tod  ami  the  freedom  of  man  tower  above  the  usual 
ideas  of  the  npocntnstasis,  as  well  as  above  the  usual 
ideas  of  eternal  =  endless  condemnation.* 

*  [A  comparison  of  ver.  32  with  Oal.  iii.  22  will  a^-sist  ai 


CHAPTER  XL   1-36. 


37S 


22.  The  anthology  of  distinctions  between  aoifia 
and  j/jwffK,-,  see  Tboluck,  p.  641.  The  former  (Abe- 
lard)  constitutes  just  the  reverse  of  ours :  sapieiitia 
quaiduiii  ad  prcescieiitiam  ipsius  scicntia  quantum 
ad  ipsius  opcris  cfftctian,  &c.  Tlioluck  defines  the 
aoqlct,  according  to  Proverbs,  as  the  economic  and 
architectural  wisdom  of  God,  and  the  yvwai-i;  as  the 
knowledge  of  the  nature  of  the  universe.  He,  in 
opposiiion  to  Meyer,  refers  the  x^l/iara  to  the  yrw- 
avc,  and  the  oSni  to  tlie  aotf'ia.  On  the  latter  point, 
we  must  coiucide  with  Meyer.  The  ideas  :  xfjlfiara 
and  the  essence  of  things,  and  oiloi  and  ai-chitectu- 
ral  dispositions,  do  not  fit  very  well  togethei-.  Tlie 
x(jl/iaTa  refer  to  final  points  ;  the  odoi  are  at  least 
connected  with  starting-points.  See  Exeg.  Notes. 
We  must  also  refer,  in  reference  to  ver.  36,  to  Tho- 
luck's  instnictive  statements. 

23.  Eom.  xi.  36  ;  comp.  1  Cor.  viii.  6  ;  Col.  i. 
16  ;  Heb.  ii.  10 ;  also  the  doxologies  in  the  New 
Testament,  and  especially  those  in  Revelation.  [Stu- 
art :  "  Such  is  the  conclusion  of  the  doctrinal  part 
of  our  Epistle ;  a  powei-ful  expression  of  profound 
wonder,  reverence,  and  adoration,  in  regard  to  the 
unsearchable  ways  of  God  in  His  dealings  with  men  ; 
and  an  assertion  of  the  highest  intensity  respecting 
His  sovereign  right  to  (-ontrol  all  things  so  as  to  ac- 
complish His  own  designs.  A  doctrine  truly  hum- 
bling to  the  proud  and  towering  hopes  and  claims 
of  self-justifying  men  ;  a  stumbling-block  to  haughty 
Jews,  and  foolishness  to  unhumbled  Greeks.  I 
scarcely  know  of  any  thing  in  the  whole  Bible  which 
strikes  deeper  at  the  root  of  human  pride  than  vers. 
83-36. — But  sovcreiffnti/  in  God  does  not  imply  what 
is  arbitrary/,  nor  that  He  does  any  thing  without  the 
best  of  reasons.  It  only  implies  that  those  reasons 
are  unknown  to  us, — And  if  our  hearts  are  ever 
tempted  to  rise  up  against  the  distinctions  which 
God  has  made,  either  in  a  temporal  or  spiritual  re- 
spect, in  the  bestowment  of  His  favors,  let  us  bow 
them  down  to  the  dust,  as  well  as  silence  and  satisfy 
them,  with  the  humbling,  consoling,  animating,  glo- 
rious truth,  that  '  of  God,  and  tlirough  Him,  and  for 
Him,  are  all  things.'  To  Him,  then,  be  the  glory 
forever  and  ever  !     Amen." — R.] 


HOMILETICAL   ANB    PRACTICAL. 

A.     Vers.  1-6.     Has  God  cast  away  His  people  ? 
God  forbid  !     1.    The  thought  is  intolerable  to  the 


in  arriving:  at  a  correct  explanation  of  its  meaning.  It 
expresses  a  bold,  genial,  and  comprrhensive  thought,  and 
contains  the  key  to  the  understanding  of  the  fall,  as  well  as 
of  the  whole  history  of  the  world.  The  profound  mystery 
of  sin  is  here  solved  in  the  lustre  of  the  Di\'ine  wisdom  and 
love.  The  temporary  abasement  and  neglect  of  countless 
individuals,  of  whole  races  and  naiions,  is  here  subordi- 
nated to  a  more  profound  and  exalted  plan  for  general 
blessing.  The  Apostle,  here  and  in  G;i].  iii.  22,  teaches  a 
untversnlity  of  sin  and  disobedience,  and  a  unive.rsolily  nf 
Divine,  grace  (so  also  Rom.  v.  12  ff.  ;  1  Cor.  xv.  21,  22),  and 
80  places  them  in  hold  contrast,  that  the  former  must  sub- 
serve the  latter.  This  universality  of  grace  refers  :  (1.) 
To  the  internal  power  and  capability  ;  (2.)  To  the  purpose 
ant  design  ;  (3.)  To  the  proffering  of  the  opportunity,  or 
the  calling.  God  can  and  will  have  mercy  tipon  all  men, 
and  gives  to  all  (at  some  period)  thi«.  opportunity.  But 
further  than  this  we  cannot  go.  Pan.  d^-^s  not  teach  a 
universalism  ot  actual  ridemption  to  all  ytif-  Th>>  accept- 
RTire  or  rejection  of  grace  is  made  dependent  on  bi'lief  or 
■unbelief.  Hence,  in  Gal.  iii.  22,  he  does  not  say,  in  the 
second  clause  :  that  the  promise  might  he  given  to  at!,  but 
to  believers.  For  redemption  is  no  natural  process,  no  work 
of  necessity,  but  a  free  act  of  God  in  Christ,  and  must  be 
apprehended  and  appropriated  in  a  free  moral  manner  by 
•acli  individual  subject. — P.  S.] 


Apostle  as  a  true  Israelite.  2.  He  repudiates  the 
fact  in  the  most  positive  manner ;  because,  a.  God 
has  provided  for  His  people  beforehand  ;  6.  In  times 
of  great  apostasy  He  has  preserved  His  remnant  of 
seven  thousand  who  did  not  bow  the  knee  to  Baal  ■ 
c.  He  will  deal  likewise  with  those  who  have  been 
reserved  through  grace. — Paul,  as  a  model  of  truly 
national  feeling.  1.  He  was  a  Christian  with  all  his 
heart ;  2.  But  he  was  also  an  Israelite  with  all  hia 
heart  (vers.  1,  2). — The  example  of  the  Apostle  Paid 
shows  how  Christianity  and  national  feeling  not  only 
do  not  preclude  each  other,  but  agree  very  well  to- 
gether.— I  also  am  an  Israelite  !  An  expression  :  1. 
Full  of  manly  power ;  2.  Full  of  Christian  love 
(vers.  1,  2). — The  example  of  Elijah.  1.  His  com- 
plaint against  Israel ;  2.  God's  answer  for  Israel 
(vers.  2-4). — God  still  has  His  seven  thousand  who 
have  not  bowed  their  knee  to  Baal  (vers.  4-6). 
— Let  the  apostasy  be  never  so  great,  God  never 
wholly  casts  away  His  people  (vers.  4-6). 

Luther  :  Not  all  are  God's  people  who  are  called 
God's  people  ;  therefore  not  all  will  be  cast  away, 
though  the  greater  portion  be  cast  away. 

Stakke  :  God's  children  often  make  unnecessary 
complaints,  and  if  the  Lord  should  answer  them,  H« 
would  not  reply  in  any  other  way  tiian  :  "  Ye  know 
not  what  ye  should  pray  for  as  ye  ought "  (ver.  2). 
— God  can  permit  no  such  confusion  of  ideas,  aa 
tliat  we  are  to  be  saved  partly  through  grace  and 
]5artly  tlu'ough  merit ;  chap.  iii.  28  (ver.  6). — IIkd- 
iNGEU:  God  has  more  saints  in  the  world  than  we 
often  imagine.  Much  of  the  good  seed  lies  under 
the  ground ;  in  the  Spring,  when  the  right  time 
comes,  it  germinates.  Be  comforted  by  this  truth, 
ye  faithful  teachers ;  Isa.  xlix.  1  ;  1  Kings  xix.  48 
(vers.  1-3). — Nova  Bibl.  Tub. :  God  does  not  cast 
us  away,  if  we  have  not  previously  cast  Him  away 
(ver.  1). — You  regard  that  church  and  congregation 
as  the  best  one  to  which  the  most  belong,  which  the 
great  men  in  the  world  honor,  and  which,  therefore, 
has  the  most  splendor,  show,  and  consideration.  Oh, 
no  ;  it  is  the  small  and  insignificant  number  wiiich 
God  has  preserved  for  salvation  according  to  the 
election.  "  Fear  not,  little  flock  ;  for  it  is  your 
Father's  good  pleasme  to  give  you  the  kingdona " 
(ver.  5). — Spicner  :  God  looks  with  other  eyes  than 
men's,  and  perceives  those  who  were  imperceptible 
to  others.  Yet  such  persons  did  not  exist  by  their 
own  strength,  but  the  Lord  has  reserved  them 
(ver.  4). 

Ltsco :  The  fall  of  Israel  is  neither  altogether 
universal  nor  perpetual.  The  Gentiles'  becoming 
God's  people,  and  participants  in  His  kingdom,  is  a 
fulfilment  of  Gen.  ix.  27,  that  Japheth  shall  dwell  in 
the  tents  of  Shem. — As  surely  as  unbelief,  according 
to  chap.  X.,  is  an  offence,  so  sure  is  the  better  dispo- 
sition of  these  better  ones  among  the  people  not 
any  work  of  theirs,  but  a  work  of  Divine  grace  (vers. 
5,6). 

Hkubnkr  :  There  is  a  divine  casting  away,  tiie 
most  terrible  penal  judgment  of  God,  in  which  He 
takes  His  Holy  Spirit  from  man,  and  quenches  th« 
spark  of  good  within  him,  so  that  he  morally  diea 
out,  is  without  the  feeling  and  power  for  good,  and, 
shut  out  from  heaven,  must  bear  misery  and  tor- 
ment.— This  is  what  pious  people  since  the  fall  have- 
been  anxiously  praying  God  to  ward  off';  P.s.  ji. 
(ver.  1). — Elijah  believed  that  he  was  the  only  one 
left.  How  often  does  many  a  pious  person  believe 
himself  alone  !  This  is  a  divine  trial ;  but  in  such 
hours  there  also  comes  equal  consolation  (vi  r.  3).— 


376 


THE   EPISTLE   OF   PAUL   TO   THE   ROMANS. 


There  is  a  seed  of  good  people  whicli  never  dies 
out.     {^InilefectiliilUas  iccUske.) 

B.  Vers.  7-10.  The  judgment  of  hardening  on 
the  Israelites  not  behjuging  to  the  ekeiioii.  1.  Why 
is  this  judgment  inllicted  u[)on  tliem?  a.  Not  be- 
cause it  was  detfrminud  irum  eternity  against  tiieui ; 
but  ;  B.'L-ause  they,  according  to  oha[).  ix.  30  IT., 
souglii  rigliteousness  by  works  and  not  by  faith, 
and,  accordingly,  became  guilty  themselves.  2.  In 
wliat  docs  this  judgment  consist  V  God  fulfils  in 
tliem  what  He,  a.  Has  said  by  Isaiah  ;  b.  By  David. 

Nova  B'ibl.  Tub.:  The  terrible  judgment  of  hard- 
ening !  They  have  hell,  who  are  smitten  and  do  not 
feel  it;  who  have  eyes,  and  do  not  see;  who  have 
ears,  and  do  not  hear  ;  who  have  poison  and  death 
instead  of  the  bread  of  life  ;  who  have  ruin,  punisli- 
nieiit,  and  condenniation,  instead  of  strength,  joy, 
and  comfort ;  who  have  darkness  instead  of  light, 
and  earth  instead  of  heaven. — Ckamek:  0  God, 
Tliou  beautiful  and  clear  light,  Thou  wouldst  blind 
no  one  ;  and  Thou  only  dost  it  as  a  righteous  Judge 
nfter  one  has  blinded  himself  in  the  power  of  the 
devil ;  2  Cor.  iv.  4  (ver.  lu). — Roos :  When  the 
titble  (where  they  concoct  mischievous  devices), 
where  they  usually  sit  unconcernedly  and  eat  good 
thing.s,  becomes  a  rope,  a  trap,  ruin,  and  a  recom- 
pense for  the  unfaithfulness  and  violence  which  they 
have  exercised  against  others,  it  is  a  symbol  of  all 
the  means  by  which  men  unexpectedly  become  in- 
volved in  dangers  by  their  words,  or,  by  their  decep- 
tion or  power,  are  led  into  tlie  hands  of  their  ene- 
mies, and  sustain  real  injury  (ver.  9). 

Lisco :  The  burdens  of  age— dim-sightcdness 
and  crookedness — are  likewise  a  symbol  of  ruin 
(ver.  10). 

Hklbxeu:  God  has  piven  them  such  a  spirit; 
that  is,  He  h;is  permitted  it  to  visit  them  as  a  neces- 
sary conse(iuencc,  as  a  righteous  punishment,  be- 
cause I  hey  made  such  resistance  to  the  strivings  of 
the  Divine  Spirit  (ver.  8).  Comp.  Acts  ii.  37  ;  vii. 
61. — Man,  both  the  individual  and  the  people,  de- 
clines into  wretched  slavery  by  apostasy  from  God 
(ver.  10). 

C.  Vers.  11,  12.  The  fall  of  the  Jews  is  the 
salvation  of  the  Gentiles.  1.  No  dark  fatality  rules 
hero  ;  but,  2.  The  loving  providence  of  God,  which 
continually  turns  every  thing  evil  U)  a  good  purpose. 
— N'otliing  is  so  bad  that  God  cannot  make  it  serve 
a  good  purpose. — Providential  sovereignty  :  i.  It  is 
mysterious,  in  so  far  as  we  often  cannot  understand 
why  it  permits  evil ;  2.  It  is  clear  and  plain,  in  so 
far  as  it  always  causes  good  to  come  from  evil. 
Comp.  Gen.  1.  20. 

SiAiiK!:,  Hedixgkk:  What  a  great  Artificer  is 
God  !  He  makes  good  out  of  evil,  medicine  out  of 
poison,  and  something  out  of  nothing. — Uoos :  Has 
God  brought  nothing  good  out  of  this  evil  ?  God 
forbid  !  From  their  fall  there  has  taken  place  the 
salvation  of  the  nations,  to  which  the  gospel  was 
direct(!d  after  it  had  Ijeen  scorned  by  the  Jews  (Matt. 
xxi  4:'.;  Acts  xiii.  4()— tS  ;  xxii.  1S-2I  ;  xxviii.  27, 
28)  timt  the  latter  might  be  provoked  to  jealousy  by 
the  ftirmer. 

Gkiu.ach,  Calvin  :  "  As  a  wife  who  has  been 
ciat  away  from  her  husband  because  of  her  guilt  is 
so  iiillaiiicd  l)y  jealousy  that  she  feels  herself  im- 
pelled by  it  to  become  reconciled  again  to  her  hus- 
band, no  shall  it  now  come  to  pass  that  the  Jews, 
having  seen  the  Gentiles  taking  their  place,  and  be- 
ing pained  by  their  l)eing  east  away,  shall  strive  after 
reconciliatioa  with  God  ;  "  comp.  Kph.  v.  25-33. 


Lisco  :  God's  wisdom  brings  good  out  of  Israel's 
perversity.  Paul  does  not  say  that  the  individual 
unbelieving  Israelite  cannot  be  lost;  but  theie  ia 
quite  a  difference  between  the  individual  and  tho 
people  (ver.  11). 

D.  Vers.  13-28.  How  does  Paul  wish  to  be  re. 
garded  by  the  Gentiles?  1.  By  all  means  as  their 
A))ostle,  who  magnifies  this  his  ofiice  ;  2.  But  yet, 
at  the  same  time,  as  a  true  friend  of  his  lineal  kin- 
dred,  who  wishes  to  be  the  means  of  saving  some 
of  them,  because  they  are  destined  for  lile  (vers. 
13-lG). — The  rich  mercy  shown  to  Israel ;  percepti- 
ble, 1.  From  its  rejection,  which  is  the  reconciling 
of  the  world  ;  2.  From  its  reception,  which  is  lite 
from  the  dead  (vers.  13-15). — The  figure  of  the  first- 
fruits  as  related  to  the  justification  of  infant  bap- 
tism ;  comp.  1  Cor.  vii.  14  (ver.  16). — Likewise  the 
figure  of  the  root  and  the  branches.  (Comp.  also 
the  Zurich  Catechism,  Question  73,  b.)  The  figure 
of  the  olive  tree.  1.  The  Apostle  warns  the  Gentile 
Christians  against  pernicious  presumption  (vers.  17, 
18);  2.  He  takes  away  the  strength  from  such  a 
possible  and  proud  objection  on  their  part  (vers. 
19-21) ;  3.  He  exhorts  them  to  behold  God's  good- 
ness and  severity  (ver.  22);  4.  He  also  declares  to 
them  his  joyous  hope  of  the  future  conversion  of 
Israel  (vers.  23,  24). — The  branches  do  not  bear  the 
root,  but  the  root  bears  the  branches.  Application  : 
1.  To  the  relation  of  children  and  parents  ;  2.  To 
the  unconfirmed  and  the  Church  (ver.  18). — Do  you 
stand  by  faith  ?  Then  do  not  be  proud,  but  fear 
(ver.  20). — God's  goodness  and  severity  (ver.  22). — 
God  can  graft  them  in  again  ;  as  this  was  the  Apos- 
tle's hope  for  the  children  of  Israel,  so  is  it  ours 
(ver.  24). — The  future  conversion  of  all  Israel.  1. 
When  will  it  take  place?  When  the  fulness  of  the 
Gentiles  is  come  into  the  kingdom  of  God,  and  the 
time  of  tlie  blindness  in  part  of  Israel  is  past.  2. 
Wiiy  will  it  take  place  ?  a.  Because  God  has  prom- 
ised it  by  the  prophets ;  6.  Because  God  has  once 
chosen  His  people  ;  c.  Because  He  does  not  repent 
His  gifts  and  call  (vers.  25-29). — The  future  conver- 
sion of  Israel  is  a  mystery,  in  the  sense  of  Matt.  xiii. 
11 ;  1  Cor.  XV.  51. — The  entrance  of  the  fulne.-is  of 
the  Gentiles  into  God's  kingdom.  1.  It  will  lie 
etlected  by  the  preaching  of  the  gospel  among 
them  ;  2.  It  will  take  place  amid  praise  and  thanks- 
giving (ver.  25). 

SrAKKE  :  It  is  part  of  a  teacher's  wisdom  to  ad- 
dress himself  es[)ecially  to  every  class  of  men  in  an 
assembly  (ver.  13). — One  often  falls,  and  yet  by  his 
fall  another  rises ;  oh,  wonderful  and  yet  holy  gov- 
ernment of  God  (ver.  15)! — A  whole  church,  a 
wiiole  ministry,  a  whole  comnmiiity,  and  a  whole 
generation,  must  not  be  rejected  on  account  of  a 
few  fools  (ver.  1(1). — The  living  of  the  Jews  among 
us  in  a  dispersed  way  can  be  of  use  to  us,  for  tho 
frequent  sigiit  of  a  Jew,  and  his  intercourse  with  us, 
remind  us  frequently  of  this  Pauline  admonition 
(ver.  21). — Why  should  you  trouble  yourselt  if  you 
are  not  rememhenMl  in  any  earthly  will  as  an  in- 
heritor of  corru|)tible  goods?  If  you  stanil  in 
God's  covenant  of  grace,  you  are  more  than  rich 
(ver.  27). — CitAMKu:  Let  no  one  forget  his  origin, 
for  that  will  teach  him  to  be  humble  (ver.  17). — The 
human  heart  is  guilty  of  two  sins :  it  is  deceitful, 
and  desperately  wicked  ;  Jer.  xvii  9.  Therefore 
(lod  must  ()i)i)ose  it  l)y  goodness  and  righteousness 
(ver.  22). — Hkiunoku:  Do  not  cast  away  so  soon 
what  does  not  jilease  you.  Many  .^in  by  doing  this. 
God  has  many  ways  to  souls.     Your  neighbor  \» 


CHAPTER  XI.    1- 


377 


guilty,  and  so  are  you.  Shall  the  Lord  cast  both 
away  ?  Bear  and  forbear.  Tiiue  produces  roses 
even  from  thoru-bushcs  (ver.  17). — Oh,  how  I  wish 
that  no  one  would  sin  against  the  poor  Jews  !  Are 
they  not  Abraham's  seed,  and  the  lineal  kindred  of 
the  C'lurch  ?  0  God,  take  compassion  on  these 
hardened  ones,  and  remember  thy  covenant ! — The 
Jews,  you  say,  only  steal  and  cheat ;  they  are  a  friv- 
olous people  !  Are  you  better  than  they  ?  Cannot 
God  convert  them '?  They  hear  the  word,  and  so 
do  you  ;  neither  you  nor  they  are  pious.  ^Yhich  has 
the  gi'euter  condemnation — you,  or  these  who  are 
under  a  judgment  ?  The  same  blindness  will  come 
over  you,  if  you  do  not  turn  to  Christ  (ver.  23). — 
If  it  is  a  mystery,  who  would  be  so  daring  as  to  de- 
sire to  fathom  it  ?  If  it  is  a  revealed  mystery,  who 
will  deny  the  conversion  of  the  Jews  ?  Though  you 
cannot  imagine  how  it  will  come  to  pass,  neither  can 
I  imagine  how  those  who  were  formerly  Gentiles  and 
servants  of  the  devil,  shall  now  be  God's  children 
and  the  temple  of  His  Spirit  (ver.  25). — JS'ova  Bibl. 
Tub. :  Every  thing  which  God  does  must  be  regard- 
ed as  for  our  improvement ;  His  judgments  to  lead 
us  to  it,  .ind  His  mercy  and  grace  to  keep  us  to  it, 
even  to  the  end.  Because  thy  loving-kindness  is 
better  than  life,  my  lips  shall  praise  thee  ;  Ps.  Ixiii. 
3  (ver.  22). — Quesxel  :  Let  no  sinner  despair! 
There  is  no  abyss  of  sin  from  which  God  cannot  res- 
cue him.  He  who  returns  to  Him  v;ith  faith  and 
confidence,  will  find  His  bosom  open  to  him  (ver. 
23). 

Spexer,  on  ver.  23  :  We  have  here  the  clear  tes- 
timony that  the  poor  castaway  people  shall  hereafter 
be  received  to  grace,  and  be  converted  to  their  Sa- 
viour ;  and  the  promises  once  given  them  repeatedly 
in  the  prophets,  shall  be  fulfilled  in  them.  From 
the  beginning  of  the  Christian  Church  down  to  the 
present  time,  this  has  been  taught  and  believed  by 
its  dearest  teachers,  from  many  passages  of  the  Old 
and  New  Testament  Scriptures ;  and  we,  too,  have 
no  ground  of  departing  from  it,  or  looking  more  at 
the  hardness  of  those  hearts  which  appear  impossi- 
ble to  be  converted,  than  at  God's  promise.  Yet  the 
time  and  manner  of  God's  effecting  the  work  we 
should  as  well  commit  to  Divine  wisdom,  as  rejoice 
with  thanksgiving  for  Divine  grace  because  of  the 
thing  itself;  and  when  such  a  result  is  effected,  we 
hope  for  all  the  more  blessed  condition  of  the 
Church,  but  meanwhile  heartily  pray  for  the  fulfil- 
ment of  such  hope, 

Gerlach,  on  ver.  16  :  The  first  figure  says,  the 
part  has  the  nature  of  the  whole ;  the  second,  the 
derived  has  the  nature  of  its  origin.  The  Apostle 
lays  greatest  stress  upon  the  latter  figure,  for  he 
dwells  upon  it  afterward,  and  portrays  it  in  clearer 
colors. — The  Apostle  purposely  uses  here  a  very 
striking  figure,  from  a  transaction  which  did  not  in 
reality  occur — the  grafting  of  the  branch  of  a  wild 
olive  tree  on  a  good  stock — in  order  to  show  that 
the  Gentiles,  in  a  higher  sense  than  the  Jews,  are 
called  to  salvation  "  contrary  to  nature  "  (ver.  24) — 
that  is,  by  supernatural  grace  overcoming  their  na- 
ture; comp.  Luke  xii.  37  (ver.  18). — Paul  calls  every 
thing  7iiystery  which  man  cannot  know  of  himself, 
and  can  only  perceive  by  Divine  revelation.  Pre- 
viously it  was  the  call  of  the  Gentiles  (chap.  xvi. 
25  ;  Eph.  iii.  3),  but  now  it  is  that  of  the  Jews. 
Comp.  Col.  ii.  2 ;  1  Cor.  xv.  51  (ver.  25). — The  con- 
tinued existence  of  the  Israelites  among  all  the  re- 
maining nations — this  perfectly  isolated  phenomenon 
:n  history — is  therefore  designed  by  God  to  glorify 


hereafter  His  covenant  faithfulness  by  a.  future  tota. 
conversion  of  the  people  (ver.  26), 

Lisco :  Under  what  conditions  we  become  and 
remain  participants  of  God's  grace  (vers.  22-24). 

Hkcbneh,  on  ver.  16  :  Honorable  forefathers  an 
earnest  admonition  to  their  posterity  (ver,  16). — ■ 
Nothing  more  clearly  proves  the  strict  righteousness 
of  God,  than  His  judgment  on  the  fallen  angels  and 
the  unbelieving  people  of  Israel.  This  should  in- 
spire every  one  with  awe,  and  with  solicitude  for 
himself  (ver.  21). — It  is  very  necessary  to  bear  in 
mind  both  God's  severity  and  goodness  ;  His  sever- 
ity, in  order  to  be  preserved  from  indulgence,  false 
security,  and  backsliding ;  and  His  goodness,  in 
order  to  be  encouraged,  and  to  hope  for  forgiveness 
and  improvement.  God  has  revealed  both.  With- 
out the  two  together  there  would  be  no  training  of 
men  (ver.  22). — Israel  is  without  God,  because  it  is 
without  Christ ;  God  has  disappeared  from  the  syna- 
gogue. He  who  would  find  God,  must  be  converted 
to  Christ  (ver.  26). — The  true  deliverance  of  Israel 
does  not  take  place  by  civil,  but  by  spiritual,  emanci- 
pation— the  mercy  of  God.  Mercy  is  the  object  of 
the  reception  of  the  Jews  into  the  Christian  Church 
(ver.  27). — God's  friendship  with  the  patriarchs  en- 
dures eternally  (ver.  28). 

Besser  :  It  is  with  Mary,  uith  the  shepherds, 
with  Simeon,  %nth  the  first-called  disciples,  with  the 
Galilean  women,  u'ith  the  Apostles,  and  imili  the 
Pentecostal  Church  of  Jerusalem,  and  not  without 
or  separated  from  them,  that  thou.  Gentile,  hast  a 
share  in  the  root  and  sap  of  the  olive  tree.  "  Paul 
loves  the  little  word  '  with,''  "  says  Bengel,  in  speak- 
ing of  the  Gentiles  ;  chap,  xv,  10  ;  Epli.  ii.  19,  22  ; 
iii.  6  (vers.  17,  18). — See  that  you  are  not  led  into 
the  folly  of  planting  the  top  of  the  tree  in  the  earth, 
and  imagining  that  you  bear  the  root,  and  that  first 
from  you,  German  blood,  the  good  sap  of  the  olive 
tree  has  really  received  strength  and  impulse  (ver, 
18). 

Deichert  (vers.  11-21):  What  serves  for  the 
fall  of  some,  must  serve  for  the  support  of  others. 
1.  Corroboration  of  this  experience  generally  and 
particularly  ;  2,  For  what  should  it  serve  both  the 
fallen  and  the  raised  ? 

E.  Vers.  29-36.  God's  general  compassion  ou 
all.  1,  On  the  Gentiles,  who  fonueriy  did  not  be- 
lieve, but  now  believe  ;  2.  Ou  the  Jews,  who  do  not 
believe,  but  shall  hereafter  believe  (vers.  29-32). — 
All  concluded  in  unbelief.  1.  How  far?  2.  To 
what  end  ?  (ver.  32.) — The  universality  of  Divine 
grace  (ver.  32). — An  apostolical  song  of  praise : 
1.  For  God's  fulness  of  grace  ;  2.  For  His  wisdom  ; 
3.  For  His  knowledge  (vers.  33-36). — Every  thing 
is  of,  throw  h,  and  in  (to)  God  (ver.  36). — To  God 
alone  be  the  honor  (ver,  36) ! 

LuTHKR,  on  ver.  32  :  Observe  this  principal  deo 
laration,  which  condemns  all  righteousness  of  man 
and  of  works,  and  praises  only  God's  compassion  in 
our  obtaining  it  by  faith. — Starke  :  God  must  be 
the  beginning,  the  middle,  and  the  end  of  all  things 
(ver.  36). — HEniNGER  :  How  audacious  not  only  to 
look  upon  God's  council-chamber,  but  to  become 
master  of  it !  Men  do  not  allow  their  political  fol- 
lies to  be  known  ;  should  we  blind  ones,  then — we 
who  are  of  yesterday  and  know  nothing — invade 
God's  wisdom  ?  Job  viii.  9.  0  man,  be  acute  with 
the  Scriptures,  but  not  on  and  beside  the  Scriptures. 
Hypercritics  mount  high,  and  fall  low  ;  and  it  all 
amounts  to  nothing  with  the  Divine  Being  (ver.  33), 

Speneu  :   The   loftiness   of   the   divine   Majestj 


378 


THE   EnSTLE   OF   PAUL   TO   THE   ROMANS. 


(vers,  33-36). — Roos :  What  Paul  has  called  the 
elediou,  he  iimuediately  afterward  divides  into  two 
ideas,  f/i/ts  and  calling,  and  says  that  God  does  not 
repent  them.  God  has  chosen  Israel,  and  remains 
firm  to  it.  lie  has  from  the  beginning  shown  great 
merey  to  tliis  people  ;  and  He  does  not  re|)ent  of  all 
this.  Single  branches  can,  indeed,  be  cut  otf,  and 
individual  Jews  can  be  lost  in  great  numbers;  but 
the  wh(jle  tree  will  not  be  cut  off,  the  whole  people 
cannot  be  cast  away  (ver.  29). 

Geklacii  :  God's  purposes  for  Israel  will  con- 
tinue uninterruptedly  until  the  end  of  the  present 
course  of  the  world  ;  as  the  fulfilment  of  all  the 
promises,  there  is  yet  to  take  place  a  great  popular 
conversion,  and  a  mighty  activity  within  the  Church 
icself.  But  from  all  this  we  cannot  conclude  that 
there  will  be  an  external  restoration  of  the  Jews  to 
a  people  in  the  political  sense,  and  their  return  to 
the  land  of  Canaan  (ver.  29J. — The  survey  of  the 
wonderfully  glorious  saving  purpose  of  God,  as  He 
gradually  unfolded  it  in  the  foregoing  verses  to  the 
eyes  of  the  Apostle,  leads  the  latter  to  make,  from 
the  bottom  of  his  heart,  this  exclamation  of  amazed 
and  adoring  wonder.  The  wisdom  of  God  compre- 
hended the  purpose  which  His  love  had  promjited  ; 
and  God's  knowledge  marked  out  the  way,  defined 
the  measure,  and  ordered  the  course  for  its  execu- 
tion. His  judgments  even  on  His  own  children, 
when  they  wish  to  set  up  their  own  righteousness, 
and  the  wai/s  in  which  He  draws  the  most  remote 
Gentiles  and  most  hardened  Pharisees  to  himself,  are 
unsearchable  ;  but  they  are  not  absolutely  and  eter- 
nally concealed,  but  the  light  of  revelation  is  dis- 
closed to  n)an  by  the  Spirit,  which  searcheth  after 
the  deej)  things  of  God,  and  reveals  them  to  those 
who  love  God  (vers.  33-30). 

Schleikumacmer  :  The  contemplation  of  the 
order  of  salvation,  that  God  has  concluded  all  in 
unbelief,  is  also  nece.-.sary  to  us  for  wonder  at  Divine 
wi.sdum.  1.  God's  concluding  all  in  unbelief,  consti- 
tutes the  nature  of  this  Hivine  order  of  salvation 
and  of  redemption  through  Christ.  2.  In  this, 
Divine  wisdom  is  most  to  be  perceived  and  admired 
(vers.  32,  33). — .ScnwKizEii:  The  unfathomable 
depth  of  (lod's  wisdom.  1.  We  represent  this  un- 
fathoniiible  dei)th  to  ourselves  in  Iniinility  ;  2.  We 
lift  oarxehn'.ii  up  in  faith,  since  therein  the  ways  of 
Divine  wisdom  are  concealed  (ver.  33). 

TiiK  Pkriooi'E  for  the  Sunditif  after  Trinity 
(vers.  33-36). — Woi>f  :  How  our  reflection  should 
he  directed  to  the  unsearchable  puiposes  of  God. 
We  see,  1.  From  whence  it  should  proceed  ;  and, 
2.  To  what  it  must  lead. — Ranke  :  How  one  can 
learn  to  submit  to  God's  incomprehensible  ways : 
1.  By  being  humble ;  2.  By  being  confident. — 
Petri  :  How  should  we  act  in  regaid  to  the  incom- 
prehensibility of  God  V  1.  We  should  be  discreet 
in  our  o|)inions  ;  2.  We  should  l)e  humble  in  our 
disposition  ;  3.  We  should  be  faithful  in  our  work. 
— Kai'FF  :  The  Holy  Trinity  :  1.  An  unfatliomal)le 
d('[)tli  ;  2.  But  an  inexhaustible  fountain  of  life. — 
J'i.okey  :  Our  inability  to  comprehend  God  is  a  re- 
minder that  should  lead  U8  to  a  careful  reflection. 
It  is:  1.  A  reminder  of  the  narrowne.'W  of  our 
mind,  that  we  should  be  warned  by  it  against  useless 
Bubtleties  ;  2.  A  reminder  respecting  tlie  Scriptures, 
that  we  should  be  moved  thereby  to  hold  fast  to 
(rod's  reveali'd  word  ;  3.  A  reminder  of  eternity, 
tliat  we  should  therel)y  think  of  the  perfect  knowl- 
edge which  awaits  us  in  the  future  world. — Sciiii.Tz: 
Tile  Lord's  ways :   1.  Uow  God  {jlorifies  them  before 


our  eyes ;    2,    To  what  end  God's  glory,  which  il 
declared  in  His  ways,  sunnuous  us. 

[Bishop  Hall  :  On  Divine  severiti/.  With  how 
envious  eyes  did  the  Jews  look  upon  those  first  hep 
aids  of  the  gospel,  who  carried  the  glad  tidhigs  of 
salvation  to  the  des|)ised  Gentiles  I  What  cruel 
storms  of  persecution  did  they  raise  against  those 
blessed  messengers,  whose  feet  deserved  to  be  beuu- 
tiful !  wherein  their  obstinate  unbelief  turned  lo  our 
advantage  ;  for,  after  they  had  made  themselves  uu 
worthy  of  that  gospel  of  peace,  that  blessing  waa 
instantly  derived  upon  us  Gentiles,  and  we  hai)pily 
changed  conditions  with  them. — The  Jews  were  once 
the  children,  and  we  the  dogs  under  the  table :  the 
crumbs  were  our  lot,  the  bread  was  theirs.  Now  ia 
the  case,  through  their  wilful  incredulity,  altered : 
they  are  the  dogs,  and  we  the  children  ;  we  sit  at  a 
full  table,  while  their  hunger  is  not  satisfied  with 
scraps. — On  the  necensitji  of  a  living  faith  in  Christ, 
If  ever,  therefore,  we  look  for  any  consolation  in 
Christ,  or  to  have  any  part  in  this  beautiful  union,  it 
must  be  the  main  care  of  our  hearts  to  make  sure 
of  a  lively  faith  in  the  Lord  Jesus  ;  to  lay  fai:t  hold 
ui)on  Him  ;  to  chisp  Him  close  to  us  ;  yea,  to  receive 
Him  inwardly  into  our  bosoms,  and  so  to  make  Him 
ours,  and  ourselves  His,  that  we  may  be  joined  to 
Him  as  our  Head,  espou.sed  to  Him  as  our  Hus- 
band, incorporated  into  Him  as  our  Nourishment, 
engrafted  in  Him  as  our  Stock,  and  laid  u[)on  Him 
as  a  sure  Foundation. —  On  the  i7iconiprehcnsibility  of 
Divine  ivisdnm.  It  is  unfitting  for  the  vulgar  mind 
to  attempt  with  profane  foot  to  ascend  the  highest 
pinnacles  of  heaven,  and  there  to  scrutinize  with 
presumptuous  eyes  the  holy  innermost  places  of  God, 
and  to  pronounce  an  opinion  on  the  most  profound 
secrets  of  the  Divine  wisdom  ! — Shall  we  dare  to 
measure  the  depths  of  the  Divine  law  with  the  di- 
minutive standard  of  our  intellect  ?  Shall  we  tram- 
ple on  things  which  even  the  angels  gaze  on  v.iih 
awe?  But  in  this  respect  I  do  not  so  much  blame 
the  people  as  the  teachers  themselves,  who  have  so 
inopportunely  supplied  the  ears  and  miuds  of  the 
multitude  with  these  subjects. 

[FAnisnoiN:  What  better  spectacle  for  the  Cliurch 
than  the  synagogue,  in  whose  ruins  and  desolation 
she  may  read  the  dangerous  effects  of  spiritual  pride 
and  haughtiness  of  mind,  and  thence  learn  not  to 
insult,  but  tremble  ? — Take  virtue  in  its  own  shape, 
and  it  seems  to  call  for  fear  and  trembling,  and  to 
bespeak  us  to  be  careful  and  watchful  that  we  forfeit 
not,  so  fair  an  estate  for  false  riches  ;  but  take  it,  as 
from  the  devil's  forge,  and  then,  contrary  to  its  own 
nature,  it  helps  to  blind  and  hoodwink  us,  that  we 
see  not  the  danger  we  are  in,  how  that  not  oidy  the 
way,  but  our  feet,  are  slii)pery.  It  mifortunately 
occasions  its  own  ruin,  whilst  we,  witli  Nero  in  Taci- 
tus, spend  riotously  upon  presumption  of  treasure. — 
Leioiiton  :  Our  only  way  to  know  that  our  names 
are  not  in  that  black  line,  and  to  be  persuaded  that 
He  hath  chosen  us  to  be  .saved  by  His  Son,  is  this, 
to  finil  tint  we  have  chosen  Him,  and  are  built  on 
Him  by  faith,  which  is  the  fruit  of  His  love  who 
fii-st  chooseth  us,  and  which  we  may  read  in  our 
esteem  of  Him. 

[CiiAKNoCK :  On  rrgeneration.  The  increasing 
the  perfection  of  one  species,  can  never  moiml  the 
thing  so  increased,  to  the  i)erfeetion  of  another  spe- 
cies. If  you  could  vastly  increase  the  heat  of  fire, 
you  could  never  make  it  a.scend  to  the  perfection  of 
a  star.  If  you  could  increa.se  mere  moral  works  to 
the  highest  pitch  they  ure  capable  of,  they  can  never 


CHAPTER  XI.   1-36. 


379 


make  you  gracious,  because  grace  is  another  species, 
and  the  nature  of  them  must  be  changed  to  make 
them  of  another  kind.  All  the  moral  actions  in  the 
world  will  never  malve  our  hearts  of  themselves  of 
another  kind  thun  moral.  Works  make  not  the 
heart  good,  but  a  good  heart  makes  the  works  good. 
It  is  not  our  walking  in  God's  statutes  materially, 
which  procures  us  a  new  heart,  but  a  new  heart  is 
niicessary  before  walking  in  God's  statutes. —  On  the 
Miiscry  of  unbelief.  Some  humbled  souls  think  God 
is  not  so  merciful  as  He  declares ;  He  swears  to  ex- 
pel their  doubts.  Presumptuous  persons  think  God 
Ls  not  so  just ;  He  swears  to  expel  their  vain  con- 
ceits. This  sin  ties  up,  as  it  were,  the  hands  of  an 
omnipotent  mercy  from  saving  such  a  one. 

[TiLLOTSON  ;  We  are  apt  to  attribute  all  things 
to  the  next  and  immediate  agent,  and  to  look  no 
higher  than  second  causes  ;  not  considering  that  all 
the  motions  of  natural  causes  are  directly  subordi- 
nate to  the  first  cause,  and  all  the  actions  of  free 
creatures  are  under  the  government  of  God's  wise 
providence,  so  that  nothing  happens  to  us  besides 
the  design  and  intention  of  God. — If  God  be  the 
last  end  of  all,  let  us  make  Him  our  last  end,  and 
refer  all  our  actions  to  His  glory.  This  is  that  which 
is  due  to  Him,  as  He  is  the  first  cause,  and  therefore 
He  does  most  reasonably  require  it  of  us. 

[Hopkins  :  Fear  God,  lest  at  any  time,  through 
any  neglect  or  miscarriage  of  yours.  He  should  be 
provoked  to  suspend  His  influence,  and  withdraw 
His  grace  from  you,  and  to  leave  you  to  your  own 
weakness  and  impotency,  upon  whose  influence  all 
your  obedience  doth  depend. 

[Henry  :  The  best  evidence  of  integrity  is  a 
freedv^m  from  the  present  prevailing  corruptions  of 
the  times  and  places  that  we  live  in  ;  to  swim  against 
the  stream  when  it  is  strong.     Those  God  will  own 


for  His  faithful  witnesses  that  are  bold  in  bearing 
their  testimony  to  the  present  truth.  This  is  tliank 
worthy  :  not  to  bow  to  Baal  when  every  body  bows. 
Sober  singularity  is  commonly  the  badge  of  true 
sincerity. 

[J.  Wesley  :  God  always  reserved  a  seed  for 
himself;  a  few  that  worshipped  Him  in  spirit  and 
in  truth.  I  have  often  doubted  whether  these  were 
not  the  very  persons  whom  the  rich  and  honorable 
Christians,  Avho  will  always  have  number  as  well  aa 
power  on  their  aide,  did  not  stigmatize,  from  time  to 
time,  with  the  title  of  heretics.  Perhaps  it  was 
chiefly  by  this  aitifice  of  the  devil  and  his  children, 
that  the  good  which  was  in  them  being  evil  spoken 
of,  they  were  prevented  from  being  so  extensively 
useful  as  otherwise  they  might  have  been.  Nay,  I 
have  doubted  whether  that  arch-heretic,  Montanus, 
was  not  one  of  the  holiest  men  in  the  second  century. 

[Clarke  :  The  designs  are  the  offsprhig  of  infi- 
nite  wisdom,  and  therefore  they  are  all  right ;  the 
means  are  the  most  proper,  as  being  the  choice  of  an 
infinite  knowledge  that  cannot  err :  we  may  safely 
credit  the  goodness  of  the  dcsic/n,  founded  in  infi- 
nite wisdom ;  we  may  rely  on  the  due  accomplish- 
ment of  the  end,  because  the  means  are  chosen  and 
applied  by  infinite  knowledge  and  skill. 

[Barnes,  on  ver.  14:  We  may  see  here,  1.  That 
it  is  the  earnest  wish  of  the  ministry  to  save  the 
souls  of  men  ;  2.  That  they  should  urge  every  argu- 
ment and  appeal  with  reference  to  this ;  3.  That 
even  the  most  awful  and  humbling  truths  may  have 
this  tendency ;  4.  It  is  right  to  use  all  the  means 
in  our  power,  not  absolutely  wicked,  to  save  men. 
Paul  was  full  of  devices  ;  and  much  of  the  success 
of  the  ministry  will  depend  on  a  v/ise  use  of  plans, 
that  may,  by  the  Divine  blessing,  arrest  and  eave  th« 
souls  of  men. — J.  P.  H.] 


880  THE   EPISTLE    OF   PAUL   TO   THE   ROMANS 


PART     SECOND. 

The  Practical  Theme:  The  calling  of  the  Roman  Christians,  on  the  ground 
of  their  accomplished  redemption,  or  the  universal  meecy  of  God  (whicli  will  be 
extended  to  all),  to  represent  the  living  worship  of  God  in  the  completion  of  the 
real  burnl-offeriag,  and  to  form  a  universal  Christian  church-life  for  the  realization  of 
the  call  of  all  nations  to  praise  and  glorify  God,  so  that  they  too  may  recognize 
and  sustain  the  universal  call  of  the  Apostle.  In  correspondence  with  this  is  the 
recommendation  of  his  companions,  assistants,  and  friends,  in  sending  his  greetings 
to  them ;  in  contrast  with  which  is  his  warning  against  Judaizing  and  jiaganizing 
false  teachers ;  chap.  xii.  1-xvi.  20. — Conclusion.  Salutations  of  friends.  Amen 
(vers.  21-27). 

Literature. — Borger,  Dissertatio  de  parte  cpistolce  ad  Romanos  parcenetica.    Lugd.  Bat.,  1*810. 


FIRST     DIVISION. 

THE    CALLLN'G    OF   THE   ROMAN   CHURCH   TO   A   UNIVERSAL   CHRISTIAN   DEPORTMENT. 

Chap.  XII.   1-XV.    13. 

First  Section. — TTie  practical  theme  (chap.  xii.  1,  2).      The  proper  conduct  of  Christians  ioivard  the 
fellowxhip  of  the  brethren  for  the  establishment  of  a  harmonious  church-life  (vers.  3-8). 

Chap.   XIL  1-8. 

1  I  beseech  you  therefore,  brethren,  by  the  mercies  of  God,  that  ye  [to]  * 
present  your  bodies  a  living  sacrifice,  holy,  acceptable  [well-pleasing]  unto  God, 

2  xchlch  is  your  reasonable  [lational]  service.  [,]  And  be  not  [And  not  to  be]' 
conformed  to  this  world  :  but  be  ye  transformed  [but  to  be  transfigured] '  by 
the  renewing  of  your*  mind,  that  ye  may  prove  what  is  that  good,  and  accept- 
able, and  perfect  will  of  God  \or,  what  is  the  will  of  God,  what  is  good,  and 
well-pleasing,  and  perfect].^ 

3  F'or  I  say,  through  the  grace  given  unto  me,  to  every  man  that  is  among 
you,  not  to  think  of  himself  more  highly  than  he  ought  to  think  ;  but  to  think 
soberly  [or,  not  to  be  high-minded  above  what  he  ought  to  be  minded,  but  to  l>e 
so  minded  as  to  be  sober-minded],"  according  as  God  hath  dealt  to  every  man 

4  tlie  measure  of  faith.      For  as  we  have  many  members  in  one  body,  and  all 

5  members  have  not  the  same  oflice  :    So  we,  being  many,  are  one  body  in  Christ, 

6  and  every  one'  members  one  of  another.  Having  then  gifts  differing  according 
to  the  grace  that  is  given  to  us,  whether  prophecy,  let  t(s  2^t'ophesy "  according 

V  to  the  proportion  of  faith  ;    Or  ministry,  let  its  wait  on  oitr  ministering ;  or  he 
8  tliat   teacheth,  on   teaching ;    Or  he  th.at  exhorteth,   on  exhortation  :    he  that 

giveth,  let  him  do  it  with  simplicity;  he  that  rrJeth,  with  diligence;  he  that 

sheweth  mercy,  witli  cheerfulness. 


'  Vor.  1. — [Thp  infinitive  should  >ic  retainod  in  the  English  ronderinp,  for  the  saha  of  convenience  In  connecting 
the  infinitivo^f,  wliich  iiro  to  }»•  ncccpted  as  the  coiTcct  rondiiifrs  in  vor.  2. 

"  Ver. '2.— [The  II  r.  (wiUi  N.  II'.  L.,  rniiiiy  versions  and  fatliero)  reads:  <n><rxiM<"'i<r«''9  e ,  which  is  adojited  l>y 
Wordswoith  and  Xrcgellcs.    The  maJDrity  of  modern   editors  and  commentators  (Lacbmiuni,  Xischendoif,  ThoIuc]i« 


CHAPTER  Xn.   1-8. 


381 


De  "Wette,  Meyer,  Alford,  Lange)  accept  the  infinitive;  so  A.  B^.  D.  F.  Most  of  these  support  o-vvo-xijMaTt'^ecreai, 
rather  than  avo-x-  Meyer  says  :  "It  is  quite  as  likely  that  the  imperative  was  written,  to  make  ver.  i  an  independeni 
eenteuce,  as  tliat  the  inhnitive  was  substituted  lor  the  sake  of  confonnity  with  ver.  1."  Accepting  the  infinitive,  we 
place  ;i  comma  at  the  close  i>f  ver.  1,  and  emend  as  ahove. 

'  Ver.  2. — [Heic  the  infinitive  iJ.eTaiJiop(j>ova-dai.  receives  the  additional  support  of  N. — The  E.  V.  ia  mors 
euphonious  than  exact  in  rendering  these  verbs  :  cnufnrmed,  transformed.  Transfgured  (Five  Ang.  Clergymen)  is  mora 
accurate,  and  reproduces,  in  a  meastu-e,  the  variety  in  the  form  of  the  Greek. 

■•  ViT.  i!. — [After  yods,  the  7?ec.  (\.  D^.  L.)  inserts  vixiav.  It  is  omitted  in  A.  B.  D'.  F. ;  rejected  by  Lachmann^ 
Tischendurf,  Meyer,  Allbrd,  Tiegelles,  Lange  ;  probably  a  mechanical  repetilion  from  ver.  1. 

*  Ver.  2. — [Ihis  emendation  accords  with  l)r.  Lange's  exegesis.  It  is  taken  fiom  Noyes ;  the  Amer.  Bible  Union 
gives  a  similar  rendering. 

*  Ver.  3 — [Ihe  bracketted  rendering  is  that  of  Alford,  'Wordswortb,  &o. ;  but  is,  at  best,  a  elunisy  attempt  to 
reproduce  the  play  on  the  words  iineptjtpovelv ,   <l>pov€iv,   am^povelv. 

'  Ver  5.-^[Tlie  i  eading  of  the  Rec.  (6)  is  very  poorly  suppcrted,  though  defended  by  Philippi  on  exegetical  grounds. 
K.  A.  B.  D'.  F.  read  to  ;  which  is  adopted  by  Lachmann,  Xischcndorf,  Meyer,  and  most.  The  clause  contains  a  sol&- 
eisui,  and  means  :  ivhat  (is  true)  as  ngards  iniHviduaU,  (they  are)  viembcrs  of  one  another. 

8  Ver.  6. — [The  difficulties  of  construction  are  discussed  fully  in  the  Exeg.  Sfotis.  The  E.  V.  has  so  happily  filled 
out  the  elliptical  clauses,  and  preserved  the  force  of  the  original,  that  it  is  not  necessary  to  make  any  alterations.  The 
clause  :  let  us  wait  on  our  ministering  (ver.  7),  might  perhaps  be  improved ;  yet,  on  the  whole,  it  presents  the  correct 
meaning. — R.] 


EXEGETICAL  AA'D   CRITICAL. 

Summary. —  Tlie  practical  theme  controlling  the 
whole  of  the  second  part.  The  proper  conduct  of 
Christians,  or  the  calling  of  (Roman)  Christians  to 
the  living  worship  (service)  of  God,*  vers.  1,  2  ;  a. 
The  proper  conduct  toward  the  fellowship  of  believ- 
ing bretliren,  the  Church  (ecclesiastical  duties),  vers. 
3-8  ;  h.  The  proper  conduct  of  Christians  in  all 
personal  relations,  vers.  9-21 ;  c.  Toward  civil  au- 
thorities (duties  toward  the  government),  chap.  xiii. 
1-6  ;  d.  Toward  the  world  in  general.  Recogni- 
tion of  the  rights  of  the  world,  and  of  legal  fellow- 
ship with  it.  Separation,  on  the  contrary,  from  the 
ungodhness  of  the  world,  vers.  Y-14  ;  e.  The  proper 
practice  of  the  living  worship  of  God,  and  its  uni- 
versalitv  in  the  removing  of  the  differences  between 
the  "  weak  "  and  the  "  strong,"  chap.  xiv.  1-xv.  4  ; 
f.  Ex);Grtation  to  unanimity  of  all  the  members  of 
the  Church  to  the  praise  of  God,  on  the  ground  of 
God's  grace,  tor  realizing  the  destination  of  all  na- 
tions to  glorify  God,  cLap.  xv.  5-13. 

See  also  the  headings  of  the  sections.  Meyer : 
*'  General  exhortation  to  holiness."  But  this  "  gen- 
eral "  exhortation  is  very  characteristically  defined 
according  to  the  characteristic,  fundamental  thought 
of  the  whole  Epistle,  in  its  essential  as  well  as  in 
its  personal  reference.  According  to  the  essential 
reference,  the  Apostle  has  shown,  in  the  first  part, 
that  the  corruption  of  the  world  consists  in  its  hav- 
ing fallen  from  the  living  worship  of  God,  and  that 
therefore  redemption  is  a  restoration  of  the  funda- 
mental principles  of  this  living  worship.  The  entire 
holiness  of  Christians  is,  accordingly,  portrayed  as 
the  development  of  a.  living  spiritual  worship.  But 
in  the  personal  reference,  the  Apostle  shows  how 
the  Roman  Christian  congregation  should  be  devel- 
oped  into  a  congregation  of  living  worship,  in  order 
to  be  the  instrument  of  its  extension  to  all  the  world, 
to  serve  as  a  central  organ  for  the  Apostle,  who  has 
perceived  his  calling  in  the  extension  of  this  worship 
mto  all  the  world. 

1.  77(6  practical  theme  (vers.  1,  2).  A  sum- 
mons to  develop  the  service  restored  by  redemp- 
tion. [Comp.  here  the  third  part  of  the  Heidelberg 
Catechism,  On  Thankfulness  to  God  for  Redemp- 
tion.—?. S.] 

*  [The  word  Gottesdienst,  used  here,  and  frequently 
throughout  this  section,  means,  literally:  Service  of  God; 
but,  technically  :  public  service.  Divine  service,  public  wor- 
ship. Dr.  Laiigc  seems  to  combine  both  meanings,  for  he 
implies  that  all  the  duties  here  set  forth  form  not  only  a 
ser^'ioe  of  God,  Init  the  best,  truest  worship,  the  real  litui-gy 
of  the  Ifew  Testament  Chmch. — R.] 


Ver.  1.  I  beseech  you  therefore,  brethren 
[TJuQay.alM  ovv  j'/tac,  adi).qioi~\.  Ac* 
cording  to  Meyer  and  Tholuck,  the  ovv  does  not 
introduce  an  inference  from  the  whole  of  the  pre« 
vious  didactic  part  (as  Calvin,  Bengel,  De  Wette, 
Philippi,  and  others,  would  have  it),  but  from  chap, 
xi.  35,  36.  But  it  must  be  observed,  that  the  con« 
elusion  of  chap.  xi.  constitutes  the  organic  apex  of 
the  entire  doctrinal  division  ;  this  is  especially  true 
of  ver.  32,  with  which  Riickert,  and  others,  would 
connect  this  verse,  Tholuck  fails  to  perceive  the 
Apostle's  practical  theme,  in  saying  :  "  The  Apostle 
was  accustomed  to  make  some  exhortations  follow 
the  chief,  and  therefore  the  didactic,  contents." 

By  the  mercies  of  God  [fVia  tmv  otxrt^)- 
ftmv  rov  ©for]  (chap.  xv.  30  ;  1  Cor.  i.  10 ;  2 
Cor.  X.  1).  The  objective  ground  of  Divine  mercy 
in  their  experience  of  salvation,  is  made  the  sub- 
jective ground  of  his  admonition.  He  refers  to  the 
experience  of  Divine  mercy,  its  consequence,  and 
its  light  and  right,  as  if  he  said,  by  the  name  of 
Divine  mercy.  The  only  difference  is,  that,  in  the 
asseveration  did,  by,  the  speaker  allows  the  subject 
of  his  asseveration  itself  to  speak  as  motive  and 
motor.  The  plural  oiy.r  i,()  n  o  i  corresponds  to 
the  Hebrew  CTariT  ;  but  the  Apostle  has  also  in- 
stituted, in  the  foregoing,  a  threefold  gradation  of 
the  Divine  demonstration  of  grace. 

To  present,  naQaarTjaav.  The  expres- 
sion, which  was  used  of  placing  the  sacrificial  beast 
before  the  altar,  conveys  the  thought  of  the  com- 
plete resignation  and  readiness  which,  on  the  one 
hand,  does  not  in  the  least  hesitate,  but,  on  the 
other,  makes  no  intrusion  by  an  arbitrary  slaying  of 
the  offering. 

Yotir  bodies  [ra  ao')fiara  v/twv'].  The 
holding  of  the  body  in  readiness  for  an  offering  well- 
pleasing  to  God,  is  the  expression  for  the  highest 
measure  of  the  renunciation  of  every  thing  earthly 
and  temporal.     Explanations : 

1.  Figurative  designation  of  personality  itself, 
according  to  the  figure  of  the  offering  (Beza,  De 
"Wette,  and  Philippi  [Stuart,  Hodge]  ). 

2.  The  bodies  in  the  real  sense,  as  the  holiness 
of  the  vovi;  is  added  in  the  second  verse  (Fritzsche, 
Meyer). 

3.  The  sensuous  nature  of  man,  which  leads  him 
to  sin  (Kcillner,  and  others). 

Against  (1.) :  The  Apostle  speaks,  according  to 
the  apostolic  standard,  to  believers,  who,  according 
to  chap,  vi.,  have  a' ready  given  their  personal  life 
to  death.  But  the  body  is  the  organ  and  symbol  of 
all  the  individual  parts,  which  must  be  offered  in 
consequence   of    this   principial  offering.      Against 


382 


TITE    EPISTLE    OF   PAUL   TO   THE   ROWANS. 


(2.),  Cocceius :  Non  pnasumnx  offcrre  eorpn.t  sine 
anima.  The  real  service  performed  in  making  the 
offering  is,  indeed,  finished  with  the  shedding  of 
blood,  or  with  the  resign.-ition  of  the  body.  But 
the  heart,  or  the  life  of  the  spirit,  is  given  to  God 
as  an  expression  that  the  body  is  offered.  Against 
(3.)  Whatever  is  sinful  is  not  fit,  as  such,  for  an 
offering. — The  boily  is  the  organ  and  symbol  of  the 
present  life  in  all  its  relations  and  parts.  Comp. 
chap.  vi.  12,  13,  where  the  question  imder  consider- 
ation is  the  active  consecration  of  all  the  members 
of  the  body.* 

Sacrifice.  Oi<aiav.  We  hold  that  the  Apos- 
tle has  in  mind  the  symbol  of  the  central  offering 
— that  is,  of  the  burnt-offering  (comp.  Tholuck,  p. 
651).  But  the  burnt-offering  was  a  symbol  that  the 
wliole  life,  with  all  its  powers,  shoidd  be  consumed 
in  the  fire  of  God's  sovereignty,  for  His  service  and 
glory.  The  predicates,  living,  L.i')(ra.v,  &c.,  par- 
ticularly the  first,  wliich  the  Apostle  ascribes  to  tliis 
i^rtrict,  are  thought,  by  Meyer,  to  denote  the  an- 
tithesis of  this  New  Testament  offering  to  that  of 
the  Old  Testament :  "  as  an  offering  whirh  lives  (an- 
tithesis to  tl;e  real  offerings  which  lose  tlieir  life)." 
Tlioluck,  on  the  other  iiand,  says  with  propriety : 
"  the  thought  that  in  the  Old  Testament  only  dead 
oflFerings  were  brought  to  God,  is  neither  Jewish  nor 
PauMne ;  to  present  not  only  dead  offerings,  but 
even  sic'r  ones,  was  an  abomination  before  the  Lord ; 
Mai.  i.  8."  Yet  this  applies  only  to  Meyer's  expres- 
sion ;  his  distinction  in  itself  is  well  founded.  Tlie 
predicates,  holy  [dylar']  and  -well-pleasing  to 
God  [n''ciQ(fTTov  roi  Onji^,  do  not  in  them- 
selves fully  constitute  an  antithesis  to  the  Old  Tes- 
tament. TIte  antithesis  is  comprised :  (1.)  In  the 
designation,  your  bodies,  human  bodies ;  which  is 
necessary  to  the  idea  of  a  spiritual  offering ;  (2.) 
In  the  emfihasis  on  the  ■irrsentivg  and  holdiiiff  in 
readiness  for  the  Lord,  as  the  Finisher  of  the  real 
offering ;  in  which  all  their  own  external  self-offering 
11  the  part  of  the  Roman  Christians  is  absofuteli/ 
preclulcd.  By  this  means  the  predicates  acquire  a 
stronger  meaning.  The  liigher  and  real  newness  of 
life,  the  holiness  of,  and  Divine  pleasure  in,  the  life 
of  faith  given  up  to  the  service  of  God,  take  the 
place  of  the  syml)olical  newness  of  life,  holiness  of, 
and  legal  Divine  pleasure  in,  the  offering  of  the 
beiist.  Estiiis,  Bengcl,  and  otliers,  have  connected 
the  Ti'i  (-)k'i  with  nnonrrTlaru;  this  is  correctly 
opposed  by  Meyer  and  TholUck  (see  Pliil.  iv.  18 ; 
comp.  Rom.  vi.  13  ;   1  Peter  ii.  5). 

Which  is  your  rational  service.  [Dr. 
Lange  :  Eiter  vcrniinfti'/ir  {qeisticfn-)  Go(f<sdienst.'\ 
Tlie  accusative  rijv  /oj-tx/ir  '/.ar^fiav  is  in 
apposition  with  the  foregoing  clause,  characterizing 
more  specifically  what  has  been  said,  according  to 
the  New  Testament  conception  of  offering,  in  an- 
tithesis to  that  of  the  Old  Testament.  The  Aa- 
T()(ia,  service,  worship,  which,  in  its  central  idea, 
is  everywheru  an  offering  (see  John  xvi.  "2).  But 
this  sacrificial  worsliip  of  Itelievers  should  be  ).o- 
yittri  (see  Jolin  iv.  21  ;  Rom.  i.  0  ;  1  Peter  ii.  !>). 
The  hiyixov  denoti's  that  which  is  inspireil  by  rea- 
son, in  harmony  with  real  reason,  and  conseipiently 

•  [So  Tholuik.  While  it  must  be  mlnilttod  that  wo  aro 
6id<)pn  to  pri'M'iU  our  entire  selves,  tlit  elioicc  of  the  word 
"bodies"  M  probably  "nn  indiention  that  the  Banctiflr.itloii 
of  Cbritti.in  life  is  to  extend  to  that  n:irt  of  man's  niiture 
whieh  m  most  eomplctely  under  the  oondnKn  of  sln"(.\l- 
for'l).  This  vii'w  ii«  n  't  open  to  the  oi'Jiction  iirircd  .mIiovo 
by  Dr.  I^ange,  and  iccords  with  Paul's  use  of  <r£iiia..—'R.] 


spiritual,  real ;  in  antithesis  to  merely  external  synv 
bolical  service  (Melanchthon,  cultus  mentis),*  but  not 
in  antithesis  to  the  uoa  aloya  (Theodoret,  Grotius, 
and  others) ;  for,  as  Meyer  observes,  the  question 
here  is  ).aT()tia,  but  not  Oiaia.  Indirectly,  in- 
deed, the  ).oyix7]  ).aT(jtict  is  also  an  antithesis  to 
the  cidlus  commentitii ;  for  if  the  symbolical  service 
would  establish  itself  beyond  its  time,  against  tiie 
real  service,  it  would  then  become  cnltus  commentilius. 
Ver.  2.  And  not  to  be  conformed.  On  the 
difference  of  the  readings,  see  'l\ztnal  Sole  -.  Tho 
infinitives  must  be  referred  to  the  Tra^oxa/w.  Tlw 
(Ti'vrr/tjfiaTit^Kr&ai,  is  passive,  with  a  reflexive 
meaning,  in  eandem  formain  redigi,  se  conformare. 
Pliilipju  :  "  The  original  difference  between  ayTjfict 
and  /lOijqt]  may  be,  that  the  latter  denotes  rather 
the  organic  form,  while  the  former  denotes  more 
the  mechanical  form,  the  external  and  adventitious 
habitus  {(T-/7jiia,  from  'i'/m,  axflv);  comp.  1  Cor. 
vii.  31.  Hence  ffx^/ia  is  also  the  external  sem- 
blance, i\\Q pompa,  and  (T/.^uctri'ZKT&ai;  synonymous 
witii  7T(io(T7Toi-fi(T0at,  to  assume  a  form,  a  seeming 
shape,  to  appear,  to  take  the  shape  of;  comp.  the 
passages  cited  by  Wetstein  ;  fto(>ifi]  also  the  beauti- 
ful form,  forma;  comp.  formosus.  Thus  fin^qi] 
more  fitly  designates  the  real  inward  form,  while 
(T/7jita  denotes  rather  the  external  and  accidental 
appearance."  Comp.  Phil.  ii.  6-8.  See  also  Tho- 
luek,  p.  C52.  Meyer  holds  [as  the  E.  V.  assumes], 
that  the  antithesis  of  both  verbs  is  comprised  only 
in  the  prepositions  ;  these,  indeed,  increase  it.  The 
(Tvv  denotes  the  torpidity  of  the  external  form  of 
the  Church  by  uniformity  with  tlie  world,  worldli- 
ness ;  the  /nfrd  denotes  the  organic  change  and 
transformation  of  the  organic  shape,  according  to 
the  new  inward  form.  Meyer:  "The  present  infini- 
tives denote  a  continued  action,  while  na()atrT',(Tcu 
represents  the  presenting  of  the  offering  as  a  com- 
pleted act." 

To  this  world  [tm  aloivi.  toi'tw].  cbiS 
ri:Tri.  The  pre-messianic  and  relatively  anti-messi- 
anic form  of  the  world  in  its  perverted  course. 
[Comp.  Lange's  Comm.,  Gal.  i.  4,  p.  13. — R.] 

But  to  be  transfigured  [a).),  a.  ft  it  a  ft  oq' 
(foT'fF  ihai..  The  difference  in  preposition  and  verb 
is  better  preserved  by  transfigured,  which  also  eon 
veys  the  distinctions  suggested  above.  See  Five  An- 
glican Clergymen. — R.j  The  ft  i  ran.  is  reflexive, 
as  (Trvcr/. 

By  the  renewring  of  your  mind ;  chap.  vii. 
24  ;  Eph.  iv.  23.  The  xrtn'dr*;t;  nvn'iinroi;  (Rom. 
vii.  6  ;  comp.  chap.  vi.  4),  as  an  impelling  principle, 
results  in  the  nvay.aivman;  of  the  vowq;  for 
the  roTi;,  the  conscious,  thoughtful,  or  reflective 
moral  and  religions  spiritual  life  (disposition)  is  con- 
stantly renewel,  in  ))art  n^stored,  and  in  part  devel- 
oped, ill  its  mastery  over  the  natural  part  of  life. 
The  transformation  and  .shaping  of  the  life  of  the 
Christian  are  determined  not  by  external  worldly 
forms,  l)Ut  by  this  inward  renewing,  or  renewing  as- 
cending  to  the  whole  of  the  external  life  ((ira- 
xrtirfi)(T(.i.)  through  the  ]iroductive  power  of  the 
Spirit.  The  vo's,  as  such,  does  not  then  receive 
the  new  iin(iiiij  (Tholuek),  but  rather  the  whole 
Christian  life  from  the  ror?  outward. f 

♦  (So  TTodRe,  Stuart,  ntid  most.  R'ltinnnJ  is  prefernble 
to  rmsnxnblf,  tieciufe  the  hitter  eonveys  nrdinnrily  the  idea 
of  Komelhlnp;  fur  whieh  n  kiwA  ren.son  ean  t>e  piven,  r.ither 
than  tho  exact  iile:i  of  Koyixny,   nilinnul,  vfrvlin/li/j.  —  K.) 

t  r'l'hi)  mi/ii'  i«  rcnoweil  in  the  nemiess  of  the  Spirit, 
and   irom  within   tho    tninifuimintc  impulse   procccas  to 


CHAPTER  XII.    1-8. 


383 


That  ye  may  prove.  Literally :  etc;  to 
rfoxt/(  at^fn'.  [Infinitive  clause  of  design  (Mey- 
er).— R. ]  The  Christian  life  should  not  receive  its 
deTclopment  by  means  of  an  external  legislation, 
but  by  the  inward  one,  which  is  directed  by  spiritual 
proving  and  self-determination  (see  Gal.  vi.  4  ;  Eph. 
V.  10 ;  Piiil.  i.  10,  and  other  passages).  Meyer  ap- 
propriately says :  "  In  the  unrenewed  man  this  prov- 
ing is  altogether  foreign  to  the  activity  of  his  con 
science.  Comp.  Eph.  v.  10."  But  with  this  there 
is  also  connected  the  being  able  to  prove  (Riickert, 
Kollner  [Hodge,  apparently]  ),  although  the  actual 
proving  is  conjoined  with  it.  Meyer  :  "  The  regen- 
erate one  proves  by  the  verdict  of  his  conscience, 
aroused  and  illuminated  by  the  Spirit."  The  voiwi; 
of  the  Spirit,  the  Christian  principle  of  life,  is  an 
infinitude,  whose  explanation  and  concrete  applica- 
tion to  life  is  committed  to  the  proving  of  Christian 
illumination  and  wisdom.* 

The  wiU  of  God  [to  d-eXrjfia,  rov 
Ofov].  That  which  is  willed  by  God  in  every 
relation  of  life.  The  reference  of  the  definitions 
TO  ayaOov,  xal  ivaQicrrov  xal  r iXitov , 
as  adjectives,  to  God's  will  (Vulgate,  Chrysostom, 
the  most  of  the  early  expositors,  Luther,  Riickert, 
&c.),  is  opposed,  first  of  all,  by  the  tvd^fdrov, 
but,  in  general,  by  the  tautology  that  would  be  con- 
tained in  the  expression.  Therefore  Entsmus,  Cas- 
talio,  Tholuck,  Mi-yer,  and  the  most  of  the  early 
commentators,  have  regarded  the  additions  as  a  sub- 
stantive apposition. 

What  is  good,  &c.  We  may  ask  whether  a 
climax  of  three  members  is  designed  [Meyer],  or 
whether  we  should  render  explicit  that  double  re- 
lation of  the  good,  by  which,  on  the  one  hand,  it  is 
that  which  is  well-pleasing  to  God,  and,  on  the  oth- 
er, that  which  is  perfect  in  itself,  because  it  arises 
frora  the  righteousness  of  faith,  the  principle  of 
perfection.  We  prefer  the  latter  rendering.  The 
repetition  of  the  article  would,  of  course,  not  be 
necessary  with  the  first  interpretation. -j- 

2.  T/ie  proper  conduct  of  Christians  toward  the 
community  of  brethren  for  the  establishment  of  a 
harmonious  church-life  (vens.  3-8).  Tholuck  is  cor- 
rect in  finding,  in  what  follows,  a  reference  to  the 
different  spheres  of  activity  in  the  Church.  Meyer 
speaks  only  of  an  exhortation  to  individual  duties.^ 

"V'er.  3.  For  I  say  (say  definitely).  The  ycnq 
is  rendered  namely^  by  Tholuck  and  Meyer.  [Al- 
ford  also  takes  it  as  resumptive.]  First  of  all, 
namely  appears  as  inapprofiriate  as  for.  If  it  is 
the  matter  of  the  self-proving  and  self-determination 
of  believers,  how  they  should  act  toward  each  other, 
how  can  the  Apostle  lay  down  his  precepts  imme- 
diately afterward  ?  The  answer  lies  in  the  fact,  that 
their  subjective  judgment  should  be  subordinated  to 
the  known  objective  will  of  God.  This  requirement, 
that  thev  should  be  certain  as  to  whether  their  con- 


transfigure  the  whole  life.  This  seems  to  be  Dr.  Langc's 
meaning. — R.l 

*  [Thfi  verb  occurring  here  is  rendered  decern  (Amer. 
Bible  Union).  apprnvi>  (Erasmus,  and  others)  ;  but  prove, 
test  by  actual  experience,  is  to  be  prefciTcd  (so  Meyer,  De 
"Wette,  Allbrd,  and  others).  "Wordsworth  :  assay  the  value 
of.— E.l 

t  [The  non-repetition  of  th«  article,  which  is  urged 
against  the  "  substantive  apposition,"  is  readily  explained. 
It  shows  that  all  three  refer  to  one  thing.  See  Winer, 
p.  120.— E.] 

t  [So  Alford.  Meyer  subdivides  these  verses  thus : 
vers.  3-5,  exhortation  to  humility  in  general ;  vers.  6-8, 
With  special  rtference  to  official  charisms. — K.] 


duct  corresponds  to  God's  perfect  will,  is  so  great, 
that  it  causes  the  Apostle  to  lay  down  regulations 
for  it.  Therefore  we  may  also  translate  the  yuQ  by 
for.     The  ^.tynv  is  used  in  the  sense  of  injunction. 

Through  the  grace,  &c.  [^ta  rtji;  xci()i' 
TO?,  X.T.A.]  Even  here  d\d.  He  will  not  pre- 
scribe for  them  by  virtue  of  his  subjective  opinion 
or  authority,  but  by  virtue  of  the  grace  which  ia 
given  to  him  (see  chap.  i.  5),  which  establishes  his 
office,  and  is  at  the  same  time  the  element  of  lil> 
common  to  his  office  and  their  church-life  (see  chap 
XV.  15  ;  1  Cor.  iii.  10  ;  Eph.  iii.  7,  8). 

To  every  man  that  is  among  you  [navri 
ro)  ovro  ev  vfiv.  Alford:  "  A  strong  bringing 
out  of  the  individual  application  of  the  pi-ecept."— 
R.]  This  would  therefore  have  applied  to  Peter 
also,  if  he  had  been  in  Rome,  or  Paul  would  not 
have  spoken  thus,  or,  indeed,  would  not  have  writ- 
ten to  them  at  all. 

Not  to  think  of  himself  [^^  vrtfpcpQO' 
vfZv.  See  the  text,  and  Textual  Note  *, — R.] 
Tholuck  :  ((<iJovi-h'  is  here  not  "  to  strive  after,"  and 
also  not  "  to  be  disposed,  to  think,"  but  "  to  think 
(of  himself) "  (see  p.  654). 

Soberly,  (nnciQovflv.  It  is  wise  conduct  or 
good  behavior,  especially  as  moderation.  —  Proper 
self-knowledge  and  esteem,  apart  from  over-estima- 
tion, should,  by  modesty,  come  to  proper  and  wise 
moderation  in  the  reciprocity  of  the  personal  life 
with  the  society.  Meyer  understands  q^ovhTr  as  to 
be  disposed,  and  explains  the  details  accordingly ; 
the  Vulgate,  Calvin,  and  others,  interpret  in  the 
same  way.  The  mode  of  thinking  and  feeling  is 
undoubtedly  connected  here  with  the  holding  and 
demeaning,  which  is 'proved  by  the  <tii)<i()ovhv. 

According  as  God  hath  dealt  to  every 
man  \_ty.d(Trm  mq  6  Sioq  e ii  e !>  i-u fv^.  The 
exdaro)  is  dependent  on  t/itQ(.af:  According 
as  God  hath  dealt  to  every  man,  &c.,  is  therefore 
made  antecedent  by  inversion  (see  1  Cor.  iii.  5). — 
The  idea  of  a  different  distribution  of  the  measure 
of  faith  leads  to  the  idea  of  the  gift  (ver.  6).  No 
one  should  apply  more  than  the  gift  of  grace,  for 
what  lies  beyond  this  is  presumption  ;  but  the  whole 
of  the  gift  of  grace  should  be  applied,  for  if  this 
be  not  done,  something  would  be  withheld  from  the 
society  which  is  designed  for  it.  Comp.  1  Cor.  xii. 
4-6,  11  ;  Heb.  ii.  4. 

The  measure  of  faith  [fi  ir^ov  Trlatf  (» ? ]. 
When  Meyer  maintains  that  faith  here  means  only 
faith  in  the  ordinary  sense,  he  overlooks  the  fact 
that  the  measure  of  faith  is  spoken  of  in  concrete 
unity  ;  or  rather,  he  interprets  this  measure  errone- 
ously, by  understanding  only  different  degrees  of 
the  strength  of  faith,  and,  accordingly,  he  not  only 
rejects  the  reference  of  the  expression  to  Chris- 
tian knowledge  (Bcza,  and  others),  or  to  the  power 
of  working  miracles  (Theophylact),  but  also  to  the 
gift  of  grace  (Chrysostom,  and  most  other  commen- 
tators). The  purely  Divine  element. in  the  gift  is 
undoubtedly  emphasized  here,  for  what  is  not  of 
faith  is  sin.  [Alford  explains  the  phrase :  "  The 
receptivity  of  /afjlrr/iaTa,  itself  no  inherent  con- 
gruity.  It  is,  in  fact,  the  subjective  designation  of 
'  the  grace  that  is  given  unto  us ; '  ver.  6."  He 
rightly  distinguishes  it  from  the  gifts  and  graces 
themselves.  So  Philippi  in  substance.  The  objee- 
five  sense  of  "  faith,"  which  is  implied  in  the  view 
of  Beza,  is  open  to  decided  objection. — R.] 

Ver.  4.  For  as  vre  have  many  members  iq 
one  body    [^xccSdniQ    ynQ    iv    ivl   aoj/nai 


384 


THE   EPISTLE    OF   PAUL   TO   THE   ROMAXS. 


nolka  fiilri  t/o/tfv].  EstablMimeiit  of  the 
foregoing.  The  individual  Christian  is  only  a  mem- 
ber of  Christ's  bodv,  and  should  conduct  himself  a.s 
a  member,  avow  himself  as  a  member,  and  should 
permit  himself  to  be  strengthened  as  a  member ; 
Christ  alone  is  tlie  Head.*  "  On  the  commonness 
of  the  paralkls  Ijetween  a  human  body  and  a  corpus 
nociak  (1  Cur.  xii.),  even  among  the  ancients,  see 
Grotius  and  Wetstein  in  loco  ;  "  Meyer. 

Ver.  5.  So  we,  being  many.  In  antithesis  to 
the  unity  of  the  body. 

In  Christ.  The  head  is  the  organic  vital  cen- 
tre ol  the  wliole,  in  which  (not  to  which)  every  thing 
in  respect  to  dominion  and  glory  is  comprised  (Eph. 
i.  22,  and  other  jjassages). 

And  every  one.  To  de  xaO'  dq  is  a 
solecism  of  the  later  Greek,  instead  of  to  di  y.aO' 
iva;  Mai-k  xiv.  19;  John  viii.  9,  and  other  pas- 
Eages. 

Ver.  6,  Having  then  gifts  differing  accord- 
ing to  the  grace  ['iyovzn;  di  ya()ia ftara 
Kara  r  ij  v  /d(jtv  t  tj  v  d  o  ()■  f  la  av  tifilv 
dKxqo(ja].  DiU'erent  constructions  here  enter 
into  consideration. 

1.  With  'i/ovTfi;  a  new  sentence  begins,  which 
continues  in  a  succession  of  elliptical  exhortations 
(Beza,  Olshausen,  Philippi,  and  others).  Meyer : 
"  The  elliptical  expression  after  AaTct  t//v  aval.  r. 
nlrrr.  may  be  supplied  by  7T(Joift;Tn''(,ififv;  by  w/nr 
after  Iv  rfi  <)it,a/.ovia. ;  by  t'drw  after  (v  ttj  dufafr- 
y.ai.'ta.  \  by  the  same  after  iv  rij  na^ay.).i](Tfi. ;  and, 
finally,  by  the  imperatives  of  the  corresponding 
verbs  (//fTrtJuidro,  &c.)  after  the  three  following 
parts,  iv  a/T/MTr^Ti.,  &c.  [So  E.  V.,  Hodge,  &c.J 
Comp.  the  analogous  mode  of  eipressiou  in  1  Peter 
iv.  10  f. 

2.  The  t/ovr fq  is  connected  with  the  fore- 
going, but  in  such  a  way  that  the  following  clauses 
arc,  according  to  Meyer,  all  ellipses  (Erasmus,  and 
others).  Meyer  also  places  Tholuek  here,  but  Tho- 
luck  declares  now  for  (1.). 

3.  The  t/uvrti;  dk  is  joined  with  eV/ar 
(ver.  5),  in  appositional  meaning,  and  the  follow- 
ing clauses  are,  at  the  outset,  not  hortatory,  but 
descriptive,  yet  pass  over  into  tiie  hortatory  (Keiche, 
Iliickert,  I)e  Wette,  Lachmann).  We  accept  this 
construction  with  the  modification,  that  we  construe 
the  t/fiv  emphatically  in  the  meaning  of  to  have 
and  to  hold  fast,  to  pxt  inio  practice,  to  exercise. 
Comp.  Rom.  i.  28.  With  the  gifts,  as  with  every 
thing  spiritual,  we  must  bear  especially  in  mind  that 
they  cannot  be  possessed  aright  without  exercising 
them.  Tlius  the  hortatory  character  under  the  dc- 
ecriptive  form  lies  in  the  force  of  the  t/nv,  and  in 
the  added  i)i.  [This  i)e  is  rendered  by  Alford  : 
"  and  not  only  so,  but." — R.] 

As  for  the  apparent  fluctuations  in  the  construc- 
tion, they  resolve  themselves  into  regular  forms,  if 
we  observe  the  subdivisions. f  The  Apostle  distin- 
guishes, first   of  all,   two   principal   categories :    a. 


•  [Alford:  "yip,  elucidating  the  fact  that  Ood  nppor- 
tioTis  variously  to  various  persons :  because  the  Christian 
cominrmity  !■)  liko  n  bn'ly,  with  many  members,  having 
TiirioUH  duties.''  — H.] 

f  [Tholuek  :  "The  first  two  accusatives  are  (irammati- 
willy  Ui'penfk'nt  on  ix°^*f  '•  'T  deurrot'S  the  Apostle  loses 
nifrlit  of  this  conftni'tKin,  anl  continue"  witli  the  concrete 
iiibatrKiov,  which  he  htill  l)iii"l»  on  to  tlie  ffircgoiuft  with 
•iT(  ;  l>ut,  at  6  ^(TaJiiovv,  omits  this  also,  and,  at  ver.  9, 
introduces  the  alistr.ict  ij  aydrni"  This  view  or  that  of 
I>r.  Lange  will  be  j  rcfcned,  ns  one  does  or  does  not  seek 
dcftnituiiesa  of  urrangcuebt  in  the  verscti,— ll.j 


TZQoqTjxiia ;  h.  diaxovla.  The  ^^cexoria  is  then 
divided  into  the  di.i)diTx(t)v  and  the  na(jctxuy.i^>v ; 
this  latter  is  again  divided  into  the  /(fT«()n)o)'s,  the 
7Ti)oi(iTuun-oq,  and  the  i/.iun:  This  is  proved  bj 
the  forms : 

1,  The  antithesis  of  the  abstract  nouns,  7T()oq?] 
Tf la  and  (Kaxo )•«'«.  The  latter,  in  its  broader  mean 
ing, .was  evidently  a  church  office;  while,  on  the 
other  hand,  the  7T(Joq  rjttia  was,  in  the  fullest  sense., 
also  an  oHice. 

2.  nri  6  iii.dda>'.i>)v,  tirt  o  naQaxahZv.  This 
naiinxa/.i^n'  must,  at  all  events,  be  regarded  as  a 
superintendent  of  the  society,  presijyter,  or  man  hav- 
ing the  gifts  of  the  presbyter,  whether,  as  6  /<tTudi^ 
doi'q,  he  devoted  himself  to  the  care  of  the  poor ; 
as  o  TrQo'ioti'tniroq,  to  the  xifJiiJvtjatq  in  the  nar- 
rower sense  ;  or,  as  6  i/.nTn;  to  the  healing  of  the 
sick  and  casting  out  of  devils.* — G'i/ls  dijfiring 
according  to  the  grace.  Gifts ;  that  is,  modifica- 
tions of  the  one  Divine  grace  in  the  ditferencei 
of  the  human  individual  talent  (sec  1  Cor.  xii. 
4fr.). 

Whether  prophecy.  Prophecy,  in  the  Old 
Testament  as  well  as  in  the  New,  is  the  gift  and  call- 
ing to  declare,  by  the  prompting  and  communication 
of  God's  Spirit,  what  is  nev: — that  which  concerns 
the  future,  and  the  development  of  God's  kingdom  ; 
in  order,  like  the  compass,  to  direct  aright,  in  the 
present,  the  ship  of  the  kingdom.  The  reason  why 
it  appears  more  in  the  foreground  in  the  Old  Testa- 
ment tiian  in  the  New,  is,  that  the  former  was  the 
time  of  expectation  and  longing,  and  the  latter  the 
time  of  fulfilment  and  satislaction.f 

According  to  the  proportion  (harmony)  of 
faith  [  z  c<  r  rt  t  ijv  dva/.oy  lav  rT/q  n  I  a  r  f  w  q^. 
The  expression  defines  exactly  :  according  to  the 
relation,  the  i)roportion,  or  harmony  of  faith  ;  that 
is,  according  to  the  proportion  defined  by  faith. 
Explanations : 

1.  Subjective  faith,  including  the  measure  of 
faith,  is  meant  (the  early  commentators ;  Origen, 
Chrvsostom,  Ambrose,  and  others  ;  Bengel  and  Mey- 
er [Alford,  De  Wette].  Tholuek:  "The  prophet 
keeps  within  the  limits  of  his  prophetical  gift,  iv* 
signed  him  by  his  individuality  "). 

2.  The  objective  rule  of  faith  (Abelard,  Aquinas, 
Hervieus,  &c.  ;  Flatt,  Klee,  Philijipi,  and  otiiers). 
Tholuek,  on  the  contrary,  observes,  that  we  may 
ask  whether  Paul  could  have  ai)pealed  already  to 
such  a  regula  fdci.  But,  in  reality,  Jloses  has 
already  established  the  features  of  the  aualogia 
Jidei,  Deut.  xviii.  18  ff.     It  is  well  known  that  the 


*  [Pr.  T-nnRe's  classifloation  is  inpenious,  and  perhop* 
the  most  satisfactory  one,  if  all  seven  terms  l>c  rcfoired  to 
official  positionn.  Jlcycr,  Alford,  and  othcio,  refer  the  lawt 
three  (in  ver.  8)  to  ]ierson8  endowed  with  certain  eharisins, 
without  any  ppceinl  official  position.  The  reason  for  this 
change  in  application  is  found  in  the  oniip.>iion  of  fir*,  the 
difficulty  of  referriiJir  these  to  official  pei-sons  and  functions, 
the  chauBO  in  the  admonitions,  which  do  not  defliie  the 
ephore,  as  before,  hut  the  mode.  Besides,  as  the  Apostle 
(ver.  4)  lias  been  speaking  of  "all  members,'"  ho  would 
naturally  allude  to  others  tlian  official  persona.  See  further 
in  the  notes  on  the  sep  irate  clauses.— U.J 

t  ("I'ropheey"  undoubtedly  inelude«  more  than  the 
prcdietiim  of  future  events,  yet  the  tendency  hna  betin  to 
identify  the  New  TeBtainent  projihet  with  "the  preacher. 
l)r.  Ilodi:e  remarks  :  "  The  (filt  of  which  Paul  here  sjieaks, 
is  .  .  .  that  of  immediate  oc.-a.sionol  Inspiration,  lenlinj? 
thi  reci]>ient  to  deliver,  as  the  mouth  of  Uoil,  the  partieular 
commuiiieati»(i  which  lie  had  received."  This  view,  which 
is  undoubtedly  correct,  removes  this  oflice  out  of  the  dis- 
cussions respietliiK  Church  poliiv  and  office."  at  the  present 
day.  It  belongs  to  the  extraordinary  gifts  of  ibc  apostolia 
age.— U.] 


CHAPTER  XII.   1-8. 


385 


Jews  crucified  Christ  by  a  false  application  of  this 
rule  ;  but  it  is  equally  well  known  that  the  New 
Testament  proofs  of  faith  from  the  Old  Testament, 
which  first  introduced  Christianity  into  the  Jewish 
world,  have  only  been  a  living  application  of  this 
rule.  At  all  events,  Paul  could  not  yet  appeal  to 
ecclesiastical  confessions,  but  he  could  appeal  to  a 
fundamental  canon  of  truth ;  see  Gal.  i.  8  ;  vi.  16  ; 
Phil.  iii.  16  ;  2  Tim.  iii.  15,  16,  &c.  However,  Tho- 
luck  has  other  grounds  for  preferring  the  explana- 
tion, that  the  prophet  keeps  within  the  sphere  of  his 
calling ;  namely,  because  the  deacon  should  remain 
within  the  sphere  of  his  diaconate,  &c.  But  is  the 
sphere  of  the  prophet  described  by  the  measure  of 
his  subjective  faith,  or  would  not  this  be  heie  rather 
a  nugatory  generality  ?  *  The  sphere  of  the  prophet, 
who  reveals  what  is  new  for  the  enlargement  of  the 
old  revelation,  is  just  the  real  character  of  the  reve- 
lation itself,  harmonizing  with  itself  through  all  the 
stages  of  development.  Yet  the  Apostle  does  not 
say  anoxah'n^'foiq,  but  nianox;,  because  the  faith 
of  the  Church  is  also  called  to  the  oflBce  of  watch- 
man, in  order  that  the  development  of  the  truth  be 
not  corrupted  by  false  prophets.  The  application 
of  this  rule  to  the  exposition  of  the  Scriptures  in 
the  early  period  (see  Tlioluck,  p.  664)  is  not  explica- 
tio,  but  applicatio  ;  but  it  cannot  be  denied  that 
this  applicatio  itself  is  made  xara  t^v  kvalo- 
yiav   T ^ <;    n iar lox;. 

Ver.  7.  Or  ministry  [ *  J't ?  Siaxoviav,  das 
Dienstamt  (Lange).  Governed  by  s/orrft,-,  like  tlie 
preceding  accusative].  A  threefold  idea  of  the  dva- 
y.orla  can  be  distinguished  in  the  New  Testament. 
1.  The  most  compreliensive  idea  understands  by 
d'Mxorla  the  ecclesiastical  office  in  general ;  see 
1  Cor.  xii.  5.  There,  prophecy  is  designated  as  a 
diaconate ;  here,  it  is  distinguished  from  it.  2. 
Therefore,  tlie  special  ofBce  for  a  definite  congrega- 
tion. So  here.  [Dr.  Lange  apparently  includes 
liere  all  the  permanent  offices  in  a  single  church,  as 
he  makes  (haxovia  a  category,  under  which  the  five 
following  terms  fall.  If,  however,  it  be  considered 
as  coordinate  with  what  follows,  then  the  still  more 
restricted  view  must  be  adopted. — R.]  3.  The  dia- 
conate, in  distinction  from  the  presbyterial  episco- 
pacy, 1  Tim.  iii.  8.  At  the  time  when  this  Epistle 
was  written,  the  ecclesiastical  distinctions  were  less 
developed  than  when  the  First  Epistle  to  Timothy 
was  written,  but  yet  more  so  than  in  the  First  Epis- 
tle to  the  Corinthians. 

Let  U8  wait  on  our  ministering  [Iv  rfj 
Siaxovitx.  We  must  supply  an  imperative,  either 
kt  tt.t  be  in,  remain  in,  or  wait  on  (as  E.  V.).  The 
sense  is  the  same. — R.]  Meyer  thus  explains  the 
tv:  The  one  who  was  "  diaconaliy  endowed  "  shall 
not  wish  to  be  of  authority  beyond  the  sphere  as- 
signed him  by  this  endowment,  but  to   be  active 


*  [Alford  (with  most  modem  commentators)  defends  the 
6u>)]ective  view  of  "faith,"  from  the  context,  "  which  aims 
at  showing  that  the  measure  of  faith,  itself  the  gift  of  God, 
is  the  receptive  faculty  for  all  spiritual  gifts,  which  are 
therefore  not  to  be  boasted  of,  nor  pushed  beyond  their 
provinces,  but  humbly  exercised  within  their  own  limits." 
Besides,  there  is  very  little  warrant  for  the  objective  sense 
of  TTiVrts ;  it  was  unknown  to  the  early  Greek  fathers 
(Meyer),  and  cannot  be  established  as  a  New  Testament 
t/sHS ;  comp.  Lange's  Comni.  Gal.  i.  23,  p.  27;  Lightfoot, 
GcCatians,  pp.  152  if.  It  would  seem,  then,  that  the  techni- 
cal, theological  phrase  :  anahigy  nf  faith,  has  a  meaning  not 
stnctiy  in  accordance  with  Paul's  use  of  the  phrase.  Cer- 
tainly the  application  is  quite  different— here,  to  the  extia- 
ordinary  gift  of  I'rophecy  ;  theologically,  to  a  rcgula  fidei. 
Dr.  Lange  seems  to  take  middle  ground.— K.] 


25 


within  it.  But  it  is  not  necessary  to  understand  th« 
ilrat,  iv  quantitatively  ;  it  can  also  be  understood 
qualitatively.  And  since  all  the  apostolic  functions 
of  the  Church  were  diaconal,  qualitative  ministering 
is  undoubtedly  the  meaning.  The  proof  of  the  true 
office  is,  that  it  consists  simply  in  service  ;  just  as, 
inversely,  pure  divine  service  becomes  the  true 
office,  even  if  it  had  no  human  official  seal.  "With 
the  positive  filling  of  his  sphere,  it  is  always  sup- 
posed that  he  does  not  commit  improprieties  beyond 
his  sphere. 

Or  he  that  teacheth,  on  teaching  [  f  tr  f  6 
St,<ici.(jy.o)v,  iv  rtj  ()K)a<Tx « A t a].  According 
to  Meyer,  Paul  should  have  continued  unifoiml}-, 
HTe  durlaay.a^iav  (so.  e/ovrfq),  "  as  [Cod.]  A.  actu- 
ally has."  We  have  seen,  in  the  arrangement  of 
the  gifts  (see  above),  what  grounds  he  had  for  not 
thus  continuing.*  Tlius  he  Las  his  gift  in  his  labor* 
as  teacher.  This  appears  self-evident ;  but  how 
many,  who  would  be  deemed  teachers,  are  mere 
babblers  ! 

Yer.  8.  Or  he  that  exhorteth,  on  exhorta- 
tion [6  71  a  Q  a  ■/.  a  ).  (Ti  v ,  i  v  t  -T;  tt  n()  a  /. ).  ija  ii,  ]. 
As  the  nai)  a/.al<l)v  here  is  definitely  disthi- 
guislied  from  the  di.()aa/.Mv,  nothing  else  can  be  un- 
derstood by  it  than  a  fraction  witiiin  the  more  gen- 
eral presbyterate.  Evidently  the  more  definite  dis- 
tinction, in  1  Tim.  v.  17,  between  presbyters  who 
devote  themselves  to  teaching,  and  ruling  presby- 
ters, thus  begins  to  take  shape  ;  while,  on  the  other 
hand,  the  diaconate  is  developed  in  a  presbyterate 
from  the  date  of  Acts  xi.  30,  and  has  not  yet  posi- 
tively been  separated  from  it.  The  exhorter,  ac- 
cording to  what  follows,  comprises  the  ditferent  sides 
of  the  subsequently  developed  presbyterial  office ; 
he  is  undoubtedly  synonymous  with  the  pastors, 
Eph.  iv.  11.  The  division  of  his  office  appears  in 
the  following  statements.! 

He  that  giveth  [6  /( f  ra  Jk5'o  j' t].  Ac- 
cording to  Meyer,  the  official  functions  to  the  Church 
cease  with  the  hti.  We  have,  on  the  contrary,  laid 
down  further  subdivisions  here.  Every  Christian  is 
indeed  a  /tf T«fyK5oi'(,",  and  not  less  an  u.-.mv; 
but  as  here  there  stands  midway  between  the  two  a 
nQoiordiavoi;.  which  not  every  one  can  be,  special 
functions  recognized  by  the  Church  are  evidently 
meant.  Meyer  argues  against  such  functions,  by 
observing :  a.  The  diaconal  gift  could  not  be  thus 
analyzed ;  b.  The  position  of  the  nQoiardfti-voi;  as 
the  presbyter  between  two  deaconal  employments, 
would  be  inappropriate.  Instead,  therefore,  ol'  bear 
ing  in  mind  the  growing  relations,  he  does  violence 
to  them  by  preconceived  opinions  ;  a  presbyter  is  a 
presbyter,  a  deacon  is  a  deacon,  &c. ;  and  then,  ac- 


*  [The  change  to  the  nominative  is  deemed  by  Dr. 
Lange  a  snfBcient  waiTant  for  taking  this,  and  the  "corre- 
sponding participle  which  follows,  as  directly  subonii'  ate 
to  the  idea  expressed  in  SiaKoviav.  If  a  reason  must  be 
found  for  the  irregularities,  of  the  Apostle's  syntax,  this  is 
the  simplest  and  most  satisfactory  explanation.— K.] 

t  [Meyer  confines  the  charisms  of  exclusively  otScial 
significance  to  the  four  terms  already  discussed,  though  h« 
thinks  these  four  are  examples  chosen  out  of  a  larger  num- 
her:  (1.)  The  gift  of  th/'opneiah't  d/icoj/csc,  prophecy.  (2.) 
The  gift  of  oversight  of  the  external  aftairs  of  the  Church, 
(Uacoiiale.  (3.)  The  gift  of  teaching  hy  ordinary  methods, 
not  yet  limited  to  any  special  ollice.  (4.)  The  gift  of  ex- 
hortation, i.  ('.,  of  encoiu'aging  or  admonitory  remarks  upon 
the  passage  of  Scripture  read  after  the  usage  of  the  syna- 
gogue. This  last  ditfers  from  the  teaching,  in  being  directed 
to  the  heart  and  will ;  while  teaching  was  directed  to  the 
understanding.  Philiiipi,  whose  notes  are  very  full  and 
valuable,  agrees  with  him  in  the  main,  hut  differs  from  him 
in  regard  to  what  follows.— K.] 


386 


THE   EPISTLE   OF   PAUL   TO   THE   ROMANS. 


oordiiig  to  liim,  Piiul  casts  the  presbyter  right  in  the 
midst  lit'  tlie  iiieiiilji?r.ship.* 

With  simplicity.  This  term  is  characteristic 
of  tliu  pcnotniiioii  of  the  Apostle,  since  accessory 
views  nii>;lit.  he  easily  connected  with  all  exercise 
of  benoticence.f 

He  that  rulelh,  n()o'iaTci u  fvoc;.  Accord- 
ing to  McycT,  the  presbyter,  but  not  the  presbyter 
exclusivoly.  See  1  Cor.  xii.  28.  The  order  there 
laid  down  by  the  apostles  is  as  follows :  1.  Proph- 
ets ;  2.  Teacliers ;  3.  Miraculous  powers ;  then 
healing  of  the  sick,  tlien  bestowals  of  help,  then 
xrfji-ityr,fin,t:,  and  finally  yivt]  y/joaat'tv.  Therefore 
the  bestowals  of  help  would  tlius  fall  under  the 
rubric  of  the  present  7iaficty.a/.i7n\  and  especially  of 
the  iifTUihiioi's-  Undoubtedly  the  xrf]f()vtj(Tn.i;  there 
stands  in  the  same  line  with  the  7i(Jo'ia tu/<  fvoi; 
here.  The  ones  concerned  as  having  care  of  the 
external  affairs  of  the  Church,  had,  at  the  begituiing, 
no  great  tilings  to  manage.  We  then  find  the  paral- 
lel of  the  t/.K7)v  in  the  gift  of  specific  miracles :  the 
healing  of  those  possessed  with  devils,  and  the  res- 
toration of  the  sick.| 

With  diligence.  ^7Tot'(^  may  mean  ficute, 
Z€a\  or  dilif/eiice.  But  the  latter  idea  is  most  defi- 
nite ;  zeal  was  a  connnon  duty  of  all. 

With  cheerfulness  [tv  ^/.a^6T»/T^,  i.  e., 
hilarity].  "  With  gladness  and  friendliness,"  says 
Meyer,  "  the  opposite  of  unwilling  and  ill-humored 
behavior."  But  the  question  here  is  not  a  conven- 
tional good  conduct,  but  that  cheerfulness  from 
heaven  which,  in  a  despondent  world,  among  other 
duties,  must  conquer  and  banish  the  demons  of  sad- 
ness. 

DOCTRINAL   AST)   ETHICAL. 

1.  On  chap.  xii.  1  ff.  As  man's  ideal  destination 
was  to  perceive  God  aright  in  His  works,  and  to 
praise  and  glorify  Him,  and,  accordingly,  the  fall 
consisted  in  the  omission  of  tliis  living  worship,  ac- 
cording to  Rom.  i.  20,  21  ;  then,  as  human  corrup- 
tion consisted  fundamentally  in  the  false  worship  of 
heathen  idolatry  and  of  Jewish  zeal  for  the  letter, 
according  to  chaps,  i.  and  ii. ;  as,  further,  redemp- 

*  [Afoyor  ffiiards  af;ainst  this  position,  liy  making  tho 
pift  a  ifi'noral  one,  not  oxfJiisivcly  that  of  prosbvtcr  or 
eirio-iciuTrot.  HorlRe  and  Philippi,  however,  refer  the  first 
a:;d  third  to  Cliristiana  pcncrally,  and  the  I'eoond  to  the 
ecclcsiM-tic  il  rulers.  The  1  itterdefimds  svich  a  promiscuous 
arranijenient  us  w.irrantoil  by  the  Aiiostlc's  purpose.  It 
may  lie  observed,  that  SiaSovi  would  better  express  otReial 
bencfieenoo,  while  (xeraSous,  it  is  claimed  by  many,  refers 
to  private  pivinp  of  one's  own  subBtance. — U.] 

T  (Tliolunk  and  Alford  render  :  w/k  fihemJily  ;  but  this 
BCemstobe  but  poorly  supported.  Dr.  llodpe  retains  the 
oommoii  moanlnpr  in  tlie  case  of  the  deacons,  and  adds  : 
"Considered  in  refer'm'e  to  private  Christians,  this  clause 
may  bo  rendered,  he  lliai  tjive'h,  with  lihi'i'iili'i/."  llul  this 
is  on'y  an  iiferoncc.  The  Apostle  says:  with  simplicih/, 
wbich  is  113  dillicult  in  the  case  of  private  as  of  official 
boneiieonne.— U.] 

t  (It  is  evident  how  difficult  it  is  to  deduce  from  the 
hints  pTiven  in  these  Epistles,  written  to  different  Cliurehes 
lit  different  times,  any  consistent  theory  of  Church  (rovern- 
mct\t  during  the  apostolic  as;e.  In  regard  to  this  particular 
word,  most  commentators  refer  it  to  "the  rulers" — i.  c, 
the  nilin;(  elders;  but  the  prroat  ohjoction  is,  that  bo  im- 

Eortiint  a  1  office  would  scarcely  be  put  in  the  p<isitlon  it 
ere  occupies.  Meyer  formerly  held  that  it  meant  those 
who  entertained  stninj^ers  (so  Stuart,  in  an  excursus  on 
this  passaRi'),  but  he  has  abandoned  this  view.  Alford 
refers  it  to  rulin^r  in  the  household,  &c.  In  favor  of  the 
coinmoa  view,  it  may  well  be  nrited,  however,  that  the 
Chnn  lies  grafted  on  tiic  synanojpio  did  liave  such  officers, 
and  we  mi(rht  expect  a  reference  to  them  here.  If  referroil 
to  at  all,  it  mu.st  be  by  this  woid.— U.J 


tion  was  instituted  that  G«d  might  effect  and  manU 
fest  the  real  atonement  in  Christ  as  the  mercy-seat 
of  the  Holy  of  Holies  sprinkled  with  His  own  blood, 
according  to  chap.  iii.  25  ;  as  then,  consequently, 
also  Christian  saving  faith  consisted  (according  to 
chap.  V.  1,  2)  of  free  access  to  God  into  the  Holy 
of  llolies,  and  is  developed  in  the  most  varied  fea- 
tures of  a  New  Testament  call  to  worship ;  so,  ac- 
cording to  the  practical  part  of  this  Epistle,  should 
Ijelievers  begin  the  devflopment  of  their  worship 
(chap.  xii.  1),  by  finishing  the  real  burnt-offering  by 
the  pure  presentation  of  their  own  bodily  life  to 
God's  service.  On  the  passages  of  heathen  and  Jew« 
ish  wise  men  relating  to  the  moral  consecration  to 
God  as  a  self-offering,  quoted  in  Wetstein  and  Koppe, 
see  Meyer,  p.  4.53.  See  the  same  author  on  the 
"  rational  service,"  p.  453 ;  Tholuck,  p.  651  ff". : 
Philippi,  p.  500.  It  is  noteworthy  tluit  the  "rational 
service  "  is  recommended  to  the  RoDian  Church. 
On  the  av(jyt]aa,'TiL.K!(ycu  and  /nTafio(j(i orcr 0-at,  see 
the  Exeff.  Notes.  On  atwv  ot'roi;,  see  Philippi,  p. 
202. 

2.  Just  a5  the  First  Epistle  of  Peter  appears  as 
an  evangelical  prophecy,  in  opposition  to  the  later 
false  image  of  Peter,  so  is  it  with  the  Epistle  to  the 
Romans ;  and  especially  does  the  expression  of  the 
living  offering  and  the  reasonable  service  stand  in 
opposition  to  the  later  picture  of  the  life  of  the 
Romish  Church.  The  same  assertion  holds  good  of 
the  expression  with  which  Paid  prescribes  for  all 
Christians  in  Rome,  that  every  one  should  not  think 
too  highly  of  himself,  that  we  are  all  members  one 
of  another,  &c. 

3.  The  first  application  which  the  Christian  has 
to  make  of  the  principle  of  his  new  life  is,  that  he 
should  not  arrogantly  abuse  his  charism  [gift]  in  a 
hierarchical  or  sectarian  way,  but  shotdd  exercise  it 
purely  for  the  service  of  the  Church,  by  adapting 
liimself  to  the  requirements  of  the  community,  and 
vet  preserve  his  evangelical  freedom.  The  rule  is  : 
(1.)  The  whole  gift  for  the  Church;  (2.)  Nothing 
but  the  gift ;  see  1  Cor.  xii.  On  the  idea  of  the 
charism,  see  the  Exffr.  Notes;  also  Tholuck,  p.  655 
ff. ;  p.  661. — The  difference  between  the  (/.hTiv  and 
him  that  giveth,  applies  to  an  early  period  in  the 
Church.  The  support  of  the  poor  Ijrethren  in  tlie 
first  period  Wivs  not  the  alms  of  charity,  (hi  the  dis- 
[losition  and  character  of  the  increa.sing  offices  in 
the  Church,  see  the  Jixecf.  Notes.  For  fuller  infor- 
mation on  the  gifts,  see  my  Grsch.  des  apostol. 
Ziitalfers,  p.  555  if.  ;   and  on  tlie  offices,  p.  535  If. 

4.  The  defective  understanding,  which  is  still 
apparent  in  many  ways,  in  reference  to  the  rule  that 
prophecy  is  according  to  the  measure  of  faith,  arises 
tVoni  the  want  of  perception  of  the  lawfulness  of 
organic  development  in  the  dopartmetit  of  spiritual 
as  well  as  of  iiiilural  life.  With  the  lawfulness  of 
development  there  is  combined  the  development  of 
lawfulness  in  all  the  spheres  of  life.  But  in  the 
ecclesiastical  department  of  faith,  many  will  know 
nothing  of  the  development  expressed  in  projihecy, 
and,  in  contrast  to  tiiein,  many  will  know  nothing  of 
the  lawfulness  expressed  by  the  measure  of  faith. 
Hence  arise  such  foolish,  noisy  decisions  of  the  day 
as  this :  The  confessions  of  the  Church  are  no  longer 
obligatory  !  Every  one  must  know  what  is  obliga- 
tory for  him,  according  to  his  own  conscience  and 
calling.  But  no  one  has  any  right  to  deny  the  valid- 
ity of  what  the  Church  of  (.Jod,  Ui  its  real  develop- 
ment of  life,  regards  as  its  duty.  At  all  events,  il 
follows  most  from  the  Apostle's  rule,  that  the  mean- 


CHAPTER  XII.   1-8. 


SSf 


ing  of  confessions  is  thoroughly  dependent  on  the 
meaning  of  the  Holy  Scriptures.  But  then  it  may 
je  .isked,  whether  a  legal  development  has  been 
commiited  to  the  Church  in  its  essential  and  substan- 
tial life,  or  whetlier  tlie  custom  of  declaiming  against 
the  boundless  culpability  of  the  Church,  now  in  doc- 
trine and  now  in  life,  has  arisen  because  the  tradition 
of  bishops'  caps  and  doctors'  hats  is  regarded  as  the 
most  (xact  history  of  the  Church. 

[6  On  cincrch  politi/,  as  taught  in  this  section. 
The  uost  remarkable  fact  is,  that  so  little  is  said. 
The  doctrines  of  grace  are  fully  treated  ;  the  prac- 
tical theme  is  distinctly  announced.  Then,  after  an 
exhortation  to  hinni/ity,  comes  an  exhortation  ap- 
parently to  church  officers,  yet  so  indistinct  in  its 
distinctions  that  nothing  definite  as  to  the  usages  of 
the  Roman  Church  caxi  be  based  upon  it.  A  warn- 
ing against  the  hierarchy  of  Rome  can  readily  be 
found  in  it ;  but  is  it  not  also  suggestive  of  a  cer- 
tain "freedom  of  adaptation"  in  the  external  pol- 
ity of  Christ's  Church  ?  To  one  who  has  puzzled 
over  this  and  parallel  passages  with  the  honest  pur- 
pose of  finding  out  what  is  the  form  of  church  gov- 
ernment given  jure  divino,  and  failed  to  discover,  in 
any  present  form,  the  counterpart  of  the  apostolic 
Church,  it  gives  a  happy  relief  from  perplexity  to 
conclude  that  church  polity  was  purposely  sketched 
by  the  apostles  only  in  "  silhouette ; "  that  the  de- 
tails are  to  be  of  ecclesiastical  rather  than  of  Divine 
enactment ;  that,  while  despotism  and  anarchy  are 
excluded,  both  by  the  nature  of  the  case  and  the 
hints  given  in  the  New  Testament,  the  external 
form  of  the  Church  of  the  future  may  be  as  differ- 
ent from  any  organization  at  present  existing,  as  its 
spirit  will  transcend  that  of  mere  ecclesiasticism. 
Mayhap,  when  the  Church  shall  return  to  the  apos- 
tolical spirit,  it  will  find  in  its  outward  form  the  true 
exegesis  of  these  disputed  passages.  He  who  reads 
prelacy  here,  reads  through  colored  glasses  ;  and  he 
who  finds  ruling  elders  alluded  to,  must  first  derive 
his  knowledge  of  their  existence  from  other  sources, 
and  then  make  his  exegesis  correspond.  If,  how- 
ever, any  will  not  be  satisfied  until  a  jure  divino 
form  is  found,  a  search  into  later  Epistles  will  be 
more  profitable ;  yet  that  fact  of  itself  admits  de- 
vclopn)ent  in  the  apostolic  age,  and  who  shall  say 
when  that  development  shall  cease  ?  Comp.  Schaff, 
History  of  the  Christian  Church,  i.  pp.  130  ff.,  and 
the  list  of  authors  there  referred  to  ;  also  a  discus- 
sion on  Lay  and  Primitive  Eldership,  in  the  Amer. 
Presbi/terian  Review,  Drs.  R.  D.  Hitchcock  and  E. 
F.  Hatfield,  vol.  vi.  pp.  253-268,  506-531.— R.] 


HOMILETICAIi  AND  PRACTICAIi. 

[In  the  original,  the  Homiletical  Notes  are  inserted  at 
the  close  of  the  chapter.— R.l 

Vers.  1,  2.     Our  thank-offering  for  God's  mercy. 

1,  What  sort  of  a  sacrifice  should  it  be?  a.  Living; 
b.  Holy;  c.  Well-pleasing  to  God.  2.  With  what 
disposition  should  it  be  presented  ?  a.  Not  so  that 
we  should  conform  to  the  world,  and  therefore  not 
with  imconverted  hearts ;  but,  b.  That  our  minds 
should  be  renewed,  that  we  may  continually  per- 
cfive  God's  will  aright. — Our  rational  service.  1. 
The  sacrifice  which  is  presented,  is  not  the  sacrifice 
of  slain  beasts,  but  the  living  sacrifice  of  our  bodies. 

2.  The  sanctuary  is  not  the  tabernacle  or  temple, 
but  the  Church  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ.     3.  The 


priests  are  not  Levites,  but  all  believing  Christiani 
whose  mind  is  renewed. — The  restoration  of  rational 
service  was  a  prime  advantage  conferred  by  our  Re- 
formers.— How  rational  service,  in  conformity  with 
its  nature,  should  not  be  limited  to  the  celebration 
of  Sundays  and  holy  days,  but  should  embrace  the 
whole  life. — The  exhortation  to  rational  service  is 
still  necessary.  1.  In  opposition  to  the  Catholic 
Church ;  2.  In  opposition  to  certain  sects. — Paul 
exhorts  to  reasonable  worship,  but  not  to  the  wor- 
ship of  reason. — Rea.sonable  service  is  not  subtilizing 
service.  1.  The  former  is  living  and  inspiring ;  2. 
The  latter,  dead  and  cold. 

LuTHKR  :  St.  Paul  here  calls  all  offerings,  works, 
and  worship,  unreasonable,  when  performed  without 
faith  and  the  knowledge  of  God. — The  law  has  a 
sacrifice  of  many  kinds  of  irrational  beasts,  all  of 
which  are  combined  in  one  sacrifice,  in  order  that 
we  ourselves  may  become  reasonable  men. 

Starke  :  Nothing  so  urges  us  to  what  is  good  as 
the  sense  of  God's  sweet  grace  and  mercy. — The 
death  of  the  old  man  is  the  life  of  the  new  man ; 
where  Adam's  wrath  ceases,  Christ's  meekness  be- 
gins ;  and  where  Adam's  pride  goes  down,  Christ's 
humility  rises. — Cramer  :  The  Christians  of  the 
New  Testament  are  spiritual  priests,  and  bound  to 
sacrifices,  but  they  should  sacrifice  themselves  :  lay- 
ing their  obedience  (1  Sam.  xv.  22),  their  lips  (Hosea 
xiv.  3),  faith  (Phil.  ii.  17),  alms  (Phil.  iv.  18),  mercy 
(Hosea  vi.  6),  and  all  such  things,  on  Jesus  Christ, 
the  golden  altar,  God  will  accept  them. 

Spener  :  It  is  not  enough  to  do  good  and  leave 
evil  undone,  but  the  Christian  must  present  himself 
a  complete  sacrifice  to  God. — If,  in  short,  we  would 
know  at  what  we  should  aim  in  Christianity,  it  is  the 
Divine  will,  and  therefore  the  Divine  word.  What- 
ever this  forbids  must  be  evil,  though  even  the 
whole  world  should  permit  and  praise  it ;  and  what- 
ever it  enjoins  is  good,  though  it  should  be  displeas- 
ing to  every  one. — Bengel  :  They  very  improperly 
shirk  from  this  perfect  will  who  are  always  in  search 
of  what  they,  as  they  think,  are  at  liberty  to  do 
without  sin.  But  their  course  is  just  like  that  of  a 
voyager,  who,  having  lost  his  reckoning,  is  constant- 
ly in  search  of  the  most  distant  shore  (ver.  2). 

Roos  :  God  wills  every  thing  that  is  good,  every 
thing  that  is  well-pleasing  to  Him,  and  every  thing 
that  is  perfect.  That  is  good  which  harmonizes  with 
God's  commandments  ;  and  it  is  good  (>;a/dr)  in  so 
far  as  it  is  well-pleasing  to  Him  ;  and  it  is  perfect  if 
presented  to  the  extent  of  our  capacity  (ver.  2). 

Gerlach  :  The  Apostle  compares  the  worship  of 
Christians  in  spirit  and  in  truth  (John  iv.  24),  which 
he  accordingly  calls  reasonable  (comp.  1  Peter  ii.  2), 
with  the  typical  and  figurative  sacrificial  worship  of 
the  Old  Testament  (vers.  1,  2). 

Heubner:  The  love  and  mercy  of  God  should 
be  the  incentive  and  source  of  the  Christian  sense. 
This  constitutes  the  characteristic  difference  between 
Christian  piety  and  every  other  kind  :  it  flows  from 
faith  and  the  experience  of  Divine  love  in  Christ. — 
The  mutual  devotedness  of  God  and  pious  people.-— 
The  holiness  of  the  first  commandment. — Christian 
faith  is  the  foundation  of  Christian  piety  (ver.  1).— 
Mastery  over  the  fiishion  of  the  world :  love  for 
God,  and  the  wish  to  have  only  His  grace,  conquers. 
— Proper  and  improper  accommodation  to  circum- 
stances.— Christian  life  must  be  something  in  motion, 
otherwise  it  will  stink.  Accipiunt  vitium,  ni  mo- 
veantur,  aquce. 

Besser  :  A  Christian  man  presents  his  body  as 


388 


THE   EPISTLE   OF   PAUL   TO   THE   ROMANS. 


a  daily  offering,  wlien  he,  1.  Crucifies  tliat  which  im- 
pedes tlie  spirit  willing  for  God's  service  ;  2.  \Vlicn 
he  oilers  all  the  powers  of  liis  body  and  soul  for 
God's  iionor  and  his  neighbor's  good  (vcr.  1). — Our 
service  is  reaxonable  ("  logical  ")  when  it  consists  in 
Christian  self-sacrifice,  because  this  service  is  worthy 
of  God,  and  well-pleasing  to  Him  ;  just  as  the  pure 
milk  of  the  gospel  (1  Peter  ii.  2)  is  called  reason- 
able  (sincere)  because  it  is  the  proper  nourishment 
for  God's  cliildren. — Paul  Spekatus  preached  at 
Vienna,  from  this  apostolical  text,  his  powerful 
Reformation  sermon  on  "  The  Glory  of  the  reason- 
able Gospel  Worship,  and  the  Punishment  of  the 
unreasonable  Popish  Worship"  (vcr.  1). — We  should 
flee  from  conforinitii  to  the  world  (vcr.  2). 

Vers.  3-8.  Humility  as  the  fundamental  law  of 
reasonable  service  in  the  Church.  1.  It  should  show 
itself  in  no  one's  thinking  too  higldy  of  himself,  but 
in  every  one's  thinking  soberly  of  himself.  2.  It 
should  be  manifested  by  patient  consecration  of  gifts 
to  the  service  of  the  Clnirch  (vers.  3-8).  —  True 
Christian  humility :  1.  Its  nature ;  2.  Its  source 
(ver.  3). — The  figure  of  the  body  and  the  members ; 
comp.  1  Cor.  xii.  (vers.  4,  5). — Healthy  church-life. 
To  this  belong  two  things :  1.  Unity  in  Christ ;  2. 
Diversity  of  gifts  (vers.  4-8). — Proof  of  the  neces- 
sary connection  of  unity  and  diversity  in  the  Church. 
1.  Unity  witliout  diversity  is  death  ;  2.  Diversity 
witiiout  unity  is  disorder  (vers.  4-8). — The  gift  of 
prophecy.  1.  In  what  does  it  consist  ?  2.  Wliat 
purpose  should  it  serve  ?  Comp.  1  Cor.  xiv.  3  (ver. 
7). — Has  any  one  an  office,  let  him  wait  on  his  office. 
This  is  said,  first  of  all,  of  the  special  care  of  the 
poor  {i)t,a/.ovia) ;  but  then  it  applies  to  every  office 
(ver.  7). — What  belongs  to  waiting  on  our  teaching? 

1.  Tlie  appropriation  of  the  material  for  teaching. 

2.  Observation    of   tlie   proper   mode  of  teaching 

S method).     3.  The  consecration  of  our  own  persons 
ver.  7). — We  should  give  with  simplicity — that  is  : 

1.  From  an  unselfish  heart ;  2.  Witii  a  single  eye 
(Matt.  vi.  22);  3.  With  a  pure  hand  (ver.  8).— 
Proper  care  in  government.     1.  It  jirotccts  order ; 

2.  It  regards  freedom  (vcr.  8). — Christian  mercy. 
1.  Its  nature  ;    2.  Its  exercise  (v'cr.  8). 

LuTiiEK :  However  precious  be  all  prophecy 
which  leads  to  works,  and  not  simply  to  Christ,  as 
our  comfort,  it  is  nevertheless  not  like  faith ;  .since 
those  who  practise  it  seek  the  revelation  of  hob- 
goblins, and  masses,  pilgrimages,  fasts,  and  the  wor- 
ship of  saints  (ver.  7). — Let  those  be  taught  who  do 
not  know  it,  and  those  be  admonished  who  know  it 
already  (vers  7,  8). 

Starke  :  Man — a  little  world  ;  such  a  glorious, 
artistic  masterpiece  of  the  Almighty  Creator,  that 
it  cannot  l>e  too  much  contemplated  and  wondered 
at  (ver.  4). — If  you  are  appointed  to  the  office  of 
preacher,  take  your  hand  from  the  oxen,  from  the 
plough,  and  from  your  worldly  business  !  Every 
one  to  the  work  to  which  God  has  assigned  him  ! 
Sirach  xxxviii.  25  (ver.  8). — Cramer  :  Let  no  one 
think  that  he  knows,  and  can  do,  every  thing  alone. 
If  that  had  been  designed,  God  would  only  have 
created  one  member  to  the  body ;  Prov.  xxii.  2 
(vcr.  4). — The  proper  touchstone  of  all  exposition 
of  tlie  Holy  Scri[)turi's,  is  tlie  constant  and  impreg- 
nable harmony  of  the  writings  of  the  prophets  and 
apostles;  Acts  xxvi.  22  (ver.  7). — Hedinoer  :  Xot 
out  of  the  nest !  How  will  you  ffy  without  feathers, 
judge  without  understanding,  l)oast  without  a  rea- 
son, be  called  pious  without  proof,  be  skilful  with- 
out God  ?     God  does  every  thing,  and  you  noth- 


ing. Therefore  glorify  Him,  but  not  yourself.  Be 
still  and  humble  (ver.  3). — Listen  !  You  arc  your 
neighbor's  servant.  Happy  he,  who,  as  the  servant 
of  Ills  neighl)or,  lives  in  love  (ver.  4). — Many  rules, 
little  work.  What  may  it  be  ?  Great  cry,  little  wool, 
Perforin  your  office  well,  and  regard  yourself  as  un- 
worthy of  praise  and  reward  (ver.  7). — Miller, 
Teacliing  instructs  and  lays  the  foundation,  exhor- 
tation builds  upon  the  foundation  (ver,  8). 

Spkner:  God  has  given  one  kind  of  faitli  to  all 
— that  is,  as  far  as  the  matter  itself  is  concerned. 
Therefore  Peter  says  :  They  who  have  obtained  like 
(laoTiiiov)  precious  faith  with  us  (2  Peter  i.  1). 
Therefore  we  must  regard  ourselves,  mutually,  as 
members  of  one  body  (ver.  3). — On  vcr.  7  :  Here 
belong  preaching  and  catechitical  instruction  (char- 
acteristic of  Spkxkr). 

Roos :  Every  one  should  act  according  to  the 
proportion  of  his  faith,  and  es[)ecially  deliver  Divine 
truths  —  that  is,  prophesy.  That  which  is  beyond 
them  is  the  work  of  nature,  and  is  worth  nothing 
(ver.  4). — To  the  words,  "  he  that  teaclicth,"  and 
"  he  that  exhorteth,"  &c.,  we  must  mentally  add, 
"  because  he  has  received  his  gift  to  do  it  from  the 
Lord."  Now  he  should  exercise  himself  in  this  em- 
ployment (vers.  7-0). 

Gi'.RLAcn :  True  humilili/  is,  to  be  conscious  of 
what  God  gives  to  it ;  and  it  is  not  a  self-acquired 
posses.Mon,  but  a  free  gift,  and  therefore  is  most  in- 
timately one  with  sobriety  and  clearness  of  spirit ; 
while  false  patience,  with  an  apparently  deep  self- 
humiliation,  gives  man  a  sullen  look  at  Ids  own 
heart,  and  in  his  gloom  it  increases  the  dark  spirit 
of  selfishness  and  pride  (ver.  3). — The  gift  of  propfi- 
fcy  should  not  draw  the  Christian  into  the  sphere  of 
obscure  feelings,  where  he  can  no  longer  distinguish 
the  truth  revealed  by  God  from  the  imaginations  of 
his  own  mind,  but  should  have  a  guiding  star  and 
rule  of  conduct  for  common  Christian  faith  (ver.  7). 

Heubner  :  God  has  given  us,  in  tht  human  body, 
an  elocpicnt  picture  of  human  society,  and  of  the 
inward  union  of  all  men.  [Comp.  the  address  of 
Meiienius  Agrippa  to  the  people  in  inonte  xacrOy 
Livy  ii.  82]  (vers.  4-6). — The  sense  of  ver.  7  is : 
Let  no  one  manifest  or  affect  more  fervency  or  en- 
thusiasm than  he  has,  according  to  the  measure  of 
his  faith,  according  to  the  degree  of  his  stnmgth  and 
religious  conviction.  How  common  it  is  for  one  to 
wish  to  appear  more  than  he  is,  or  can  be  !  Even 
religion  is  brought  out  for  a  show,  and  perverted  to 
a  desire  to  jileaso  (ver.  7). — Nothing  beyond  the 
Christian's  office  is  required  of  him  ;  that  is  tlie  first 
thing  for  him. — Christian  fidelity  to  office  as  the  fruit 
of  faith  (ver.  7). 

Besser:  It  is  very  important  to  distinguish  the 
measure  of  faith,  and  yet  not  to  separate  from  the 
measure  of  gifts  (ver.  3). — To  prophesy,  means  to 
declare  God's  mysteries,  impelled  by  tlie  Holy  Spirit 
(ver.  7). — The  prophecy  of  an  unbelieving  preacher 
and  expositor  can,  indeed,  resemble  faith  ;  but  wo 
pray  the  Lord  for  prophets  whose  measure  of  faith 
liolds  the  rule  of  faith  alive  within  them,  who  j)rcach, 
with  hearts  iielieviiig  according  to  the  received  mciw 
sure  of  faith,  the  faith  which  the  Church  coufcssci 
(ver.  7). 

The  Pericopes.  Vers.  1-6  for  the  first  Run- 
dny  after  E/>lphant/.  IIecbner  :  The  sacred  obliga- 
tions of  the  Christian  as  a  member  of  a  holy  com- 
munity.— Every  Christian  should  be  a  minister.  1, 
Proof;  2.  Blessing. — Christian  piety.  1.  Its  nature; 
2.  Its  effects.— Buddecs  :  The  real  fruits  of  faith. 


CHAPTER  Xn.   1-8. 


38S 


They  are  shown  :  1.  In  true  service,  or  proper  con- 
duct towiud  God ;  2.  In  proper  conduct  toward  the 
world  ;  and,  3.  In  proper  conduct  toward  ourselves. 
— Kapff:  What  is  necessary  for  the  offering  of  a 
sacrifice  well-pleasing  to  God  ?  1.  That  we  should 
no  longer  seek  salvation  in  ourselves  or  in  the 
world ;  2.  That  we  should  fully  appropriate  Christ 
as  the  perfect  sacrifice ;  S.  That  we  should  wholly 
suri'ender  ourselves  to  the  perfect  will  of  God. — 
Sr-iNDT :  How  far  a  true  Christian  must  alienate 
himself  from  the  world.  1.  As  a  sacrifice  on  the 
Loi  d's  altar  ;  2.  As  a  work  of  the  Lord's  hand  ;  3, 
As  a  member  of  the  Lord's  body.  —  Buhk  :  The 
Christian's  life  a  daily  priestly  service.  1.  In  the 
feeling  which  pervades  him ;  2.  In  the  denial 
which  he  exercises ;  3.  In  the  service  which  he 
renders. 

[Bishop  Hall,  on  ver.  2  :  Sermon  on  the  fash- 
ions of  the  world.  Outline:  I.  The  world.  II.  The 
foi bidden  fashions.  1.  The  head.  2.  The  eyes : 
(1.)  The  adulterous  eye  ;  (2).  The  covetous  eye  ; 
(3.)  The  proud  eye  ;  (4.)  The  envious  eye.  3.  The 
forehead — the  seat  of  impudence.  4,  The  ear  :  (1.) 
The  deaf  ear  ;  (2.)  The  itching  ear.  5.  The  tongue : 
(1.)  The  false  tongue  ;  (2.)  The  malicious  tongue  ; 
(3.)  The  ribaldrous  tongue.  6.  The  palate,  or  bellv. 
7.  The  back.  8.  The  neck  and  shoulders.  9.  The 
heart.  10.  The  hands  and  feet.  III.  The  ugliness 
and  disgustiveness  of  worldly  fashions  in  God's 
sight. 

[Farindon,  on  ver.  6  :  On  the  jjroporiion  of 
faith.  Plato,  when  asked  what  God  does  in  heaven, 
how  He  busies  and  employs  himself  there,  how  He 
passes  away  eternity,  answered  :  "  He  works  geo- 
metrically." So  is  the  "  proportion  of  faith,"  as  St. 
Paul  calls  it,  also  geometrical ;  where  we  must  not 
compare  sum  with  sum,  as  they  do  in  a  market,  or 
value  the  gift  more  or  less  by  telling  it ;  but  argue 
thus  :  "  As  v;hat  fie  bestows  is  in  proportion  to  his 
estate,  so  is  what  I  bestow  unto  mine."  And  in  this 
sense,  the  widow's  two  mites  were  recorded  as  a 
more  bountiful  and  a  larger  present  than  if  Solomon 
had  thrown  the  wealtli  of  his  kingdom  into  the  treas- 
ury. It  was  the  faith,  tlierefore,  from  which  their 
liberality  proceeded,  which  cheered  the  Apostle  in 
all  his  distresses  ;  not  the  gift  itself. 

[Lkighton,  on  ver.  1 :  On  the  sacrifice  of  the 
godly.  The  children  of  God  delight  in  offering  sac- 
rifices to  Him  ;  but  if  they  might  not  know  that 
they  were  well  taken  at  their  hands,  it  would  dis- 
courage them  much.  How  often  do  the  godly  find 
it  their  experience,  that,  when  they  come  to  pray. 
He  welcomes  them,  and  gives  them  such  evidence 
of  His  love  as  they  would  not  exchange  for  all 
worldly  pleasures  !  And  when  this  doth  not  appear 
as  at  other  times,  they  ought  to  believe  it.     He  ac- 


cepts themselves  and  their  ways  when  offered  in  sin 
cerity,  though  never  so  mean  ;  though  tliey  some 
times  have  no  more  than  a  sigh  or  a  groan,  it  is  most 
properly  a  spiritual  sacrifice. 

[Jerkmy  Tayluk  :  Religion  teaches  us  to  present 
to  God  our  bodies  as  well  as  our  souls  ;  for  God  is 
the  Lord  of  both  ;  and  if  the  body  serves  the  soul 
in  actions  natural,  and  civil,  and  intellectual,  it  must 
not  be  eased  in  the  only  offices  of  rehgion,  unless 
the  body  shall  expect  no  portion  of  the  rewards  of 
religion,  such  as  are  resurrection,  reunion,  and  glo- 
rification. 

[CiiARKoCK,  on  ver.  1 :  God,  who  requires  of  ua 
a  reasonable  service,  would  work  upon  us  by  a  rea- 
sonable operation.  God  therefore  works  by  way  of 
a  spiritual  illumination  of  the  understanding,  in  pro 
pounding  the  creature's  happiness  by  arguments  and 
reasons,  and  in  a  way  of  a  spiritual  impression  upon 
the  will,  moving  it  sweetly  to  the  embracing  that 
happiness,  and  the  means  to  it,  which  He  proposes  ; 
and,  indeed,  without  this  work  preceding,  the  motion 
of  the  will  could  never  be  regular. 

[J,  Howe,  on  ver.  1  :  Sermou  on  self-dedication. 
I.  Explanation  of  the  terms  in  the  text.  II.  How 
the  act  enjoined  must  be  performed.  1.  With 
knowledge  and  understanding  ;  2.  With  serious  con- 
sideration ;  3.  With  a  determined  judgment  that  it 
ought  to  be  done  ;  4.  With  liberty  of  spiiit ;  5. 
With  lull  bent  of  heart  and  will ;  6.  With  concomi- 
tant acceptance  of  (rod  ;  7.  With  explicit  reference 
to  Christ ;  8.  With  deep  humility  and  self-abase- 
ment;  9.  With  joy  and  gladness  of  heart;  10. 
With  candor  and  simplicity;  11.  With  full  surren- 
der to  God ;  12.  With  solemnity.  III.  Induce- 
ments to  self-dedication. 

[Bishop  Hopkins,  on  ver.  2:  On  Go:''s  vill. 
This  is  all  contained  in  the  Holy  Scriptures,  which 
are  a  perfect  system  of  precepts  given  us  for  the 
government  of  our  lives  here,  and  for  the  attaining 
of  eternal  life  hereafter ;  and  therefore  it  is  likewise 
called  His  revealed  will ;  whereas  the  other,  namely, 
the  will  of  purpose,  is  God's  secret  will,  until  it  be 
manifested  unto  us  by  the  events  and  effects  of  it. — 
To  be  governed  by  our  own  or  other  men's  wills,  is 
usually  to  be  led  by  passion,  and  blind,  headlong 
affections ;  but  to  give  up  ourselves  wholly  to  the 
will  of  God,  is  to  be  governed  by  the  highest  reason 
in  the  world  ;  for  His  will  cannot  but  be  good,  since 
it  is  the  measure  and  rule  of  goodness  itself;  for 
things  are  said  to  be  good  because  God  wills  them. 
And  whatsoever  He  requires  of  us  is  pure  and  equi- 
table, and  most  agreeable  to  the  dictates  of  right 
and  illuminated  reason  ;  so  that  we  act  most  like 
men  when  we  act  most  like  Christians,  and  show 
ourselves  most  rational  when  we  show  ourselvei 
most  religious. — J.  F.  H.] 


390  THE   EPISTLE   OF  PAUL   TO  THE   ROMANS. 


Sbcond  Section. — Tlie  proper  conduct  of  Christians  in  all  their  personal  relations :   to  the  brethren , 
in  their  own  life  ;   to  the  needy  ;   to  guests  ;   to  every  body,  even  toward  entnuez. 

Chap.  XIL  9-21. 

9        Let  love  be  without  dissimulation  [jjour  love  be  unfeigned].     Abhor'  that 

10  which  is  evil ;  cleave  to  that  which  is  good.  He  kindly  aifectioned  one  to 
another  with  brotherly  love  [In  brotherly  love '  be  affectionate  one  to  another, 

11  lueraiiy,  be  as  biooi  relatives]  ;  in  houour  preferring  one  another ;  Not  slothful  in 
business  [In  diligence,  not  slothful]  ;    fervent  in  spirit  [in  spirit,  fervent]  ;    serv- 

12  ing  the  Lord  ["»•,  the  time]  ;^  Rejoicing  in  hope  [in  hope,  rejoicing]  ;  patient  in 
tribulation   [in  tribulation,  patient]  ;    continuing   instant  in  prayer    [in   piaver, 

13  persevering];    Distributing  [Communicating]  to  the  necessity  [necessities]^  of 

14  saints ;    gwen  to  hospitality.     Bless  them   which   [these  Avho]  persecute  you  : 

15  bless,  and  curse  not.     Rejoice  with  them  that  do  [those  who]  rejoice,  and  weep 

16  with  them  that  [those  who]  weep.  Be  of  the  same  mind  one  tov>ard  another. 
Mind  not  high  things,  but  condescend  to  men  of  low  estate  [oc,  lowly  things]."* 

17  Be  not  wise  in  your  own  conceits.  Recompense  to  no  man  evil  for  evil.  Pro- 
vide  [Have  a  care  for]   things   honest  [honorable]  in   the   sight  of  all   men." 

18  If  it  be  possible,  as  much  as  lieth  in  [dependeth  on]  you,  live  peaceably  [be  at 

19  peace]  with  all  men.  Dearly  beloved,  avenge  not  yourselves  [Avenge  not  your- 
selves, dearly  beloved],  but  rather  give  place  unto  wrath  [to  the  wrath, 
sc,  of  God]  :    for  it  is  written,'  Vengeance  is  mine ;    I  will  repay,  saith  the  Lord. 

20  Therefore 

If  thine  enemy  hunger,  feed  him ; 

If  he  thirst,  give  him  drink  : 

For  in  [by]  so  doing 

Thou  shalt  heap  coals  of  fire  on  his  head. 

21  Be  not  overcome  of  [by]  evil,  but  overcome  evil  with  good. 

TEXTUAL. 

•  Ver.  9. — [The  imperatives  of  the  E.  V.  are  retained,  since  we  accept  the  hortatory  view  of  the  participles.  It  ia 
true,  the  E.  V.  itself  occasionally  retains  the  participinl  form  (vors.  10,  11, 12,  13),  but  only  in  such  a  way  as  not  to 
disturb  the  hortatory  meaninir.     See  the  Ex-g.  Xnli-s  on  the  construction. 

'  Ver.  10. — [l"he  E.  V.  has  Inverted  the  Greek  order  in  these  brief  clauses.  The  datives  stand  first,  and  their 
equivalents  should  occupy  the  same  position  in  English      So  Five  Aner.  Cleruj-mcn,  Amcr.  Bible  Union,  &c. 

'  Ver.  11.— [The  Rir.,  with  N.  A.  15.  D"^  ^.  L.,  most  fathers,  re:id<  :  Kv'piw  ;  adDptcd  bv  bezn,  Lachmann,  Scholz, 
Tischendorf,  De  Wettc,  Pbilippi,  Alfonl,  Trocrelles.  Dr.  LanKf,  however,  follow'^  Griesbnch,  Mill,  Fritzschc,  and  Meyer, 
who  adopt  Kaipif,  on  the  authority  of  1)'.  F.  G.,  Latin  fathers  (pd  Luttier).  Yet  Meyer  himself  acknowlcdtres  thattlie 
other  readine  is  better  supported  ;  he  rejects  it  on  account  of  the  criticiil  difficulty  of  accounting:  for  the  vtiriation,  were 
Kvpita  genuine,  especially  as  the  phnse  :  serve  the  Lord,  is  so  common  with  I'aul.  Dr.  Lange  s.Tys  :  "Such  a  general 
summons  to  serve  the  Lord,  looks  like  an  interruption  in  the  niiilst  of  general  directions.  Trie  rc:>ding,  a.s  Mover 
observes,  is  readily  explained  by  the  fact  that  a  prejudiced  moral  feeling  would  easily  stumtilo  at  the  principle  :  t<L  xaipoi 
iouA«u«ii'"  It  would  seem  that  Dr.  Lange  is  governed  rather  by  a  dcire  to  preseri-e  certain  excgetical  coirespondcm  cs, 
than  by  the  results  of  crltiftil  investigation.  See  Alford  in  favor  of  the  received  reading,  lie  contends  that,  besides 
the  weight  of  external  authorities,  the  internal  probabilities  sustain  it.  "The  piv.v.ji'  fubject  is,  the  clnrnrler  of  nur 
trill  fur  Go'l.^'  "The  command,  T<j>  xatpw  Sov\.,  would  surely  come  in  very  inopportunely  in  the  midst  of  exhorta- 
tions to  the  zealous  nervic  of  G'"!."  iJe  Wette,  indeed,  doubts  the  proi>riety  of  the  expression,  remarkiug  th:it  Chris- 
tians may  employ  rbi'  Konpov,  but  not  servo  it.  On  the  whole,  I  feel  constrained  to  differ  from  Dr.  L;\nge,  and  to  retain 
the  reading  of  the  Ric    See  further  in  the  Ex'g.  jYo'es. 

•  Ver.  13. — f^'C,  N.  A.  B.  D'.  :  xptian;  ;  D'.  F.  •  fiveiait.  The  former  is  adopted  by  all  modern  editors.  The 
latter  was  "a  corruption  introduced,  liardly  accidentally,  in  favor  of  the  hunor  of  mnrhirs  by  riimiii<m,,ratinii  "  (Alfordb 
So  Meyer,  and  most.  Dr.  Lange  admits  that  the  reading  p.vii,aiv,  which  he  rejects  here,  is  supporteil  by  the  sjimo 
authorities  as  the  reading  tcatpu  (ver.  11),  which  ho  accepts.  "But  the  connection  here  pronounces  in  feivor  of  the 
B'cep'n."  He  intimates  that  ho  finds  another  meaning  ttuui  "the  worship  of  martyrs"  in  the  rejected  reading,  but 
dous  nnt  state  what  it  is. 

•  Ver.  16.— (.See  Exrg.  Kolen. 

•  Ver.  17. — (After  xaka,  A'.,  Pnlycarp,  &c.,  insert  fvumiov  toO  9eov  Ka'i  ;  F.  O.,  Vulgate,  Gothic,  many  fithers, 
insert  ou  m<>>'Ov  ivuiwiov  t.  8tov  aWa  xai.  These  additions  arc  rcjcited  by  all  mo'lcrn  editors,  as  tJikeii  from  I'rnv.  iii. 
4,  where  the  LXX.  reads:  npovooi  icoAa  ivuiTriov  xvpiov  koX  avBpionutv. — Insfeiid  of  irafrui'  (lire,  N.  B.  D*.  L., 
venrions  and  fathers).  A".  D'.  F.  Sec,  have  rCiv,  which  probably  aros-  from  the  jirevious  insert 'ou. 

'  Ver.  19.— [From  l>cut.  xxxii.  35,  where  the  LXX.  reads  :  «V  qm«'po  i<c5i»ti)o-fu»?  diTaTToSulau.  Ilob. :  C£ll5"l  Cp3  "3, 
"mine  is  revenge  and  requital."    The  same  thought  is  found,  .Ter.  xxviii.  fl.     Hob.  x.  30  quotes  precisely  as  here. 

•  Ver.  20. — [An  exact  quotation  from  the  L.KX.,  I'rov.  xxv.  21,  2.'.  There  is,  howevi  r.  a  variation  in  the  opening 
words.  The  K-c,  with  D'.  L.,  some  versions  and  fnthers,  reads  :  iav  ovv  {iiv  alone  is  from  the  LXX.) ;  adoptcil  by 
Do  Wette,  I'hilippi,  Wo/dsworth,  and  Lange  (Hodge  nnd  .Sfunrt  nccept  it  without  reniiirk).  11'.  F.,  and  other  authori- 
ties, have  iav  alone  ;  so  Tischendorf.  N.  A.  I).  :  a  AAa  tav  (Lacbmnnn.  Meyr,  Alford).  Otiicr  variations  occur  in  the 
fathers  It  is  difficult  to  deiide.  I'robably  ou»'  was  the  original  roadins,  then  rejeetod  because  the  inference  was  not 
nnderwtood,  or  to  conform  to  the  LXX.;  then  aAAo  substituted,  as  a  connecting  particle  was  deemed  necessary.  Ccr* 
taiuly  iat   ovv  is  kcliu  diJJicUior,    Even  Alford  seems  inclined  to  adopt  it.— U  ] 


CHAPTER  XII.   9-21. 


39  J 


EXEGETICAL  AND  CRITICAL. 

Summaru. — The  remark,  that  the  expression  ^ 
aydnt;  cir/'Troz^vtToi,-  serves  as  an  inscription  to  all 
the  following  participles,  has  induced  us,  after  the 
example  of  Me3-er,  and  others,  to  begin  the  new 
section  with  ver.  9.*  It  may  be  doubted  whether 
the  Apostle  has  mentally  supplied  tffTo>  or  iari 
The  latter  view  is  favored  by  the  idea  of  Christian 
love,  not  merely  "  toward  others,"  but  in  a  uni- 
versal relation;  see  ver.  II,  The  first  construction 
i*-  favored  by  the  hortatory  form  appearing  more 
strongly  towaid  the  end.  Our  earlier  division  was 
based  on  the  lact  that  vers.  9  and  10  treat  of  con- 
duct toward  coiapaiiions  in  faith  within  the  Church. 
The  Apostle,  however,  makes  use  of  a  long  series 
of  participles,  as  if  he  would  urge  not  so  much  a 
Christian  course  of  conduct,  as  to  set  up  a  typical 
rule  of  conduct  for  believers,  according  to  unfeigned 
love. 

[De  Wette,  Olshausen,  and  others,  supply  ear/,, 
thus  making  these  verses  descriptive,  not  hortatory. 
They  urge  that  the  use  of  the  participle  for  the  im- 
perative is  vei-y  rare.  That  is  true  ;  but  in  ver.  14 
we  have  the  imperative,  followed  by  an  infinitive  in 
ver.  15,  and  then  by  participles,  vers.  16-19  ;  all  of 
these  latter  clauses  being  of  a  hortatory  character. 
With  most  commentators  (so  E.  V.),  we  prefer  to 
supply  t'tTTo)  with  the  first  clause  of  ver.  9,  and 
tart  with  the  following  participles,  since  ver.  8  is 
of  a  hortatory  character.  Meyer,  Philippi,  Tischen- 
dorf,  Lachmann,  larger  edition,  declare  for  this ;  the 
editors  by  their  punctuation,  which  is  the  same  in 
the  main  as  that  of  the  E.  V.  Lachmann  also  favors 
(smaller  edition)  joining  the  participles  with  the  im- 
perative in  ver.  14,  and  thus  obtaining  the  hortatory 
force ;  this,  however,  is  not  only  singular,  but  con- 
trary to  the  thought,  which  will  not  permit  these 
participles  to  modify  the  imperative,  bless.  Fritzsche 
takes  the  participles  as  corresponding  to  the  personal 
subjects  of  "  love  unfeigned,"  as  2  Cor.  i.  7 ;  but 
this  is  unnecessary. — R.] 

Ver.  9.  Let  your  love  be  unfeigned]  ?/ 
aydnt]  dvv n6y.(j  i^roi;.  We  are  justified  in 
slrengtliening  ^  dydnri  into  your  love,  in  Eng- 
lish. But  the  Apostle  means  love  absolutely,  not 
merely  love  to  the  brethren  (which  is  spoken  of 
afterwards),  nor  love  to  God.  The  adjective  need 
not  be  paraphrased,  as  in  E.  V. — R.]  See  2  Cor. 
vi.  6  ;  1  Peter  i.  22.  Meyer  well  says  :  "  As  love, 
BO  also  must  faith,  its  root,  be ; "  1  Tim.  i.  5  ;  2  Tim. 
i.  8.  Undissembled  love  is  therefore  the  inscription 
for  the  whole  series  of  prescriptions  which  the  Apos- 
tle lays  down  in  parallelisms  of  two  and  of  three 
members. 

Abhor  that  which  is  evil,  dnoarx'yovv- 
Tf?.  Strictly,  repelling  with  repugnance.  This 
first  gi-and  antithesis  says,  that  believers  should  turn 
away  with  utter  abhorrence  from  that  which  is  evil, 
in  order  to  cleave  to  the  good  with  inseparable  at- 
tachment, as  with  bridal  affection.  This  antithesis 
constitutes  the  practice  of  heaven  and  heavenly  life, 
and  its  realization  is  the  life  of  our  Lord.  Its  break- 
ing off  and  turnhig  away,  as  well  as  its  connecting 
ind  uniting,  constitute  the  fundamental  moral  law 
)f  God's  kingdom.  The  second  antithesis  unites 
with  this. 

•  [In  the  first  edition,  vers.  9  and  10  were  added  to  the 
previous  section.  The  present  division  has  tlie  support  of 
the  best  modern  commentators,  aud  must  be  deemed  a 
happy  alteration.— R,] 


Yer.  10.    In  brotherly  love,     gt/larff/^ta 

[The  dative  is  that  of  reference :  as  respects  brother 
ly  love. — R.]  Specific  brotherly  love  for  fellow. 
Christians  ;  1  Thess.  iv.  9  ;  Heb.  xiii.  1  ;  1  Peter  i. 
22  ;  2  Peter  i.  T. — [Be  affectionate  one  to  an- 
other, fi<;  a/./fj/oi't;]  qn.).6a'T  o^i  yoi,.  Be  lov. 
ers  as  toward  these  related  in  blood. 

In  honour.  Tiu/j,  esteem.  The  antithesis 
hei-e  is  the  equalization  in  confiding  brotherly  love, 
and  the  subordination  of  our  own  personality  to  our 
esteem  for  others. 

Preferring  one  another.  riQoyjyo v /nvoi,. 
The  explanations :  excelling  (Chrysostom,  and  oth- 
ers), obliging  (Theophylact,  Luther,  and  others),  and 
esteeming  higher  (Theodoret,  Grotius;  see  Tholuck), 
are  intimately  connected  therewith,  [Stuart :  "  In 
giving  honor,  anticipating  one  another."  Meyer  : 
"  Going  before  as  guides  ;  i.  e.,  with  conduct  incit- 
ing others  to  follow."  These  explanations,  however, 
do  not  seem  to  suit  xt/i// ;  hence  Allbrd,  and  most, 
prefer  the  meaning  given  in  the  Vulgate :  iuvicem 
preeveniente-!.  Hodge  :  "  Instead  of  waiting  for 
others  to  honor  us,  we  should  be  beforehand  with 
them  in  the  manifestation  of  respect." — R.] 

Ver.  11.  In  diligence,  not  slothful,  &c.  [ttj 
<TTtovi)ri  fi  ij  o/.r-ti(j oi,  z.t./..]  This  clause,  wliict 
has  three  members,  defines  proper  activity  in  refer- 
ence to  temporal  affairs,  just  as  the  following  clause, 
which  also  lias  tliree  members,  defines  proper  pas- 
sivity in  these  affnirs.  Both  verses  define  the  per- 
sonal conduct  of  the  Christian  in  relation  to  him- 
self,  according  to  his  situation  in  time.*  The  prin- 
cipal rule  of  the  first  clause  is :  not  to  shrink  half- 
heartedly from  the  whole  work  of  time,  but  to  work 
with  persevering  enthusiasm.  To  this  belongs  the 
polar  conduct  of  remaining  warm  in  spirit  (seething 
and  boiling  like  a  hot  spring),  and  overcoming  the 
time  (see  Acts  xviii.  25),  while  in  one's  daily  task 
adapting  one's  self  to  the  moment,  to  the  will  of 
the  zr^tot;  in  the  xat^oc,  so  that  He  is  served  by 
observing  its  full  meaning,  /tovl.  t<~>  y.aii>(7), 
tempori  servire  (Cicero),  and  similar  expressions ; 
see  Meyer,  p.  463.  The  expression  was  usual  in  the 
bad  sense  (of  unprincipled  accommodation),  as  in 
the  good  (to  accommodate  one's  self  to  the  time). 
But  here  it  reads  :  controlling  the  time  by  serving 
the  Lord;  Eph.  v.  16;  see  Tholuck,  pp.  669  ST.,  who 
gives  the  preference  to  the  reading  zi^v/w. 

[Serving  the  Lord,  nji  y.viiio)  ()ov}.ivov- 
tft;.  On  the  readings,  see  Textual  Note  ^  The 
adoption  of  the  reading  xat^w,  whicli  is  not  so  well 
sustained  as  that  of  the  Bee.,  has  influenced  the  exe- 
gesis of  Dr.  Lange  throughout  the  veise.  Philippi 
urges  against  xat^fi)  its  equivocal  meaning,  aud  the 
fact  that  Paul  always  represents  the  Cliristian  as 
free,  a  servant  only  to  God,  or  Christ,  or  righteous- 
ness — never  of  the  time.  In  fact,  the  injunction 
seems  scarcely  to  differ  from  one  of  worldly  wisdom, 
if  that  reading  be  accepted.  Eph.  v.  16  ;  Col.  iv. 
5,  will  not  justify  the  expression.  Fritzsche  in  loco 
admits  an  interchange  of  xv^la;  and  xat^^o'i;  in  other 
places. — Dr.  Hodge  explains :  "  Influenced  in  our 
activity  and  zeal  by  a  desire  to  serve  Christ.     Thia- 


*  [The  readinjr  adopted  hy  Dr.  Lange  in  the  last  clause 
lends  him  to  this  limitation  of  meaning.  "Whili-,  as  Phi- 
lippi observes,  there  is  no  necessity  for  limiting  the  dili- 
gence to  evangelistic  efforts,  it  seems  eqnnlly  iinonlled  for 
to  refer  it  exclusively  to  temporal  affairs,  as  is  done  hy  Dr. 
Lana-e  and  the  E.  V.  ("business").  Luther  is  ncit  literally 
exact,  but  trives  the  correct  sense  :  S'-irl  in'chl  lr(ip'\,  m  •.<  ihf 
ihvn  snlJf ;  Be  not  slothful  in  what  you  ouglit  to  do.  lliue- 
it  is  referred  to  all  Christian  duty  aa  such  (Alford).— R.) 


303 


THE    EPISTLE    OF   PAUL    TO   THE    ROMANS. 


member  of  the  sentence,  thus  understood,  descril)es 
the  motive  from  whicli  zeal  and  diligenee  should 
proceed."  Tiie  common  interpretation,  derived  from 
the  E.  v.,  is:  not  slothful  in  temiioral  all'airs,  yet  of 
an  earnest  religious  spirit,  because  all  is  done  in  tlie 
service  of  the  Lord.  If  tiie  first  clause  be  extend- 
ed so  as  to  include  "  whatever  our  hand  finds  to 
do,"  this  is  sutliciently  correct.  The  second  mem- 
ber derives  its  appropriateness  from  the  fact — never 
more  m)ticeable  than  in  these  l)ustling  days,  ^vllen 
even  religious  duty  partakes  somewhat  of  the  spirit 
of  the  age — that  zeal  and  diligence  may  become  a 
habit  and  passion,  a  mere  activity,  lacking  the  genu- 
ine fervor  of  the  spirit.  The  hist  term  does  not, 
indeed,  refer  to  the  Holy  Spirit,  but,  in  an  exhorta- 
tion to  Christians,  may  well  be  taken  iis  meaning  the 
human  spirit  under  the  iutluence  of  the  Holy  Spirit. 
— R.]  This  is  followed  by  a  trichotomy  as  the  prop- 
er passivity  in  temporal  relations. 

Ver.  12.  In  hope,  rejoicing  [t^  iknldt, 
yai^ovrii;.  Stuart  thinks  the  datives  in  this 
verse  also  are  datives  of  reference :  as  respects 
hope,  rejoicing,  &c.  But  the  regularity  has  been 
broken  in  upon  by  the  jm  y.i<(jiio  of  the  preceding 
verse ;  we  are  therefore  warranted  in  adopting  a 
different  view  here,  especially  a.s  the  datives  in  this 
verse  seem  not  to  be  parallel  to  each  other.  The 
verb  ■/aifin.v  may  indeed  govern  the  dative,  but  the 
hope  is  rather  the  (/round  than  the  object  of  rejoic- 
ing (so  Meyer,  Alford).  De  Wette,  Philippi :  ver- 
moge  der  Hoffnung  ;  Hodge  :  on  account  of  hope. 
The  ho|)e  is  objective,  and  to  be  taken  more  gen- 
erally than  Dr.  Lange  suggests.  His  view  results 
from  reading  zat^w  above. — R.]  The  antithesis 
shows  that  here  the  D.rrii;,  as  formerly  the  (Tnorthj, 
must  be  regarded  as  prevalently  objective.  In  the 
time  bestowing  hope.  It  is  in  harmony  witli  the 
childlike  character  of  faith  to  rejoice  gratefully 
over  every  good  token  ;  but  it  is  also  in  harmony 
with  manliness  to  be  j)atient  in  tribulation. 

Izi  tribulation,  patient ;  in  prayer,  per- 
8evei"ing  [  t  ■tj  i>  /.  i  v  f  t  v  n  o  /i  i  v  o  v  r  k;  '  t  7; 
7T(>  on  f  I'/ j^  /r  (I  o<;xa(i  T  f  ooT'%'r  n;.  Alford:  t7j 
&).i\\'n,,  the  state  in  which  the  vnuiiovt;  is  founii. 
Piiilippi,  De  Wette,  Meyer,  &c.,  think  iv  was  omit- 
ted on  account  of  the  parallelism  of  construction, 
though  the  verb  governs  the  dative  (more  usually 
the  accusative,  however).  On  the  second  clause, 
comp.  Col.  iv.  2 ;  Acts  i.  14. — K.]  The  harmoniza- 
tion of  the  great  conU-a-sts  of  life  lies  in  the  perse- 
vering life  of  prayer.  Similar  harmonizations,  see 
James  i.  9,  10:  chap.  v.  13.  Bengel :  Oamlbnn 
non  modo  est  affectuit^  scd  itiam.  officiiim  chrin/iano- 
rnm.  Tholuck  and  Meyer  would  regard  the  hope 
here  quite  universally,  as  the  foundation  of  Chris- 
tian joy.  This  is  not  favored  by  the  antitliesis  ttj 
&}.iil'n,.  Meyer  iiere  reails  the  dative:  stiuiding 
out  again.st  tribulation.  Hut  Paul  will  not  consider 
tribulation  as  an  adversary.  We  also  prefer  bring 
patient  to  fjeiiig  xtfad/'<ixt,  as  continued  steadfastness 
is  placed  here  finally  in  the  life  of  prayer.* 


*  [Th"'  Idoa  of  viro/xcVnc  in  jintipnt  con  I  innnnnc,  or 
ttenclfaritnciw,  iilthouKli,  !it  tim"s,  the  i<li'a  of  patience  ra.iy 
bo  th  •  pri'inincnt  one.  It  m:iy  l)c  ilr)u))te(l  whctiier  tlio 
Other  thonpht  is  not  equally  prominent  here.  So  I'hilippl  ; 
tn  tifr  Diiing<nl  h'tidmlig. — AceflntiiiK  tlic  wiilcr  relorenco 
of  Ihe  vertte,  Dr.  Ilodifo  tays :  "  This  hope  of  Hiilvntion  is 
the  most  ellectual  menns  of  produ'ini;  jiatlenee  un'ler  pres- 
ent nllliutiona."  "  Intercourse  with  (iod,  hiiwover,  is  necoM- 
B!iry  to  the  exercise  of  this,  and  all  other  virtues,  and 
therefore  the  Apostle  imnicilinlely  adds  :  enntinuivn  instant 
inprayit."     lie  finds  in  this  expression  two  attributes  of 


Ver.  13.   Communicating  to  the  necessitiea 

of  saints  \_TnTq  ■/{itiai.t;  ti7)V  ayiiiiv  /.Ot-VM- 
voT'VTfi;.  '^^Q  Textual  Note  *. — R.]  The  believer 
naturally  comes  from  his  own  necessity  to  the  neces 
sity  of  his  brethren.  'l'ai(;x(j(iai,q.  The  mean- 
ing of  the  verb  xotv. :  distributing  to,  is  oi)posed  by 
Meyer  and  Tholuck.  It  is  sufficient  here  that  /lold- 
ing  fellowship  ivith  is  the  fuller  and  stronger  ex- 
pression, yet  not  fellow.ship  "  in  the  necessities  "  of 
fellow-Christians,  but  with  them ;  or,  in  other  words : 
to  participate  in  their  necessities  (Chrysostom,  Theo- 
doret).* — Given  to  hospitality  [r/ji'  gtAolf- 
viav  di,ii)xovTfc,  literally,  pursuing  honpitality. 
— R.]  In  ancient  times,  hospitality  was  also  a  high 
ly  important  work  of  love,  for  the  relief  of  neces- 
sity ;  Heb.  xiii.  2  ;   1  Peter  iv.  9. 

Ver.  14.  Bless  those  who  persecute  you, 
&C.  [  f  r  /  o  y  f  I  T  *  T  o  in;  d  kd  a  0  v  r  aq  r  n  ui;  , 
js.T.A.]  Here  the  hortatory  form  becomes  distinct ; 
see  Matt.  v.  44.  Probably  the  expression  of  Jesus 
has  reached  Paul  by  the  tradition  of  the  Church, 
Tholuck:  "It  is  just  from  the  Sermon  on  th« 
Mount  that  we  find  the  most  reminiscences ;  1  Cor. 
vii.  10  ;  James  iv.  9  ;  v.  12  ;  1  Peter  iii.  9  ;  iv.  14." 
Tholuck,  very  strangely,  supposes  here  a  so-called 
lexical  connection — i.  e.,  that  ver.  14  is  accidentally 
called  forth  by  the  word  ()ni>/.ovrtti.\  But  it  is  in- 
correct to  suppose  that  the  exhortation  of  ver.  14 
interrupts  such  exhortations  as  vers.  13  and  15, 
which  relate  to  the  mutual  conduct  of  Christians ; 
ver.  15  has  been  too  generally  regarded  as  favoring 
this  view. 

Ver.  15.  Rejoice  with  those  who  rejoice, 
&c.  [)r(xi(tn,v  /I  fro.  xai.()6vT(i>v ,  x.t.A.  On 
the  infinitive  as  imperative,  see  Winer,  p.  296. 
Meyer  fills  out  the  sentence  thus:  /ai(jfLV  I'fidq 
(V-m". — R.]  XaiijHv,  the  infinitive  as  au  imperative, 
to  be  supplemented  mentally  by  a  corresponding 
verb  ;  see  Sirach  vii.  83,  34.  Ver.  14  defines  the 
proper  conduct  in  relation  to  personal  aniipathg ; 
ver.  15,  the  proper  conduct  in  relation  to  personal 
sympathy. 

Ver.  16.  Be  of  the  same  mind  one  to'ward 
another  [to  avto  fl(;  a//. rAoi'i;  (/(fovorv- 
Tfi,].  The  participles  in  ver.  16  have  been  vari- 
ously construed  ;  now  with  the  preceding  impera- 
tive /nlom;  x/.uinv,  ver.  16,  and  now  with  the 
following  /(/;  ylftnOf ;  see  Philippi.  Becau.se  of 
the  great  dilliculties  of  such  connections,  commen- 
tators  prefer   to   supply    tart    (Philippi,    Meyer).| 

accepiiWe  praver — perseverance  and  favor — both  implying 
faith  in  God.— 11.] 

*  [Meyer  paraphrases  :  "havinp  fellowship  in  the  neces- 
sities of  the  enints  ;  1.  e.,  eondiictinp  yourselves  as  though 
the  necessities  of  your  fellow-Chrisfiaiis  were  your  own, 
and  thus  seekiiii;  to  meet  thera."  Stuart  :  "in  respect  to 
the  w.iiits  of  the  saints,  be  sympalhetie ; "  but  the  dative 
is  hardly  a  dative  nf  referei'ce.  The  intransitive  meaiiinf^ 
of  the  verb  must  he  insisted  upon  (Tholuck,  Meyer,  and 
most).  Even  in  flal.  vi.  6,  the  transitive  nuanin^'  must  Ije 
l^ven  up.     (Comi".  Un'Ce's  Cnmm.  in  lorn,  p.  150.) — R.) 

t  [Woniswortli  tinde  a  hapjiy  play  upon  the  words, 
Jiw<to>^««  (ver.  l.'l),  iiuiKovra^  (ver.  U).  "  It  would  seem  as 
If  the  .\i>ostle's  minil,  stnilned  by  the  pressure  of  the  ai-gu- 
nieut  with  which  il  had  been  laborinp,  now  prracefully  and 
pliyfully  rehixi's  itself  In  Christian  cheerfune-s.  In  hi* 
conciliatory  courtesy,  he  would  ehow  his  readere  what  he 
bad  siiid  Kevorely  eoneeriiinK  them  in  the  former  ports  ol 
his  Kpistle,  had  been  spoken  in  love.  So  he  now  says,  in  a 
tone  of  lively  alfection  :  Even  we  Christians,  whom  tho 
world  ;)'r.>crit'.'.«,  ouylil  to  be  persrcntorx  ;  we  oufjht  to  follow 
with  our  blesslii(;s  and  our  prayers  those  who  pursue  Ui 
with  rancor  and  disdain."— On  the  spirit  of  this  injunction, 
see  lldd^e  in  liico,  especially  tho  extract  from  Calvin  which 
he  (fives.- U.]  , 

I  [Wo  retain  the  imperative  form  of  the  E.  V.    It  might 


CHAPTER  XII.   9-21. 


31)S 


The  attempt  at  the  proper  construction  would  be 
be-5t  favored  by  returning  to  ver.  15,  and  reading 
this  injunction  as  a  fundamental  thought,  control- 
ling what  follows,  clothed  in  figurative  expression 
and  made  explicit  by  the  beginning  of  ver.  16.  On 
this  wise  : 

First  trichotomy :  Rejoice  with  them  that  do  re- 
joice, and  weep  with  them  that  weep  :  bci7iff  of  the 
same  mind  one  toward  another. 

Second  irichotoini/ :  Mind  not  high  things,  but 
condescend  to  the  lowly.  Addition  :  Bo  not  wise 
in  your  own  conceits  (in  seclusion). 

Third  trichotonni :  Recompense  to  no  man  evil 
for  evil ;  provide  things  honest  in  the  sight  of  all 
men  ;  if  it  be  possible,  as  much  as  lieth  in  you,  live 
peaceably  with  all  men. 

Fourth  trichotomy :  Dearly  beloved,  avenge  not 
yourselves,  but  rather  give  place  unto  wrath  ;  for  it 
is  wi'itten,  &c.  All  this  follows  from  the  conduct  of 
Christians  toward  each  other.  But  then  the  whole 
glory  of  this  reciprocal  feeling  is  elaborated  in  the 
Christian  love  of  enemies,  which  conquers  evil  by 
good  ;  vers.  20,  21. 

The  same.  To  air 6  ;  see  chap.  xv.  5;  Phil, 
ii.  2 ;  iv.  2  ;  2  Cor.  xiii.  7.  They  should  adhere  to 
the  same,  what  is  equal,  what  is  common,  in  their 
intercourse  with  each  other,  or  in  the  intercourse  of 
one  toward  others ;  reminder  of  the  Golden  Rule. 
According  to  Phil.  ii.  4,  to  ki'to  nfjovtlv  proceeds 
from  the  to  tv  (f(jovtiv.  Adherence  to  one  results 
in  adhering  to  the  same  ;  then,  this  results  in  unity, 
which,  however,  is  only  a  special  fruit  of  that  gen- 
eral conduct.  Likewise  Tholuck.  [Dr.  Hodge  thinks 
concord  of  feeling  is  the  prominent  thought.]  Chry- 
sostom's  view  is  different :  not  to  regard  one's  self 
better  than  others,  and  similarly. 

Mind  not  high  things  [ ,«  ^  t  «  r  y^'v^la, 
(f>^ovovvtf'i\  Not  merely  " high-aspiring  selfish- 
ness," but  also  self-complacent  fancies;  for  example, 
Novatian,  puritanic,  aristocratic,  or  humanistic  fan- 
cies injure,  or  even  tear  asunder,  the  bond  of  com- 
munion, of  Christian  fellowship  with  the  Church, 
and  of  humane  fellowship  with  the  world. 

But  condescend  to  men  of  lov7  estate. 
Tol'i  TaTTfij-oTc.  Construed  as  masculine  by 
Chrysostom,  Erasmus,  Luther  [Alford,  Wordsworth], 
and  others.  (Various  definitions  :  Christians  should 
count  themselves  among  the  lowly ;  should  suffer 
with  the  oppressed ;  should  remain  in  fellowship 
with  the  lowly,  with  publicans  and  sinners.)  But 
Fritzsche,  Reiche,  De  Wette  [Stuart],  and  many  oth- 
ers, have  declared  in  favor  of  the  neuter.  Meyer : 
Subjecting  yourselves  to  the  lower  situations  and 
occupations  of  life.  The  antithesis  ta  {xftj/.d  is 
urged.  But  the  antithesis  is  modified  by  the  change 
of  the  verb  into  awanayoftfvoi'.  The  latter 
verb  denotes,  to  be  carried  off,  to  be  taken  along 
with,  or,  to  allow  one's  self  to  be  carried  off,  to  be 
misled,  to  be  tal-en  alone/  with  (see  Tholuck,  p.  673). 
This  may  apply  as  a  duty  toward  the  bretliren  in 
low  estate,  who,  in  opposition  to  high  things,  repre- 
eent  the  real  essence  of  humanity  in  tlie  form  of  a 
servant ;  but  it  cannot  apply  to  trivial  and  low 
things.  We  should  take  small  things  into  consider- 
ation in  the  light  of  duties,  but  not  to  permit  our- 
selves to  be  carried  oft"  by  them.  But  of  small 
men,  who  are  great  in  God's  eyes,  it  is  said  with  pro- 
priety :    that  we  should  devote  ourselTes  to  them 

perh.nps  he  chnncred  to  the  participial,  as  is  done  in  the 
re\ision  by  Five  Ans.  Clergymen  ;  but  this  would  render  a 
jhango  in  punctuation  necessary. — E.] 


through  suff'ering  to  glory.     Imprisoned  and  himg 
with  the  lowly,  but  not  with  the  bad  1 

The  neuter  construction  is  thus  explained  b) 
Calvin,  and  others :  hurnilibiis  rebus  obsecundantei 
(about :  to  be  true  in  small  things) ;  while  Grotius, 
and  others,  thus  explain  the  masculine  construction : 
modestissimorum  t.rcmpla  sectnntes. 

[On  the  whole,  the  masculine  is  preferable ;  for 
in  no  other  case  in  the  New  Testament  is  the  adjec- 
tive Ta,Tfn'6t;  used  of  things.  Nor  does  the  Apos- 
tle's antithesis  require  the  neuter  meaning.  Alford : 
"  In  TO.  {'ii'tj/.a  qfJoroTi'Tfq,  the  Iti'tj/.u  are  necessa- 
rily Subjective — the  lofty  thoughts  of  the  man.  But 
in  toTl;  Tanfivolq  avvan.  the  adjective  is  necessa- 
rily objective — some  outward  objects,  with  which  the 
persons  exhorted  are  avvandytaOcu.  And  those 
outward  objects  are  defined,  if  I  mistake  not,  by  the 
nq  ci/./.i^).oi\:."  Dr.  Hodge,  and  many  others,  do 
not  decide  between  the  two  views. — R.] 

Be  not  wise,  &c.  iMi]  yivftrSf,  x.t./.  See 
chap.  xi.  25.  But  there  the  conceit  of  one's  own 
wisdom  constitutes  an  antithesis  to  God's  revelation, 
while  here  it  constitutes  an  antithesis  to  the  fellow- 
ship of  men  (not  merely  of  Christians  in  a  good 
sense). 

Ver.  17.  Recompense  to  no  man  evil  for 
evil  [/tij^fvi  y.ay.'ov  uvri  y.ct/.ov  unQf)i,- 
()6)'Tft,'.  Alford:  "The  Apostle  now  proceeds  to 
exhort  respecting  conduct  to  those  tvifhout."  There 
is,  however,  no  warrant  for  this  limitation  in  the  lan- 
guage, and  certainly  the  temptation  to  render  evil 
for  evil  to  Christians  is  frequent  enough.  —  R.] 
Meyer :  "  The  principle  itself,  and  how  it  stood  op- 
posed to  heathendom  and  pharisaism  !  " 

[Have  a  care  for  things  honourable,  7T(io- 
V  o  0  V  ft  f  V  o  I,  y.  a  ). « .  Lange :  S<id  a uf  das  Edie  be- 
dacht.  Have  careful  regard  to  what  is  noble,  &c. 
Dr.  Hodge  finds  here  a  motive  for  the  injunction 
which  precedes,  and  objects  to  the  period  after 
"  evil  "  in  the  E.  V.,  as  well  as  to  the  translation 
"  honest,"  which  undoubtedly  conveys  to  the  ordi- 
nary reader  the  thought  that  we  are  bidden  to  pro- 
vide for  ourselves  and  families  in  an  honest  way. 
The  clause  much  resembles  Prov.  iii.  4  (LXX.), 
hence  the  variations. — R.] 

In  the  sight  of  all  men  [tvinmov  ndv- 
T(>)v  dv &()U)7cii)v.  'iee  Textual  Note  ^.'\  Meyer: 
Before  the  eyes  of  all  men.  We  regard  the  term  as 
an  expression  of  the  relation  to  the  most  diverse 
men.  However,  the  other  construction  also  makes 
good  sense  ;  for  Christians  could  often  expose  indi- 
viduals to  danger,  by  giving  them  cause  for  offence  ; 
Prov.  iii.  4  ;   2  Cor.  viii.  21. 

Ver.  18.  If  it  be  pos!3ible,  &c.  El  divaTov 
is  referred  by  Erasmus,  Bengel,  and  others,  to  what 
precedes  [but  this  is  objectionable].  The  clause : 
as  much  as  dependeth  on  you,  explains  the  fi  dv- 
varov.  It  maybe  outwardly  impossible  to  us  to 
live  at  peace  with  every  body  ;  but  inwardly  we 
should  be  peaceably  disposed,  prepared  for  peice, 
toward  every  body.  [The  ti  (irrreToi'  is  objective 
(Tholuck,  De  Wette,  Meyer,  Alford),  not,  "  if  you 
can,"  but,  if  it  be  possible,  if  others  will  allow  it. 
"All  YOVR  part  is  to  be  peace  :  whether  you  actually 
live  peaceably  or  not,  will  depend,  then,  solely  on 
liow  others  behave  toward  you"  (Alford).  That 
this  is  often  impossible,  the  Apostle's  life  plainly 
shows. — R.] 

Ver.  19.  Avenge  not  yourselves,  dearly- 
beloved.  The  additional  a  j'«  tt // t  o  «' ,  loving 
pressure.     [The  address  becomes  more  aft'ectionate 


3tf4 


THE   EPISTLE   OF  PAUL   TO   THE   ROMANS. 


as  the  duty  becomes  more  difficult  (so  Tholuck). 

-RJ 

Give  place  unto  the  wrath  [<)ot*  ronov 
TTJ  ocj'ij].  ilake  way  for  Divine  wratii ;  do  not 
aiiticiijiite  it ;  do  not  get  in  its  way ;  let  it  rule. 
Tliis  is  the  explanation  of  most  connnentatore,  from 
Chrysostom  and  Augustine  down  to  Tholuck,  De 
VVeue,  Meyer,  and  Philippi.  [So  Hodge.] — Second 
explanation  :  Let  not  your  own  wrath  break  forth 
(Du  Dieu,  Sender  [Stuart],  a-.d  others).  Meyer,  on 
the  contrary  :  The  Latin  u.sage  of  utm  inc  sputiuin 
dare  liarmonizes  very  well  witli  this,  but  tlie  Greek 
uftige  of  Tonuv  didovat  docs  not.  [Jowett  says 
this  explanation  "  is  equally  indefensible  on  grounds 
of  language  and  sense.  It  is  only  as  a  translation 
of  a  Latinisni  we  can  suppose  tlie  phrase  to  have 
any  meaning  at  all ;  and  the  meaning  tlms  obtained, 
'  defer  your  wrath,'  is  out  of  place."  See  his  re- 
marks in  defence  of  the  next  explanation. — R.] — 
Third  explanation  :  To  tiiue  place  to  the  wrath  of 
your  cnemi/  (SchiJttgen,  Morus,  and  others).  Mey- 
er :  This  would  be  only  a  prudential  measure.*  The 
first  explanation  is  raised  above  all  doubt  by  the 
addition  :    Vcn(/ianre  is  mine.\ 

For  it  is  written,  Dcut.  xxxii.  35. — Addition  : 
Xiyfi,    ■/.  V  ()  t.  o  ^  ;   see  Heb.  x.  30. 

Ver.  20.  Therefore  if  thine  enemy,  &c. 
[e«v  ot'V  nn.va,  v..t./..  See  Text  ml  Note  ".] 
The  ore,  which  is  omitted  by  most  Codd.,  probably 
on  account  of  difficulty,  follows  from  the  antithesis. 
One  caimot  conform  to  the  negative  :  not  to  hate  an 
enemy,  without  obeying  the  affirmative.  [Hodge : 
"  The  expressions  are  obviously  not  to  be  confined 
to  their  literal  meaning,  nor  even  to  tlie  discliarge 
of  the  common  offices  of  humanity ;  they  are  figu- 
rative expressions  for  all  the  duties  of  benevolence. 
It  is  not  enough,  therefore,  that  we  preserve  an  ene- 
my from  perishing ;  we  must  treat  him  with  all 
affection  and  kindness." — R.]  The  words  are  from 
the  LXX.  of  I'rov.  xxv.  21. 

Thou  shall  heap  coals  of  fire,  &c.  [ar- 
fl- (J  a  z  f 1 1;  71  I' (t  in;  fT  lo  (>  t  i' fT  f  ti; ,  x.T./..]  The 
bm'ning  of  fiery  coals  is  an  Oriental  figure  of  con- 
stantly burning  pain.     Explanations : 

1.  Thou  wilt  draw  down  upon  him  severe  Divine 

*  [Dr.  Lanitc  quotes  Meyer's  olijeclion  to  one  single 
phase  of  this  ex|)lanation,  ami  tlint  not  the  one  most  promi- 
noiitly  urged. '  Ewald,  Jowett,  Wordsworth,  understand  by 
this  view,  which  they  defend,  not  g>iiiitg  nut  of  the  way  of 
the  wrath  of  another,  hut,  iiUowint?  it  to  spend  itself  ni)on 
you,  "  li't  your  enemy  have  his  way."  So  far  from  di'eming 
this  a  pruilential  step,  Jowett  defends  it  from  the  ohjcction, 
that  "common  prudence  requires  th;it  we  should  <lefend 
ourselves  apiinst  our  enemic","  by  urping  that  the  (jospel 
does  not  always  (jive  "eoun'^els  of  jiruilence,  but  of  pcrtec- 
tion "  Meyer,  however,  opposes  the  real  explanation  of 
these  authors,  by  saying  that  such  a  me  mini;  has  too  little 
positive  moral  character;  and  further,  that  tho  prohibit  ion 
of  revenge  by  no  means  Implies  that  the  personal  object  is 
an  anprry  one.    Those  objections  are  valid  ones. — H.) 

♦  [The  first  explanation  is  thi-  most  natural  one  ;  but 
Alford  sUKRi'sts  another,  viz. :  ''  Ang'r,  generally  ;  '  proceed 
not  to  exeruto  it  hastily,  but  leave  it  for  its  legitimate  time, 
when  lie  whose  it  is  to  avenge  will  execute  It:  make  nut 
the  wrath  your  own,  but  leave  it  for  Ood.'  "  Word.swoith, 
in  d'fending  the  third  explanation,  objects  to  the  first :  "  It 
duld  hardly  be  ])resent«l  as  a  Christian  duty-to  make 
room  for  the  Divine  wrath  to  work  against  an  enemy."  Me 
furthermore  defemls  the  ambiKimus  rendering  of  the  K.  V., 
as  excellent  from  its  ambimiity,  from  not  saying  too  murh, 
nn. I  tlias  inviting  study,  using  this  opnort unity  for  oppos- 
ing a  revision.  "I  ever  held  it  a  kind  of  hoiu'st  s|)lrifual 
thrift,  when  there  arc  two  «'».««■»  given  of  (me  ]>Jace,  iHjth 
agreeable  (o  tho  analogy  of  faith  and  manners,  lo  mukf  use. 
of  liiiHi"  (Ilislmp  Sanrferson).  Dr.  Wonlsworth  approves 
this  mil-  for  expo-itors.  llis  own  praetiee  of  this  "spirit- 
ual thrift"  may  lead  to  spiritual  wealth,  but  certainly 
Bebins  to  tend  to  ex'-griital povirty.—'R.] 


wrath  (with  reference  to  4  Ezra  xvi.  54 ;  Chryso* 
tom,  Theodoret,  &c.,  Zwingli,  Beza,  &c.,  Stolz,  Heug< 
stenberg,  &c.). 

2.  Tliou  wilt  prepare  him  for  the  pain  of  peni- 
tence (Augustine,  Jerome  [Tholuck,  De  Wette,  Mey- 
er], Luther,  and  many  others).  Origen  has  opposed 
the  former  view,  which  was  continually  under  the 
necessity  of  being  established  in  the  Church,  because 
of  the  propensity  to  wrath.  On  Hengstenberg's  ex- 
planation of  I'rov.  xxiv.  18,  see  Tholuek,  p.  675  If. 
Ver.  21,  as  well  as  the  spirit  of  the  jjassage,  pro- 
nounces in  favor  of  ex])lanation  (2.).  No  one  coula 
gladly  retiuite  evil  with  good,  if  he  knew  of  a  cer- 
tainty that  he  would  thereby  be  exposed  to  Divine 
wrath.  Finally,  this  explanation  is  favored  by  the 
whole  spirit  of  Christianity.  Yet  it  must  be  ob- 
served, that  |)enitence  cannot  be  designated  as  an 
infallible  effect  of  the  love  of  enemies,  and  of  it3 
expressions.  The  most  immediate  eft'ect  of  such  ex- 
pressions is  hurnivg  shame,  a  religious  and  moral 
crisis.  He  will  bend  his  head  as  if  fiery  coals  lay  on 
it.  The  rule,  as  well  as  the  purpose,  of  this  crisis, 
is  penitence  and  conversion  ;  but  there  are  frequent 
instances  of  false  adversaries,  like  Judas,  becoming 
hardened  by  kindness. 

[3.  Slightly  different  from  (2.)  is  that  adopted 
by  Hodge :  "  You  will  take  the  most  effectual  means 
of  subduing  him."  Kindness  is  as  effectual  as  coals 
of  fire.  So  Alford  :  "  You  will  be  taking  the  most 
effectual  vengeance."  Similarly  Jowett.  This  view, 
which  excludes  even  the  pain  of  penitence,  is  fa- 
vored by  the  connection  with  ver.  21. — R.]  For 
other  uinmportant  explanations,  see  the  Note  in 
Meyer,  p.  4(18.*  On  the  figure  of  fiery  coals,  see 
Tholuck,  p.  «75. 

Ver.  21.  [Be  not  overcome,  &c.  fti;  rtx(7», 
y..T.X.  "  A  comprehensive  summary  of  vers.  19, 
20.  Be  not  overcome  (led  to  revenge)  hi/  evil  (which 
is  done  to  you),  but  overcome  bij  the  pood  (which  you 
show  to  your  enemy)  evil  (by  causing  your  enemy, 
ashamed  by  your  noble  spirit,  to  cease  doing  evil  to 
Tou,  and  to  become  your  friend) ; "  Meyer.  Seneca, 
Dc  Bene/.,  7,  31  :  Vincit  inalos  pertinax  bonitas. 
— R.]  The  purpose  of  all  these  manifestations  of 
love  is  that  of  Christ  on  the  cross :  to  ovvrcome  evil 
with  good. 

DOCTRINAL  AND   ETHICAL. 

1.  The  proper  conduct  in  personal  intercourse, 
particularly  with  the  brethren,  is  love  without  dix- 
xiiiiulntion ;  iis  the  proper  conduct  toward  tho 
Church,  previously  described,  is  love  without  self- 
bodgtiiifi.  The  conduct  toward  civil  authorities 
(which  follows  in  chap,  xiii.)  is  love  without  fear  ; 
atid,  finally,  the  proper  conilnct  toward  the  world  is 
love  without  dix/iixiiKi  the  rightu  of  the  world,  and 
without  miui/lini/  with  the  iinmoraliti/  of  the  world. 

2.  The  root  of  brotherly  love  is  reverence  for 
the  appearing  image  of  Christ;  and  its  development 
and  consummation  are  types  of  the  most  inward 
consanguinity. 

3.  The  proper  conduct  toward  different  individu- 
als begins  with  proper  conduct  toward  ourselves ; 
portrayed  in  ver.  11.  To  this  there  belon^is,  first  of 
all,  fresh  spiritual  life ;  zealous  and  enthusin.stic 
work,  embracing   eternity   as   the   blessing   of  the 


•  (Among  these,  tho  roferenjc  to  the  sqflrntng  by  burn- 
ing coals  ((Jlc'ickler),  the  inflaming  to  love  (t'alovius),  tht 
Id/  blush  of  »Uiune  live-glowing  coals  (Sauctius).— It.J 


CHAPTER  XII.   1-8. 


395 


Spirit ;  calm  ardor  in  communion  with  God,  and  in 
the  consciousness  of  its  being  sent  by  God  ;  but  re- 
garding the  moment  of  time  as  the  moment  of  eter- 
nity in  time.  In  this  place  belongs  Solomon's  Ec- 
clesiastes,  this  much-mistaken  pearl  of  the  Old  Tes- 
tament— a  writing  whose  fundamental  thought  is, 
that  every  thing  is  regarded  vain  in  consequence  of 
despising  eternity  in  time. 

4.  The  Apostle's  pen  gives  a  festive  expression 
even  to  Christian  ethics ;  as  is  proved  by  the  beau- 
tiful parallelisms,  mostly  in  the  form  of  trilogies,  in 
this  chapter,  together  with  1  Cor.  xiii.  [Comp. 
Erasmus  on  this  chapter  :  "  Comparibus  membris  et 
incMis,  similiter  cadentibus  ac  desinenttbus  sic  totus 
sermo  modidatits  est,  ut  nulla  cautio  possit  esse  ju- 
cundior" — R.]  Christian  life  should  also  be  a  wor- 
ship. But  the  worship  is  festive,  free  from  common 
•weariness. 

5.  All  Christianity  is  a  conquest  of  evil  by  good, 
which  Christ  has  established,  and  already  decided  in 
principle,  on  His  cross.  All  the  single  rules  of  con- 
duct toward  individuals  concentrate  in  this  last  and 
highest  one. 


HOMrLETICAl  AND  PRACTICAIj. 

Vers.  9-21.  The  sincerity  of  love.  It  is  mani- 
fested in  :  1.  Our  abhorring  that  which  is  evil ;  and, 
2.  In  cleaving  to  that  which  is  good  (ver.  9)  — Let 
not  love  be  false.  1.  What  is  it  to  love  in  this  way? 
2.  How  is  it  possible  ?  (ver.  9.) — What  belongs  to 
true  brotherly  love  ?  1.  Sincere  heartiness ;  2. 
Obliging  respect  (ver.  10).  —  Universal  love  and 
brotherly  love.  1.  How  far  related  ?  2.  How  far 
different  ?  Comp.  2  Peter  i.  1  (vers.  9,  10).— Chris- 
tian joy  in  labor.  1.  Its  nature  ;  2.  Its  origin  ;  3. 
Its  limit  (ver.  11). — Be  not  indolent  in  doing  what 
you  should  !  (ver.  11). — Be  fervent  in  spirit !  A 
Pentecostal  sentiment  (ver.  11). — Adapt  yourselves 
to  the  time  !  A  word  of  comfort  in  times  of  need 
and  tribulation  (ver.  11). — Rejoice  in  hope,  be  pa- 
tient in  tribulation,  continue  instant  in  prayer — an 
inexhaustible  text,  and  one  that  can  be  always  ap- 
plied afresh  on  marriage  occasions,  in  harvest  ser- 
mons in  years  of  failure,  or  in  New  Years'  sermons 
in  troublous  times  (ver.  12). — Distribute  to  the  ne- 
cessity of  saints  !  1.  Description  of  it  (with  special 
references  similar  to  those  in  ver.  11).  2.  A  sum- 
mons to  energetic  assistance  (ver.  18). — The  forgiv- 
ing C'liristian  spirit.      1.  A  beautiful  virtue;    but, 

2.  One  very  difficult  to  exercise ;    and   therefore, 

3.  Proper  to  be  implored  from  God  (ver.  14). — 
Christian  sympathy  :  1.  In  joy;  2.  In  sorrow  (ver. 
15). — Christian  unanimity  (ver.  16). — Christian  hu- 
mility (ver.  18).  —  Christian  honesty  (ver.  1*7). — 
Christian  pcacefulness  (ver.  18). — Christian  love  of 
raiemies.  1.  It  desists  from  revenge ;  2.  It  over- 
comes evil  with  good  (vers.  19-21). — Fiery  coals 
on  the  head  of  an  enemy :  1.  They  cause  pain ; 
but,  2.  Healing  pain,  because  it  is  the  pain  of  shame 
vers.  19-21). 

Luthkr:  To  heap  coals  of  fire  on  the  head  is, 
that,  by  kindness,  our  enemy  grows  angry  with  him- 
self for  having  acted  so  wickedly  toward  us. 

Starke  :  True  Christianity  does  not  make  lazy 
peop's  and  sluggards,  but  industrious  ones;  for  the 
more  pious  the  Cliristian  is,  the  more  hidustrious 
laborer  he  is  (ver.  11). — Dear  Christian,  j'ou  present 
1  gift  to  strange  beggars,  though  you  do  not  know 
whether  they  are  holy  or  not — indeed,  the  most  are 


without  holiness  ;  should  you  not  rather  do  goofl  to 
the  poor  who  live  among  us,  who  prove  by  their 
deeds  that  they  are  holy  and  God's  children  ?  (ver. 
13.) — He  who  rises  high,  falls  all  the  lower;  such 
conduct  is  always  dangerous.  High  trees  are  shaken 
most  violently  by  the  winds  ;  high  towers  are  most 
frequently  struck  by  the  thunder-storm  ;  what  is 
high  is  easily  moved,  and  likely  to  fall.  Rather  re- 
main low,  and  then  you  will  not  fall,  Sirach  iii.  19 
(ver.  16). — If  you  have  wisdom,  it  is  not  your  own, 
but  God's ;  let  it  not  be  observed  that  you  know 
your  wisdom.  There  are  others  also  who  are  not 
fools  ;  #nd  there  are  many  superior  to  you  (ver.  16). 
— Every  one  should  be  ruler  of  his  own  spirit,  Prov. 
xvi.  32  (ver.  21). — It  is  most  glorious  to  show  good 
for  evil,  and  to  make  a  friend  out  of  an  enemy, 
Prov.  xvi.  6  (ver.  21). — As  fire  is  not  quenched  by 
fire,  so  is  evil  not  quenched  by  evil,  nor  invective  by 
invective. — Hedinger  :  Christianity  is  not  absurd 
selfishness  and  incivility.  Love  and  patience  teach 
quite  different  things  toward  our  neighbor  (ver.  10). 
— Muller:  The  richer  and  higher  in  God,  the  poor- 
er and  more  like  nothing  in  our  own  eyes,  2  Sam. 
vii.  18  (ver.  10). — God  sends  His  cross  to  us  that  it 
may  press  from  our  hearts  many  fervent  sighs,  from 
our  mouth  many  a  glorious  little  prayer,  and  from 
our  eyes  many  hot  tears  (ver.  12). — Christian  souls 
are  one  soul  in  Christ,  and  therefore  one  feels  the 
sorrow  and  joy  of  another  (ver.  15). — To  do  good 
is  natural ;  to  do  evil  is  carnal ;  to  do  evil  for 
good  is  devihsh ;  to  do  good  for  evil  is  divine 
(ver.  17). 

Spener  :  Love  is  the  principal  virtue  required 
by  Christ  of  His  disciples  (ver.  9). — Brotherly  love 
should  be  as  hearty  as  natural  love  between  parents, 
children,  and  brethren  (the  aro^iyt]),  and  should  not 
be  lukewarm,  but  zealous  (ver.  10). — The  Spirit  of 
God  is  a  holy  fire,  which  inflames  hearts  wherever  it 
is.  Whei-e  things  go  very  sleepily,  we  may  well  ap- 
prehend that,  because  there  is  no  fire,  there  is  no 
zeal,  and  that  there  is  also  no  work  of  the  Spirit, 
but  only  of  nature.  Yet  there  should  be  a  fervency 
and  zeal  of  the  spirit.  For  the  flesh  has  also  its 
blind  zeal,  which  is  the  more  dangerous  the  greater 
it  is  (ver.  11). — Accommodate  yoursdrcs  to  the  time. 
But  this  must  not  be  in  such  a  way  as  to  join  in 
with  the  world,  as  every  period  brings  with  it  that 
which  the  Apostle  (ver.  2)  has  already  forbidden — 
conformity  to  this  world.  But  Christians  should  not 
lose  the  opportunity  of  doing  good  which  God  con- 
stantly presents  to  them  ;  and  they  should  always 
give  due  care  to  all  circumstances — to  what  is  best 
now  to  be  done  according  to  the  Divine  rule.  More- 
over, they  should  always  give  due  attention  to  the 
condition  in  which  they  are  situated,  so  that  they 
may  act  just  as  God  now  requires  of  them  (vei".  11). 
— In  prosperity  and  adversity,  prayer  is  the  best 
means  for  our  support  (ver.  12). 

Roos :  Christians  should  be  refined  and  polite 
people  (ver.  17). 

Gerlach  :  The  most  glowing  love  should  not 
lose  sobriety  and  discretion,  by  virtue  of  which  it 
chooses  and  performs  just  what  the  circumstances 
require  ;  comp.  Matt.  x.  16  (ver.  11). — "  '  It  is  well,' 
says  one,  '  that  he  has  very  properly  commanded 
weeping  with  those  who  weep ;  but  for  what  end  did 
he  command  us  to  do  the  other  part,  that  which  ia 
not  great  ?  '  And  yet,  rejoicing  with  them  that  re- 
joice  is  a  far  more  self-denying  state  of  mind  than 
weeping  with  those  who  weep  ; "  Chrysostom  (ver. 
15). — By  Jiery  coals  we  must  understand  that  w« 


396 


THE   EPISTLE    OF   PAUL   TO   THE   ROMANS. 


lead  the  one  who  injures  us  to  repentance  of  his 
deed,  by  doing  good  to  him  (v^v,  20). 

Lisco  :  Ilow  tlie  love  of  tlie  believer,  arising 
from  humility,  h  manifested  toward  other  believers. 
1.  Its  peculiarity  (vers.  9-12) ;  2.  Its  manifestations 
amid  very  difterent  external  circumstances  (vers. 
13-10). — Relation  of  the  believer  to  the  unbelieving 
world  He  is  even  animated  with  love  toward  it 
(ver=   J  7-21). 

IIkubxkk  :  Love  should  be  tender  and  delicate; 
It  should  avoid  every  thing  that  can  ottend  another's 
sense  of  modesty  or  honor.  Indelicacy  is  always  a 
want  of  ies])ect  (ver.  10). — Christianity  tcacjjes  the 
real  ai-t  of  being  always  happy. — The  Christian  must 
keep  in  a  good  humor.  Hope  is  the  source  of  the 
Christian's  cheerfulness ;  the  condition  of  it  is  pa- 
tience. Prayer  st»'engthens  both  faith  and  hope 
(ver.  12). 

Besser  :  Thr  works  of  Christians  in  love  (vers. 
9-21). — Paul  calls  upon  us  to  oppose  two  special 
enemies  of  unity :  1.  Pride ;  2.  Self-conceits  of 
wisdom  (ver.  10). — Saul  felt  most  painfully  the  burn- 
ing coals  from  David's  hand,  1  Sam.  xxiv.  17  ff. 

ScnLEiERMACiiEu:  The  Apostle's  injunction :  Re- 
joice witli  them  tliat  do  rejoice,  and  weep  with  them 
that  weep.  1.  What  is  the  scope  of  it — what  are 
the  limits  which  he  lias  assigned  to  it  ?  2.  Its  con- 
nection with  our  spiritual  life  in  God's  kingdom 
(ver.  15).  —  Perseverance  against  the  evil  sorely 
afflicting  us.  It  consists  in :  1.  Our  taking  care 
lest  evil  prostrate  our  spirit ;  2.  Jn  being  careful 
not  to  lose  our  sobriety,  when  englged  in  work,  by 
surprise  ;  3.  And  in  being  on  our  guard  lest  our 
pleasure  in  life  be  destroyed  by  the  pressure  of  evil 
(ver.  21). 

Vers.  7-16.  The  Pericope  for  the  Second  Sun- 
da;i  aftrr  Eplphanii. — IIkubneii  :  The  fruits  of  Chris- 
tian faith  in  iiuman  life. — The  connection  of  the 
Christian  virtues. — The  real  life  as  a  practical  school 
of  Cliristiatiity. — II.vrless:    True  fideliti/  to  cd/inq. 

1.  Good  Cliristian  deportment  is  always  likewise 
fidelity  to  calling  ;  2.  The  discharge  of  one's  call- 
ing is  true  wlien  it  is  done  witli  simplicity,  with  care, 
and  with  pleasure ;  3.  This  fidelity  to  calling  arises 
alone  from  true  love  ;  4.  But  true  love  arises  alone 
from  the  humility  of  Christian  faith. — Jaspis:  True 
Christians  are  also  the  most  faithful  laborers.  1. 
They  regard  their  lifetime  as  a  very  gracious  gift ; 

2.  They  act  continually  from  holy  motives  ;  3.  They 
feel  inwardly  united  with  their  fellow-men  ;  4.  They 
have  too  serious  a  reverence  for  their  Eternal  Judge 
to  discharge  their  calling  unconscientiously. — Kreml  : 
Strengthening  of  [)aiience  in  tribulation  by  :  1.  Wise 
hope  ;  2.  Pious  reflection  ;  3.  Steadfast  prayer ;  4. 
Joyous  hope. 

Vers.  17-21.  The  Pericope  for  the  Third  Sun- 
daii  after  K[>iph(ui>i.  —  Heitbner  :  The  Christian 
amid  the  afflicting  relations  of  the  world.  1.  He 
uses  them  for  opposing  his  own  self-love  ;  2.  He 
uses  them  for  greater  severity  toward  himself;  3. 
For  the  jjractice  of  a  peaceful  disposition  ;  4.  For 
tiie  exhibition  of  love  toward  enemies  ;  5.  For  in- 
crea.'iing  his  stability  and  steadfastness. — The  dignity 
of  Christum  [)eacefulness ;  1.  Its  source  ;  2.  Its 
limits  ;  3.  Its  strength. — Beck  :  Direction  for  the 
art  of  genuine  Christian  peacefulness.  1.  Stop  tip 
the  fountain  of  dis(piietude  in  your  own  heart ; 
2.  Give  place  to  the  external  occasion  to  dis(|uictnde 
by  conscientious  and  blameless  deportment  toward 
every  body  ;  3.  Amid  external  U-mptations,  direct 
your  heart  to  the  highest  Recpiiter ;    4.    Strive  to 


overcome  the  hatred  of  enemies  by  good  deeds,  and 
to  turn  away  the  punishment  impeiuling  over  them, 
— F.  A.  Woi.f:  Avenge  not  yourselves!  1.  Tlie 
meaning  of  this  declaration  of  the  Apostle  ;  2.  How 
it  should  be  observed. 

Kapi'F  :  What  belongs  to  true  culture  :  1.  Mod- 
esty and  humility ;  2.  Universal  philanthropy ;  3. 
Truth  and  [)urity  of  heart. — Brandt:  Christianity 
is  the  way  to  a  peaceful  and  blessed  life ;  for  it : 
1.  Opposes  our  own  conceits ;  2.  Fori)ids  all  re- 
venge ;  3.  Reconmiends  honesty ;  4.  Loves  peace- 
fulness  ;  5.  Enjoins  magnanimity ;  6.  And  always 
desires  the  conquest  of  all  evil, 

[Hopkins  :  On  revenge  (ver,  1.5).  Revenge  is  a 
wild,  untamed  passion,  that  knows  no  bounds  nor 
measures.  And  if  we  were  permitted  to  carve  it 
out  for  ourselves,  we  should  certainly  exceed  all 
limits  and  modeiation  ;  ftu-  self-love,  which  is  an 
immoderate  affection,  would  be  made  the  whole  rule 
of  our  vengeance  :  and  because  we  love  ourselvea 
abundantly  too  well,  we  should  revenge  every  imagi- 
nary wrong  done  us  with  too  much  bitterness  and 
severity :  and,  therefore,  God  would  not  trust  the 
righting  of  ourselves  in  our  own  hands,  knowing  we 
would  be  too  partial  to  our  own  interests  and  con- 
cerns, but  hath  assumed  it  to  himself  as  the  preroga- 
tive of  His  crown. — On  ver.  20  :  On  kbulnvus  toward 
enemies.  This  is  all  the  revenge  which  the  gospel 
permits ;  this  is  that  excellent  doctrine  which  our 
Saviour  came  to  preach,  which  He  hath  given  us 
commission  to  declare  and  publish  to  the  world,  to 
guide  our  feet  into  the  way  of  peace  ;  that  we  might 
all  be  united,  as  by  faith  and  obedience  unto  God, 
so  in  love  and  charity  one  to  another, 

[Bishop  Atterburv  :  Sermon  on  the  duty  of 
Uvhiq  pcfurably  (Rom.  xii.  18).  I.  In  what  the 
duty  consists,  in  relation  to  public  and  private  men, 
opinions  and  practice.  II.  The  extent  of  it — to  all 
men.  III.  The  difflculty  of  practising  it.  IV,  The 
best  helps  to  the  practice  of  this  duty:  (1.)  To 
regulate  our  psissions;  (2.)  To  moderate  our  desires, 
and  shorten  our  designs,  with  regard  to  the  good 
things  of  life  ;  (3.)  To  have  a  watchful  eye  upon 
ourselves  in  our  first  entrance  upon  any  contest ; 
(4.)  Always  to  guard  against  the  intemperance  of 
our  tongue,  especially  in  relation  to  that  natmal 
proneness  it  has  toward  publishing  the  faults  of  oth- 
ers ;  (5.)  To  keep  ourselves  from  embarking  in  par- 
ties  and  factions;  (0.)  To  study  to  be  (juiet,  hy  do. 
ing  our  own  business  in  our  proper  profession  ot 
calling  ;  (7.)  Add  prayer  to  the  Author  of  peace 
and  Lover  of  concord,  for  the  fruits  of  His  Spirit. 

[Burkitt:  What  it  is  to  be  overcome  of  evil, 

1.  When  we  dwell  in  our  thoughts  too  much,  too 
often,  and  too  long,  up(Ui  the  injuries  and  unkind- 
ness  we  have  met  with  ;  this  is  as  if  a  man  that  was 
to  take  down  a  bitter  jiill,  sluuild  be  continually 
champing  of    it,   and   rolling  it   inuler  his    tongue, 

2.  We  are  overcome  of  evil  when  we  are  brought 
over  to  commit  the  same  evil,  by  studying  to  make 
spiteful  returns,  in  a  way  of  revenge,  for  the  inju- 
ries we  have  received. — Wherein  cimsjsts  the  duty 
and  excelleney  of  overcoming  evil  with  good?  1.  It 
renders  tis  like  (iod,  who  does  gooil  to  us  daily, 
though  we  do  evil  against  Him  continually  ;  2.  We 
imitate  (Jod  in  one  of  the  choicest  ])erfeeti()ns  of 
His  divine  luiture  ;  3.  We  overcome  our.selvcs ;  4. 
We  overcome  our  enemies,  and  make  them  become 
our  frien<ls. 

[Hknuy  :  Ble.ss  them  who  persectite  you :  1. 
Speak  well  of  them.     If  there  be  any  thing  in  theia 


CHAPTER  XIII.   1-6, 


so: 


commendable  and  praiseworthy,  take  notice  of  it, 
and  mention  it  to  their  honor ;  2.  Speak  respect- 
fully to  them,  according  as  their  place  is  ;  3.  Wish 
well  to  them,  and  desire  their  good,  so  far  from 
seeking  any  revenge ;  4.  Offer  up  that  desire  to 
God,  by  prayer  for  them. 

[Clarke,  on  ver.  16 :  There  have  not  been  want- 
ing, in  all  ages  of  the  Church,  persons  who,  losing 
the  savor  of  divine  things  from  their  own  souls  by 
drinking  into  a  worldly  spirit,  have  endeavored  to 
shun  the  reproach  of  the  cross,  by  renouncing  the 
company  of  the  godly,  speaking  evil  of  the  way  of 
life,  and,  perhaps,  sitting  down  in  the  chair  of  the 
scorner  with  apostates  like  themselves.  And  yet, 
strange  to  tell,  these  men  will  keep  up  a  form  of 
godliness  !  for  a  decent  outside  is  often  necessary  to 
enable  them  to  secure  the  ends  of  their  ambition. 


[Hodge,  on  vers.  20,  21 :  Nothing  is  so  powen 
ful  as  goodness ;  it  is  the  most  efficacious  meanf 
to  subdue  enemies  and  put  down  opposition.  Men 
whose  minds  can  withstand  argument,  and  whost 
hearts  rebel  against  threats,  are  not  proof  against 
the  persuasive  influence  of  unfeigned  love  ;  there- 
is,  therefore,  no  more  important  collateral  reason 
for  being  good,  than  that  it  increases  our  power  to 
do  good. 

[Barnes,  on  ver.  11 :  The  tendency  of  the  Chris, 
tian  religion  is  to  promote  industry.  1.  It  teaches 
the  value  of  time;  2.  Presents  numerous  and  im- 
portant things  to  be  done  ;  3.  It  inclines  men  to  be 
conscientious  in  the  improvement  of  each  moment ; 
4.  And  it  takes  away  the  mind  from  those  pleasures 
and  pursuits  which  generate  and  promote  indolence. 
—J.  F.  H.] 


Third  Section. —  Christian  universalism  {Roman  Catholicism  in  PauVs  sense)  in  proper  conduct  toward 
the  civil  Government  {the  heathen  State),  ithich  has  a  diaconal  and  liturgical  service  in  the  household 
of  Ood.     The  office  of  civil  Government  defined. 

Chap.  XIII.   1-6. 

1  Let  every  soul  be  subject  [submit  himself]  unto  the  higher  powers  [to  the 
authorities  which  are  over  him].'  For  there  is  no  power  [authority]  but  of 
[except  from]  '^  God  :    the  powers  that  be  are  [those  which  exist  ^  have  been] 

2  ordained  of  [by]  God.  Whosoever  therefore  resisteth  the  poAver  [So  that  he 
who  setteth  himself  against  the  authority],  resisteth  the  ordinance  of  God : 
and  they  that  [those  who]  resist  shall  receive  to  themselves  damnation  [con- 

3  derauation].  For  rulers  are  not  a  terror  to  good  works  [the  good  work],*  but 
to  the  evil.  Wilt  thou  then  not  [Dost  thou  then  wish  not  to]  be  afraid  of  the 
power  [authority]  ?    do  that  which  is  good,  and  thou  shalt  have  praise  of  [from] 

4  the  same :  For  he  is  the  minister  of  God  [God's  minister]  to  thee  for  good. 
But  if  thou  do  that  which  is  evil,  be  afraid ;  for  he  beareth  [weareth]  not  the 
sword  in  vain :   for  he  is  the  minister  of  God  [God's  minister],  a  revenger  to 

6  execute  wrath  upon  [an  avenger  for  wrath  to]  him  that  doeth  evil.  W^herefore 
ye  must  needs  *  be  subject  [submit  yourselves],  not  only  for  [because  of  the] 

6  wrath,  but  also  for  conscience'  sake.  For,  for  this  cause  pay  ye  [ye  pay] 
tribute  also :  for  they  are  God's  ministers  [the  ministers  of  God],°  attending 
continually  upon  this  very  thing. 


'  Ver.  1. — [The word  e(ov<xia,  rendered  power  in  the  E.  V.,  has,  as  its  German  equivalent:  Obrigkeit.  Dr.  Lange 
expands  efovo-tais  vnepexov  aati  into:  den  Ohri'gkeiten,  den  ihn  uherragendt^n  Mdchten.  The  rendering  above  is 
partly  from  Noycs,  partly  from  the  revision  of  Five  Ang.  Clergymen.  Both  of  these  versions  substitute  througliout, 
authnritij  fur  power  (E.  v.,  Amer.  Bible  Union).  The  change  is  a  happy  one,  since  auihorily  has  both  an  abstract  and  a 
personal  force,  corresponding  to  that  of  cfoucri'a.     Civil  authority  is,  of  course,  intended. 

*  Ver.  1. — [N.  A.  B.  D'.  L.,  some  fathers,  rend  iiiro  ;  adopted  by  Lachmann.  D^.  E'.  F.,  Origen,  airo;  which  is 
adopted  by  modem  editors  (except  Tiegellcs),  since  it  might  readily  be  changed  on  account  of  the  utto  immediately 
following,  and  also  because  the  other  reading  would  be  tautological. 

"  Ver.  1. — [The  Ric.  inserts  e'foutri'at  after  oStrai,  with  D^.  L.,  some  versions  and  fathers.  It  is  omitted  in  N.  A. 
B.  D'.  F.,  most  versions  and  fathers.  Later  editors  reject  it.  It  would  easily  be  written  as  an  explanation.  The  Rec, 
also  insei'ts  toO  before  0eov,  on  very  insuflBcicnt  authority. 

*  Ver.  3. — [Instead  of  twv  ayadiav  epya>v,  aWa  T(av  KaKoiv  (Rec,  D'.  L.,  some  fathers,  Scholz),  the  reading:  tcS 
ayadu  epyu,  ciAAa  T^  Ka(c<p  is  supported  by  .  A.  B.  D'.  F.,  many  versions  and  fathers,  Lachmann,  Tischendor^ 
De  Wette,  Meyer,  Philippi,  Alford,  Tregelles.  Stuart  and  Ilodge  do  not  notice  the  correct  reading,  which  was  doubtless 
altered  into  that  of  the  Rec,  for  the  saiie  of  supposed  grammatical  accuracy. 

5  Ver.  5. — [In  D.  F.,  and  a  few  minor  authorities,  avdyKr)  is  omitted,  and  the  infinitive  vnoTacra-ea-Oai  altered 
into  the  imperative  inroToa-o-eafl e  .     The  Vulgate  follows  the  riading  avdyK-g  iiwoToo-trto-fle.     So  Euther. 

'  Ver.  6. — [The  E.  V.  has  here,  God's  ministers,  and  in  ver.  4,  the  minister  of  God.  The  expressions  are  altered  in 
both  verses  in  the  version  of  Five  Ang.  Clergymen,  which  I  have  followed,  for  this  reason,  that,  in  ver.  4,  the  idea  of 
serving  on  behalf  of  God  is  implied  in  Siaxocos  ;  while  here,  that  of  serving  or  ministering  to  God,  on  behalf  of  the 
people  (AetToupyoc  Beoii)  seems  to  be  included  also.  It  were  perhap.s  still  better  to  render  SiaKovot,  servant,  and 
reserve  the  word  minister  for  this  verse,  as  Noyes  has  done.  "We  could  not  vary  tlie  English  rendering  oi  SiaKovot  and 
XetTovpyos,  except  by  introducing  some  word  like  'officer,'  which  would  have  had  an  awkward  sound"  (Five  Ang 
Clergymen).— B.] 


39vS 


THE   EPISTLE    OF   PAUL   TO   THE   ROMAXH. 


EXEGETICAL  AND  CRITICAL. 

Gniera!  Eiinark<. — As,  in  chap,  xii.,  ecclesiasti- 
cal duties  are  supplemented  by  personal  duties,  so 
here,  in  cii.ip.  xiii..  civil  duties  are  supplemented  by 
duties  toward  the  world  in  general. — According  to 
Tiioluck,  tiu'  passive  conduct  in  relation  to  private 
injuries,  in  chap.  xii.  i;>-21,  has  led  to  this  exhorta- 
tion. Yet  this  would  be  too  accidental  an  occasion. 
The  thought  of  the  transition  is,  that,  even  in  the 
heathen  State,  evil  must  be  overcome  with  good. 
But  the  possibility  of  this  conquest  lies  in  the  ne- 
ces.«ity  of  the  Christian's  recognizing  something 
good  even  in  the  large  State,  as  well  as  in  the  per- 
sonal opponent.  Chrysostom  held  that  this  section 
has  the  apologetieal  design  of  showing  that  Chris- 
tianity does  not  lead  to  the  dissolution  of  the  State, 
and  of  tlie  social  legal  relations  (comp.  1  Tim.  ii.  1  ; 
Titus  iii.  1  ;  1  Peter  ii.  18,  14).  According  to  Cal- 
vin, and  others,  the  occasion  lay  in  the  fact  that  the 
Jews  were  inclined  to  resistance  to  heathen  govern- 
ment, and  that  also  the  Jewish  Cliristians  often  be- 
came subject,  witii  them,  to  suspicions  of  the  same 
disposition.*  As  might  be  expected,  Baur  finds  the 
key  for  tiie  solution  of  this  question  also  in  the 
Clementines.  On  these  and  other  hypotheses,  par- 
ticularly those  of  Neander  and  Baumgarten-Crusius, 
see  further  details  in  Tiioluck,  pp.  078  ff.  The  same 
author  says  :  "  If  the  Epistle  was  written  in  the  year 
68,  tlicn  it  follows  that  Nero's  five  mild  years  termi- 
nated in  the  following  year."  In  view  of  the  uni- 
versal character  of  this  Epistle,  even  on  its  practi- 
cal side,  the  Apostle  must  have  felt  the  necessity  of 
defining,  from  his  principle,  the  relation  of  duty  in 
which  Cliristians  stood  to  the  State,  without  his  hav- 
ing been  led  to  it  by  this  or  that  circumstance. 

Ver.  1.  Let  every  so\il,  7rd(T«  v ''/»/• 
Every  man  ;  yet  with  reference  to  the  life  of  the 
soul,  whose  emotions  in  relation  to  the  government 
come  into  special  consideration  (Acts  ii.  43  ;  iii.  23  ; 

*  [This  exhortation  was  prohahly  occasioned  by  the 
tttrhulont  spirit  of  the  Jews  in  Itoino,  who  had  been  on 
this  (icoDUnt  banished  from  the  city  for  a  time  by  the  Km- 
peror  Claudius  (A.  1).  51).  Their  messianic  cxpeotatioiis 
assumed  a  caj-nal  aoil  political  character,  and  were  directed 
chiorty  to\v.aid  the  cxteriLal  emancipation  from  the  odious 
yoke  of  the  he-ilh<'n  Romans.  A  few  years  after  the  date 
of  the  Epistle  to  the  Romans,  the  spirit  of  revolt  burst 
forth  in  ojinn  war,  which  ended  in  the  destruction  of  Jerii- 
ealem  (A.  D.  70).  The  Jen'i.sh,  and  evi'n  the  Ocntilc  Chris- 
tians, mieht  rendily  bo  led  away  by  this  fanaticism,  sinoi' 
the  pospel  proffered  hberli/,  and  they  miL'ht  not  unilorstand 
that  it  was  miinly  spiiitual— moral  freedom  from  the  slav- 
ery of  sin,  out  of  which,  by  doL'rees,  in  the  appointed  way, 
n  reformation  and  transformation  of  civil  relations  should 
proceed.  Such  mistakes  have  been  common  ;  '.  /;.,  the 
Pea-sant's  war,  the  Anabaptist  tumults  in  the  time  of  the 
Refoi-mation,  and  many  revolutions  sin(:e  the  latter  part 
of  the  last  century.  The  attitude  of  Christ,  His  Apostles, 
and  His  Chuioh  down  to  the  time  of  Constant'ne,  toward 
the  civil  Kovcriimetit,  is  truly  sub  imc.  They  rccoRriizeil  in 
itanordiiia  ce  of  God,  despite  its  ileReneiaoy,  yieMiupr  to 
It,  in  all  Icirilimate  affairs,  a  ready  oboilience,  despite  the 
(ict  that  they  wi-re  persecuted  by  it  with  fire  and  sword. 
It  should  lie  rrmeml)cred  that  this  exhortation  was  ad- 
dressed t"  tlip  Romans,  when  the  cruelties  and  crimes  of  a 
Tiberius,  Caliz-id;!,  and  Claudius  were  in  yet  fresh  remcm- 
branee,  and  when  the  monster  Nero  sat  on  the  imperial 
throne— the  sami"  Nero  who,  n  few  years  later,  wantonly 
and  mercilessly  persecuted  the  Christians,  cundemninK  the 
Apostles  I'aul  .ind  I'etcr  to  a  martyr's  death.  It  was.  how- 
ever, by  just  Fiieli  Christian  coiidiict,  in  contrast  with  such 
cruelty,  thai  C;hrist's  Church  won  the  moral  victorv  over 
the  Roman  Kmi>irc  and  ln-athe  idom.  Under  the  inlhieiiee 
of  such  preci-pts,  the  early  Church  wils  "  ^Teat  in  deeds, 
greater  in  BulFerinns,  i^reittest  in  death,  for  the  honor  of 
Christ  and  the  benefit  of  Rciierations  to  come;"  thus  she 
was  cnaMed  to  "  overcome  evil  with  good."—!'.  S.] 


Rev.  xvi.  3). — Submit  himself,  vnoraaaiff&uy 
Voluntarily  subjecting  liimself  to  autiiority.  [Tlia 
reflexive  form  describes  the  obedience  a.s  of  a  na- 
tional, voluntary,  principled  eharaeter,  in  distinction 
from  blind,  servile  subjecticjn. — P.  S.] — To  the 
authorities  which  are  over  him  [tioiir/ttK; 
(''/ff (If/ 0  1' ff «!.(,•].  In  liornla  are  comprised  both 
the  magistracy  and  their  power  ( pofrsfas).  '  Ynto 
f'/oi'iTctt,  Vidgate:  nublimiorcs.  Tiioluck:  The  hig\ 
thos''  hir/h  in  auikorifi/,  with  a  reference  to  1  Tim. 
ii.  2.  [Philippi  and  Meyer  refer  to  the  German 
phrase :  iJie  /to/ie  Obrir/keit,  but  there  seems  to  be 
no  reference  to  the  higher  grade  of  rulers.  The 
rendering  given  above  is  sufficiently  explicit. — It 
must  be  noticed  how  general  the  injunction  is — 
ei'eri/  soul,  and  lohatevcr  power*  are  set  over  him. 
Wordsworth:  He  does  not  say  obey,  but  submit. 
On  the  limitations,  see   below,  and   Docir,  Notes. 

Except    from    God    [ft    ii  f;    an  6    Ofov. 

See  TextAial  Note  ".  The  proposition  is  universal, 
its  application  follows.  Wordsworth  remarks  that 
(ivva/uii,  force,  does  not  occur  throughout.  — 11.1 
God's  sovereignty  is,  in  the  general  sense  (ct;ro 
<-JtoT< ),  the  causality  of  magisterial  power. 

Those  which  exist  [ « «  dk  oi'trcti,.  See 
Textual  Note '.]  According  to  Erasmus  and  Schmidt, 
the  Apostle  understands  by  the  ««'  fit  ovaai,,  the 
rightful  powers;  with  reference  to  John  x.  12,  6  o>v 
not-fitp',  qui.  v(Tus  pastor  est.  According  to  Meyer 
and  Tholuck,  there  is  no  dilference  whatever.  [The 
words  mean  simply  this :  all  existing  civil  autliori 
ties,  de  facto  governments.  This  doubtless  includes 
temporary  and  revolutionary  governments,  although 
nothing  is  said  on  this  point.  Of  course,  there  has 
been  much  casuistry  in  the  discussions  as  to  what 
constitutes  the  existence,  ova  a,  of  the  authority. 

-R.] 

The  general  definition,  a;ro  ©for,  for  which 
Codd.  A.  B.",  and  others,  would  read  vttq  0.,  is 
"  more  specifically  defined  by  the  i';r6  ('tiov  tj- 
ray/iivai.  da  I"  have  been  ordained  by- 
God,   which   denotes   Divine   apiiointment.*      The 


*  [Without  anticipatinp  the  discussion  in  the  Doctrinal 
Xoti's,  it  may  be  well  to  remark  here,  that  while  this  phrase 
has  been  u«ed  very  frequenllv  in  the  interest  of  the  divjno 
right  of  kinprs,  such  an  a])plic;iiion  is  rather  an  accident 
than  a  necessary  mfiTcnco  from  the  .Vpostle's  propo.-iition. 
The  theolopi:ms  of  Germany  are  apt  to  turn  this  apainst 
the  revolutionary  tendencies  of  Europe,  dft.  ;  but  .should 
the  Rovernnicnt  under  which  they  live  in  any  way  become 
ri>iiul)lican,  or  ultra-democratic,  I  lien  consistency  must  lead 
tliem  to  concede  to  such  authorities  also  \\\e  jus  divhiiiin. 
The  simple,  pellucid  meaninp:  of  the  .\postle  is,  that  civil 
(jovernment  is  nect.'ssary,  ami  of  iJivine  appointment.  We 
infer  that  anarchy  is  "a.s  Kod!css  as  it  is  inhuman  ;  thut 
mafriBtratos  are  not  "  the  servants  of  the  people,"  nor  do 
they  derive  their  nnthority  from  the  pi'0])U',  but  from  God, 
even  thoufrh  chonen  !)y  the  people  ;  that  ropublicnn  otH- 
cial.s,  no  less  than  the  heredit;iry  monarchs,  cm  subscribe 
themselves,  «' by  the  irrnce  of  God."  Unless  the  principle 
be  of  universal"  :ipplieation,  anarchy  will  be  justified  some- 
where. This  principle,  moreover,  respects  the  office,  not 
the  chMMcter  of  the  niapiritnite  ;  not  the  abstraet  authority, 
indeed,  but  the  concrete  rulers,  whatever  their  character. 
If  it  be  deemed  too  swcopinp,  then  its  «elf-impo^ed  limita- 
tion has  been  overlookeil.  For  as  the  olicdience  is  de- 
manded because  of  Goil's  aiipointmenl,  the  .  it  is  int  J. - 
minil'il  in  matters  cmhiny  to  (JodS  apnointment.  When 
the  civil  power  contradicts  tJod's  Word  and  His  voice  in 
our  con.science,  then  it  contradicts  and  subvert.s  its  own 
authoritv.  Herein  the  superior  wisdom  of  (Christian  ethics 
is  manifest.  Human  seif-will  leiuU  to  anarchy,  human 
jiower  to  despotism  ;  but  obedience  to  £/•  fnclo  rulers  as  a 
Christian  duty  hius  led,  and  iiiust  lead,  to  true  civil  free- 
dom, since  it  "alone  inikes  \lie  Individual  truly  free,  and, 
by  ni-sertinK  the  higher  law  as  the  hasis  of  the  lower  aU- 
tlioriiv,  ever  elevates  the  lower  authority  nearer  the  lJivin» 


CHAPTER  XIII.    1-6. 


399 


Apostle,  howcTer,  seems  desirous  of  making  a  dis- 
tJDction,  yet  not  between  the  rightful  and  illegal 
authorities,  but  between  the  actual  appearance  of 
the  authorities  and  their  ideal  and  essential  ground 
of  life,  whose  validity  should  also  undoubtedly  be 
recognized  in  the  actual  authorities,  because  of  their 
permanent  destination.  In  harmony  with  this  dis- 
tinction, Clirysostom,  and  others,  have  distinguished 
between  the  magisterial  office  itself  and  its  accident- 
al incumbents.  Yet  we  must  hold  that  the  Apostle 
not  oidy  enjoins  obedience  toward  the  ideal  institu- 
tion of  the  authorities,  but  also  toward  their  empiri- 
cal appearance.  But  he  will  establish  the  require- 
ment of  this  obedience  by  reference  to  the  ideal 
institution  and  design  of  the  authorities.  This 
arises  clearly  from  what  follows. 

Ver.  2.  So  that  he  Tvho  setteth  himself 
against,  &c.  [wOTf  6  avrtraffffo/;  f  I'oi,-,  x.t.A. 
Notice  the  recurrence  of  rao-ffw  in  various  forms 
and  combinations. — R.]  Whoever  becomes  avrt,- 
rctdcFOfifvoi;  against  the  actual  authorities,  be- 
comes also  the  resister  of  the  ordinance  of  God. 
The  cii'TtTccirfrfffi^rtt  denotes,  primarily,  mili- 
tary opposition,  the  array  of  a  hostile  order  of  bat- 
tle ;  but  it  has  also  a  more  general  sense.  Its  mean- 
ing, over  against  the  authorities,  in  every  case  must 
be  that  of  resistance ;  and  Tholuck  makes  an  arbi- 
trary limitation  when  he  says  :  "  Neither  the  armed 
opposition  of  the  individual,  nor  of  many,  as  in  in- 
surrection, is  meant  here  ;  it  rather  appears,  from 
ver.  *?,  what  kind  of  opposition  is  meant,  namely, 
that  of  refusal  to  pay  taxes."  Busides,  ver.  7  is  the 
beginning  of  another  section.  [The  more  general 
sense  is  usually  accepted,  as  in  the  above  rendering: 
Jle  who  setteth  himself  against,  which  is  adopted  to 
bring  out  the  reflexive  force  of  the  original. — R.] 
As  related  to  the  Divine  appointment  ((VtaT«yw,  here 
=  <)\dray/(a),  this  resistance  becomes  a  spiritual 
resistance.  This  is  the  rule  ;  and,  according  to  this 
rule,  it  is  said  of  those  who  resist  the  Divine  ordi- 
nance : 

Those  TO-ho  resist  shall  receive  to  them- 
selves condemnation  [ot  de  dv 0  fffTijAoxfi; 
eavroTi;  xqlfia  ^.17/t i/'oi'Tat].  Meyer  properly 
remarks,  that  "  a  condemnation  by  God  is  meant,  as 
it  is  produced  by  their  resistance  of  God's  ordinance, 
but  that  the  afj^nvxa;  are  regarded  as  executing  this 
sentence  ;  therefore  Paul  does  not  mean  eternal  (ac- 
cording to  Reiche,  and  most  commentators),  but 
temporal  purtishment."  Yet  these  executioners  are 
not  always  the  a(>/oi'Tfo; ;  for  it  is  well  known  that 
revolution  very  often  "  devours  its  own  children," 
and  that  the  sorest  punishments  come  from  anarchy. 
[The  next  verse  seems  to  point  to  the  rulers  as  the 
instruments  in  inflicting  the  Divine  punishment 
(Tholuck,  Alford),  yet  there  is  no  necessity  for  this 
limitation,  in  the  face  of  the  fact  that  punishment 
often  comes  by  other  hands.  Though  the  punish- 
ment comes  from  God,  condemnation  is  preferable 
to  damnation,  since  the  latter  refers  now  to  eternal 
punishment  alone,  which  is  not  the  meaning  here. — 
On  vers.  1,  2,  Dr.  Hodge  remarks ;  "  The  extent  of 
this  obedience  is  to  be  determined  from  the  nature 
of  the  case.     They  are  to  be  obeyed  as  magistrates, 


Law.  For,  as  Alford  observes  of  the  duty  here  laid  down  : 
"  To  obtain,  by  lawful  means,  the  removal  or  alteration  of 
an  unju=;t  cr  uJireasonable  law,  is  another  part  of  this  duty ; 
for  all  pov/ers  among  men  must  bo  in  accord  with  the  hip;h- 
eet  power,  the  moral  sense."  And  the  elevation  of  the 
moral  sense  of  individuals  will  accomplish  more  than  levo- 
luiions,  however  justifiable  and  necessary.— R.] 


in  the  exercise  of  their  lawful  authority.  This  pas 
sage,  therefore,  afi'ords  a  very  slight  foundation  fol 
the  doctrine  of  passive  obedience." — R.] 

Ver.  3.  For  rulers  are  not  [o^  ydf)  aqyov- 
Tf?  oiiy.  ftfTtr].  It  may  be  asked  here,  what  the 
ya.Q  is  designed  to  establish?  According  to  Mey. 
er,  it  explains  the  modality  of  the  condemnation  • 
they  shall  receive  condemnation  in  so  far  as  the  civil 
authority  is  its  executioner.  But  Tholuck  and  Phi. 
lippi  very  properly  suggest,  that  the  y.axd  f.jjya  m 
ver.  3  cannot  mean  merely  resistance  to  civil  author- 
ity. If  the  civil  authority  exists  merely  for  the 
quelling  of  resistance,  the  whole  State  would  be  a 
mere  circle,  or  the  civil  authority  would  be  an  abso- 
lute despotism.  According  to  Calvin  and  Bucer, 
ver.  3  should  connect  with  ver.  1,  and  prove  the 
ntilitas  of  the  Divine  ordinance  of  civil  authority.* 
But  the  ydfj  refers  simply  to  the  idea  of  absolute 
punishment  in  the  condemnation  in  ver.  2.  >  In  Tho- 
luck there  is  a  similar,  and  perhaps  somewhat  more 
general,  reference  to  ver.  2.  God  punishes  insurrec- 
tion, because  it  is  designed  to  shake  a  legal  ordi- 
nance, existing  for  the  protection  of  the  good  and 
the  punishment  of  the  bad.  All  those  are  guilty  of 
this  misconception  of  all  the  moral  powers  of  exist- 
ing order,  who,  in  their  abstract  worship  of  a  pure 
fancy,  oppose  the  best  form  of  government,  and 
therefore  finish  their  labors  by  perverting  existing 
order  to  a  moral  chaos.  Now,  the  limitation  of  the 
strict  requirements  of  the  Apostle  lies  in  the  defini- 
tion of  the  civil  authority,  which  he  gives  in  this 
and  the  following  verses. 

A  terror,  q^ofJoi;.  For  terror,  formidandi. 
Princes  are  not  formidable  to  the  good  work,  but  to 
the  evil. — [To  the  good  ■work,  but  to  the  evil, 
T  (15  u  y  a  0-  (0  t  (J  y  a ,  d  /.  ?.  d  r  iZ  y.  a  v.  w .  See 
Textu.d  Note'^.—R.]  ' 

Dost  thou  then  wish  not  to  be  afraid  of 
the  authority?  [OD.nq  de.  ft  rj  qiopila  0  at, 
rTjv  iiovcFiav;  Although  it  is  not  necessary  to 
retain  the  interrogative  form,  yet  it  will  express 
sufficiently  the  hypothetical  force,  which  most  com- 
mentators find  here. — R.]  These  words  are  a  hypo- 
thetical premise,  and  not  a  question,  as  Griesbach, 
and  others,  would  construe  them. — Thou  shalt 
have  praise  [t'Sfn,-  tnai,vov1.  Commendations 
by  the  magistrates,  in  opposition  to  punishments, 
were  common  even  in  ancient  times.  Origen,  on 
the  contrary,  says,  that  it  is  not  the  custom  of  rulers 
to  praise  the  non.  peccantcs.  To  this,  Pelagius  says: 
Damnatio  malormn  Inns  est  ho7ior%im.  Meyer  says  : 
"  Grotius,  moreover,  properly  says  :  '  Cum  hwc  scri- 
beret  Patdiis,  non  sceviebatur  Romce  in  Christianas  ?  ' 
It  was  still  tlie  better  period  of  Nero's  government." 
Tholuck's  view  is  similar.  Yet  the  written  words 
of  the  Apostle  have  been  of  perfect  application  sub- 
sequently, even  down  to  the  present  day.  The 
Apostle  sets  up  an  ideal,  by  which  the  ruler  also  can 
and  shall  be  judged.     We  must  hold  : 

1.  That  he  portrays  obedience  to  authority  as  an 
obedience  for  the  Lord's  sake  (comp.  Eph.  vi.  5,  6). 
This  secures  the  .sphere  :  "  Render  to  God  the  things 
that  are  God's  ;  "  bondage  under  religious  and  con- 
scientious despotism  is  excluded. 

2,  The  definition  of  what  is  aood  works  and  what 


*  [The  view  of  Calvin,  Philippi,  Hodge,  Alford,  and 
others,  that  this  verse  gives  an  additional  ground  for  obedi- 
ence, ^•iz.,  that  magistrates,  besides  being  ordained  of  God, 
arc  appointed  for  a  useful  and  beneficent  purpose,  has  much 
to  commend  it.  Dr.  Lange  seems  to  be  led  toward  such 
exclusive  references  as  bear  against  revolution. — R.] 


400 


THE   EPISTLE   OF   PAUL   TO   THE   ROMANS. 


are  evil  works,  abides  by  the  decision  of  God's  word, 
of  Cliiifilian  faith,  and  of  conscience,  but  is  not  de- 
pendent on  the  ruler. 

3.  This  also  indicates  that  everj'  power  shall  be- 
come weakness,  when  the  poles  of  sword -bearing 
BJiall  bo  so  absolutely  transposed  tiiat  the  sword  be- 
comes a  terror  to  good  woi'ks  ;  but  that  it  is  a  matter 
of  the  Divine  government  to  prove  tiiat  weakness, 
whicli  lies  in  the  fact  that  an  actual  government  has 
absolutely  dropped  ofl'  froTii  the  idea  of  its  design.* 

Ver.  4.  For  he  is  God's  minister  [  fc>  *  o  r 
yet  (J  tltcixo%'6i;  t'dTn'].  Tlie  j'a^  of  ver.  4 
brings  out  the  ground  of  the  declaration  in  ver.  3. 
The  rule  of  the  magistracy  as  a  terror  to  the  evil, 
and  for  the  praise  and  encouragement  of  those  who 
do  good,  is  explained  by  its  character,  its  essential 
design,  to  be  God's  servant. — [To  thee  for  good, 
<ri)i  fii;  TO  ciyafl-dr.]  But  he  is  God's  minis- 
ter for  the  good  of  man  ;  see  Book  of  Wisdom  vi. 
4.  [Wliile  rulers  are  of  God,  it  is  for  the  benefit 
of  the  ruled.  A  repetition  of  wliat  precedes,  and 
Buggestinr;  the  same  limitations. — li.] 

He  weareth  not  the  sword  in  vain  [oi' 
yciQ  fly. J]  rrjv  fidxai,()av  ifOQfZ^.  Me  wear- 
eth it  {(f>6()H'  is  stronger  than  qf(jfl)  as  the  sym- 
bolical token,  insignia,  of  his  governing  and  judicial 
sovereignty ;  but  he  does  not  wear  it  merely  as  a 
symbol,  without  reason,  and  for  show.  He  makes 
use  of  it  because  he  is  God's  minister,  as  the 
punitive  executioner  of  His  wrath.  The  addition : 
lor  wrath,  d^  ofiy i] v ,  expresses  the  fact  that 
even  in  the  State  and  municipal  court  there  is  the 
authority  of  something  higher  than  merely  human 
justice,  namely,  the  Divine  retribution  of  wrath 
upon  offenders. 

On  the  different  antiquarian  interpretations  of 
the  iiri/fuiin,  particularly  as  the  dagger  which  tlie 
Emperor  carried  at  his  side,  see  Tholuck,  p.  690. 
Tholuck  and  Meyer  decide  for  the  sword,  because 
/»«/.  in  the  New  Testament  always  means  this,  and 
because  everywhere  in  the  provinces  it  was  borne  by 
the  highest  officers  of  military  and  criminal  affairs, 
as  the  sign  of  the  jus  gladii.  Nevertheless,  the  dag- 
ger of  tiie  Emperor,  and  of  his  representative,  the 
jPrcefectua  Prcctorii,  belongs  under  the  symbolical 
description.  After  all,  in  an  abstract  and  real  direc- 
tion, we  would  otlitrwise  have  to  think  only  of  the 
executioner's  sword.  [It  requires  some  ingenuity 
to  escape  the  conviction  that  this  passage  implies 
a  New  Testament  sanction  of  the  right  of  capital 
punishment.  At  all  events,  the  theory  of  civil  ])cn- 
nlties  here  set  forth  is  in  direct  opposition  to  that 
so  constantly  upheld  nowadays,  that  the  end  is  sim- 
ply the  reformation  of  the  offender.  See  Dodr. 
Note  6.— -R.] 

•  [Tb  thus  presenting  an  ideal  of  civil  government  fns 
mofit  comran  I  tutors  supposed,  tho  Apostle  pivos  both  the 
reiisim  for  olit'diciicc  to  riKhtful  authority,  and  makus  room 
for  rc-iistanco  to  rulers  who  utterly  and  entirnly  depart  from 
this  idi'iil.  Wordj^worlh,  hnwovor,  takes  dcoidia  giound 
at^ainst  :iny  right  of  insurrection,  and  ailds  :  "  But  evrn  sup- 
pose II  Nero,  and  a  Nero  pi^rnccut'nK  the  Church  ;  yet  even 
tlien  you  may  have  jiraise  therefrom.  You  may  overcome 
IiIh  evil  liy  your  gooi)  ;  you  may  he  more  than  conqueror — 
you  m  ly  di-rivc  glory  from  it.  For  tliough  it  is  unjuMt  and 
condemns  you,  yet  Ood  is  just  nnd  will  reward  you.  lie 
will  crown  you  for  acting  justly,  and  for  sutfi-ring  unjustly. 
Then-fore  hold  fast  your  justice,  and  whi  thor  the  power 
Roquits  or  condemns  you,  you  will  reap  praise  from  it.  If 
you  dii'  for  the  faith  from  Its  hand,  you  wiil  reap  glory  from 
Its  fury.  Augustine  (Serm.  xiii.  30'2)."  Yet  even  ihis 
author  iidmits  that  the  A]iostle  "clmritahly  presumes  rulers 
to  /('■  what,  liciiin  God's  minister'',  they  nunlit  In  h'\"  This  is 
virtu.'iUy  the  presentation  of  an  ideal,  the  non-renlization  of 
which  implies  certain  limitations  to  absolute  submission.— U.] 


Ver.  5.  Wherefore  ye  must  needs,  &c.  [Ji6 
flrayxj/,  x.t./.]  For  the  reason  stated,  it  was  not 
merely  the  duty  of  prudence,  but  also  a  religious 
and  moral  duty  of  conscience,  to  be  subject.  When 
the  Apostle  says,  not  only  because  of  the 
w^rath,  but  also  for  conscience'  sake,  he  de- 
notes thereby  the  antithesis  of  the  servile  fear  of 
the  external  infliction  of  puni.shment,  and  of  inward 
and  free  ol)edience,  in  the  knowledge  and  reverence 
of  the  Divine  order  in  the  civil  afl'airs  of  men.* 
Comp.  1  Peter  ii.  13, 

Ver.  6.  For,  for  this  cause  ye  pay  tribute 
also  [(K«  ToT'To  }'«(<  y.ai  (fooori;  Tf/ftr*. 
The  question  of  connection  has  been  much  dis 
cussed.  Calvin,  De  Wette,  Alford,  and  many  oth- 
ers, make  ()ta  TorTo  [larallel  with  Om)  (ver.  5), 
as  another  inference  from  vers.  1-4.  Meyer,  how- 
ever, connects  immediately  with  ver.  5,  finding  here 
an  inference  from  the  necessity  there  described,  as 
well  as  a  confirmation  of  it.  He  thinks  the  other 
construction  passes  over  ver.  5  arbitrarily.  But  if 
the  verses  are  taken  as  parallel,  this  difliculty  is  not 
of  much  weight.  See  his  notes  for  other  views ; 
Stuart  takes  dua  rovro  yct(>  its  a  strengthened 
causal  particle,  and  the  verb  as  imperative. — R,] 
The  Tf/.tiTf  must  not  be  read  as  imiierative  (lleu- 
mann,  Alorus  [Stuart,  Hodge],  and  others) ;  but  the 
yd^  [orr  with  the  imperative  would  have  been 
more  natural]  and  the  imperative  in  ver.  7  are 
against  this.  Tlie  payment  of  tribute  declares  a 
recognition  of  the  State,  also  according  to  our  Lord's 
own  declaration  (Matt.  xxii.  21).  But  by  means  of 
paying  tribute,  the  subject  himself  takes  part  in  the 
government  of  the  magistracy.  He  actually  takes 
part  in  the  support  of  the  administration,  \fhich, 
consciously  or  unconsciously,  is,  in  the  highest 
sense,  a  servant  of  the  kingdom,  and,  in  the  widest 
sense,  is  a  servant  [Litvvff]  of  God,  analogously  to 
the  servant  of  the  temple.  Olshausen,  and  others, 
erroneously  construe  n(JO(r/.c(iiTf(>o7vT^^  as  subject. 

[For  they  are  the  ministers  of  God,  ).fi,- 
Toi<()yoi  yci()  Oioh  ilaiv.  See  7'ij:tua! Note  *. 
The  subject  is  d()XorTK;  (supplied  in  thought);  A*t- 
Tovpyol  is  predicate  (Meyer,  Philippi,  and  most). 
See  rliilip])i  on  the  distinction  between  /utoi'cj'oi; 
and  (iuiy-orni;.  He  bases  upon  the  former,  which, 
he  claims,  applies  to  one  engaged  in  a  practical,  ex- 
ternal service,  as  well  as  on  the  concrete  jilural  (in- 
stead of  the  abstract  tlovfrin),  the  reference  to  tho 
collection  of  tribute  in  tiq  «i't6  tocto.  But 
it  is  better,  with  Tholuck,  Wordsworth,  and  others, 
to  find  here  the  idea  of  servants  ministering  to  God 
in  rejiresentation  of  the  iieo]ile. — H.] 

Attending  continually  upon  this  very 
thing  [  f '\'  a  r  r  o  toTto  tip  o^xaij  t  ^(^orv- 
^  (<;].  Philippi f  explains  ft\-  ft^To  tocto:  for 
this  vcri/  pitr/'one,  viz.,  the  payment  of  tribute.  But 
then  that  would  mean :  they  receive  taxes  in  order 
that  they  may  exact  more  taxes.  The  purpose  is 
the  fundamental  thought  of  the  whole  section  :  Tho 


•  [Melanohthon  thus  sti-ongly  puts  tho  case  :  ^ulla 
poleiitia  /tiimnnn,  uitllt  rxercilus  tmiffis  muriunt  inijiTirtf 
qunm  liitc  srvi-riftiiiia  Irx  Dri:  nfccse  est  obedirt  prnpter 
co'i'ciniliani." — R  ] 

t  [The  oriirinal  says  Mover,  hut  gives  the  very  words  of 
Phili|ipl  ;  wliilo  Meyer  (-llh  ed.,  without  nny  iuAication  of 
change  of  view)  defends  the  wider  referenee,  among  other 
reasons,  boc.iiise  the  vorti,  which  includes  a  moral  idea, 
would  lie  inapplicable  to  the  more  collection  of  taxes.  Ths 
gi-eat  thought,  miniHrrr:  of  Ood,  seems  to  lie  the  controlling 
one.  Stuart,  IIod(te,  anci,  the  older  commentators,  prefer 
the  other  reference,  which,  perhaps,  to  a  certain  extent, 
implies  this.— It.] 


CHAPTER   XIII.    1-6. 


401 


State  is  the  Stats  of  the  police,  of  rectitude,  and  of 
civilizaiion.  Therefore  the  XfiTovQyfTv  nji  (-Juji  is 
undoubtedly  meant  (Tholuck,  and  otliers)  in  the 
very  sense  in  which  the  section  has  described  it. 


DOCTRINAL  AND  ETHICAL. 

1.  As  chap.  xii.  has  defined  the  conduct  of  Chris- 
tians toward  tiie  Cliurch  and  the  personal  depart- 
monts  of  life,  so  does  chap.  xiii.  define  their  conduct 
toward  the  State  and  the  world.  Ti;e  Apostle  has 
therefore  very  forcibly  regarded  the  sphere  of  per- 
sonal life  as  the  atmosphere  of  the  Church,  and  then 
the  sphere  of  the  world  as  the  atmosphere  of  the 
State.* 

2.  In  reference  to  the  civil  authority,  tlie  Apos- 
tle evidently  makes  the  following  distinctions:.  (1.) 
The  actual  existence  of  the  civil  powers,  which  are 
in  every  case  an  ordinance  of  God's  providence  [not 
of  a  social  contract,  nor  simply  by  the  loill  of  the 
peopl'. — R.]  ;  and  the  ideal  and  real  existerce  of  the 
civil  power,  wliich  is  not  merely  providentiaU (/  ano 
Q)tov,  but  is  also,  by  creation  and  instilation,  fun- 
damentally an  ordinance  vno  rov  Ofov  TfTayuivai. 
(2.)  He  distinguishes  between  social  opposition  to 
the  civil  power,  and  the  spiritual  opposition  to 
God's  institution  wliich  is  comprised  therein.  (3.) 
He  also  distinguishes  between  the  power  of  the 
State  itself  and  its  incumbents,  the  rulers,  by  which 
designation  he  expresses  the  possibility  of  different 
political  forms. f  (4.)  He  finally  distinguishes  be- 
tween the  actual  appearance  and  its  ideal  destina- 
tion, according  to  which  tiie  tioiaia  should  be  a 
(hn/.oi'la  and  administrator  of  Divine  right,  and  the 
ci^/ovTtq  should  prove  themselves  as  hnovQyoi 
&iov. 

3.  The  following  distinctions  with  reference  to 
duty  toward  the  State  clearly  appear : 

A.  The  submission  is  of  necessity  {avdyy.fj), 
ver.  5  ;  (1.)  Because  of  the  wrath.  Since  Divine 
providence  has  its  wise  purposes  even  in  raising  up, 
and  permitting  to  exist,  severe  and  despotic  powers, 
60  long  as  they  are  really  State  powers,  'vni()iyov- 
aai,  so,  in  this  relation,  is  the  avrtrdarTtaOnv  a  sin 
against  wisdom ;  the  revolter  draws  upon  himself 
the  x^ji/ia  for  his  want  of  judgment,  his  presump- 
tion, and  his  wicked  encroachment  and  invasion. 
The  same  o(iyt'i  which  makes  the  State  pass  over 
from  an  institution  of  Divine  mercy  to  a  phenome- 
■  non  of  Divine  wrath,  and  which  makes  use  of  the 
despotic  tool  as  an  axe  to  be  cast  aside  in  due 
season  (Isa.  x.  15),  and  which  oppresses  a  people  to 
its  own  chastisement,  crushes,  first  of  all,  the  indi- 
vidual anarchical  despots  of  revolution,  who,  in  ex- 


*  [Jowett  oscapes  all  the  difficulties  of  this  section,  by 
IntimatiTig  that  the  Apos'le's  exhortation  has  a  refrrence 
only  to  the  Bonian  Christians  in  their  then  circumstances. 
He  thinks  many  a  scriptural  precept  is  abusi'd  because  not 
thus  limited,  and  adds,  respoctinp:  the  Apostle  :  "It  never 
occurred  to  him  that  the  hidden  life,  which  he  thought  of 
only  as  to  be  absorbed  in  the  glory  of  tl'e  sons  of  Ood,  w.as 
one  day  to  be  the  governing  principle  of  the  civilized  world." 
It  IS  not  likely  to  be  so  long,  if  .all  its  professed  posses.sors 
paie  down  the  scripiural  precepts  in  thi^  fashion. — R.] 

t  [From  the  expression,  "  God's  minister  to  thee  for 
good,"  tiie  relative  excellence  of  the  different  forms  of 
poverament  must  be  determined,  since  this  is  the  only  rule 
laid  do\\'n,  and  ar.  emjirical  one  at  best.  So  lonf»  as  a 
popular  government  best  fulfils  this  Divine  purpose,  so 
long  will  men  gladly  lay  dt  wn  their  lives,  that  "  the  gov- 
ernment of  the  people,  by  the  people,  and  for  the  people, 
Bliall  not  pensh  from  the  earth  "  (Prss.  Lincoln  at  Gettys- 
burg Cemetery.— R.] 

26 


cessive  self-estimation,  would  cure  the  relative  evii 
of  despotism  by  the  absolute  evil  of  aiuircliy.  (2.) 
Although  this  folly  itself  nuist  be  avoided  for  con- 
science' sake,  there  is  added  a  specific  obedience  for 
conscience'  sake,  which  is  unfettered  respect  for  the 
ideal  splendor  of  the  Divine  institution,  joy  at  an 
existence  protected  by  the  laws  and  civilization  of 
the  State,  gratitude  for  tlie  moral  blessings  which 
humanity  possesses  in  civil  life  ;  but,  in  one  word, 
the  knowledge  of  the  Divine,  which  shines  clearly 
euo'igh  even  through  the  imperfect  phenomenon  of 
civil  life. 

B.  The  "submitting,"  vnorua<jfaQni,,  excludes 
the  resisting,  dvn.TancFcaOai,;  but  it  by  no  meana 
excludes  it  from  God's  word  and  froiri  conscience, 
nor  from  judgment  (dependent  on  an  existitig  power) 
on  what  is  good  and  what  is  evil,  and  what  is  just 
and  wliat  is  unjust ;  for  it  is  only  in  consequence  of 
this  judgment  that  there  can  be  a  candid  conviction 
that  the  higher  powers,  really  as  God's  servant,  ex- 
ercise the  right  of  the  sword  for  a  terror  to  evil 
works  and  protection  to  good  works.  Consequent!)', 
judgment  on  the  actions  of  the  State  within  the 
pui'ely  ethical  department,  and  the  limits  and  legal- 
ity of  wisdom,  is  also  unfettered. 

C.  According  to  the  Apostle,  the  mark  of  vol- 
untary obedience  consists  in  not  fearing  the  civil 
powers,  in  assuming  their  existence  according  to  the 
idea  in  vers.  3  and  4,  and  not  according  to  their  ac- 
cidental errors.  This  fearlessness  may  not  only  be 
united  witli  the  respect  required  by  ver.  7,  but  is  in- 
separably connected  with  it  (see  Tholuck,  p.  ti92). 
As  one  has  the  right  and  duty  to  expect  of  the 
Christian  that  he  will  act  in  a  Christian  waj',  so  has 
one  the  right  and  duty  to  expect  of  the  State  that  it 
be  clothed  with  the  ideal  priiici[)lis  of  the  State. 

D.  The  Apostle  says  :  "  Render  therel'ore  to  all 
their  dues  ;  tribute  to  whom  tribute  is  due  ;  "  as  if 
he  would  say  that,  by  this  voluntary  act,  you  partici 
pate  in  the  civil  government,  and  pledge  your  obe- 
dience to  it.  But,  in  ver.  7,  he  characterices  the 
same  act  as  indebtedness.  The  solution  of  this  ap- 
parent antinomy  has  been  given  V)y  our  Lord  him- 
self, Matt.  xxii.  21  (see  the  Commentary  on  Matthew, 
pp.  396,  397).  The  individual  has  the  right  to  emi- 
grate when  an  extraneous  power  arises.  But  if, 
with  the  u.se  of  the  coin  of  the  country,  he  enjoys 
the  profit,  pi'Otection,  and  authority  of  the  country, 
there  arises  the  duty  of  paying  the  tribute  required 
by  the  united  life  and  neccs.sities  of  the  Stiite.  And 
he  who  pays  tribute — that  is,  renders  alleginnce — 
with  one  hand,  but  with  the  other  rises  in  revolu 
tion,  is  not  only  guilty  of  resistance,  but  also  of  self- 
delusion  and  self-contradiction. — These  are  the  prin- 
cipal features ;  they  may  also  be  found  in  Eph.  vi. 
5  ;  1  Tim.  ii.  2  ;  1  Peter  ii.  13.  The  application  of 
them  to  the  individual  cases  and  questions  arising 
here,  has  been  committed  by  God's  word  to  the  de- 
velopment of  the  Christian  spirit.  We  are  con- 
vinced that  this  spirit,  and  its  foundation,  can  be 
misapplied  by  impure  minds,  when,  on  the  one 
hand,  Byzantine  adulterers  make  the  gospel  of  truth 
a  gospel  of  absolute  despotism,  and,  on  the  othei, 
fanatical  and  hierarchical  mutineers  make  it  a  gofptl 
of  revolutionary  terrorism,  as  was  the  case  with  the 
Jewish  Zealots,  and  appears  now  as  secret  political 
justice  [  Vehmj iisliz]  (practised  in  Wcstjihalia  in 
early  times),  now  as  brigandage,  and  now  as  Fenian- 
ism.  In  both  respects  the  Old  Testament  is  a  com- 
mentary,  rich  in  illustrations,  on  the  .sense  of  the 
New.     Neither  Pharaoh  nor  Korah's  company,  nei 


402 


THE   EPISTLE   OF  PAUL   TO  THE   ROMANS. 


ther  Rehoboam  nor  Jeroboam,  neither  Nebuchad- 
nezzar nor  the  adversaries  of  Jeremiali,  escaped  the 
condeirii)atory  judgment  of  the  Spirit  recorded  on 
the  pagijs  of  lloly  Writ.  But  in  the  Jewii^h  war, 
when  tlie  fanaticism  of  power  and  the  fanaticism  of 
an  enthusiastic  fancy  for  freedom  contended  topetiier 
for  the  Holy  City,  the  Cliristians  emigrated  to  Pelia. 
Tiie  light  and  right  of  the  Christian  consist  in  the 
incap;icity  of  any  earthly  power  to  intervene  be- 
tween his  heavenly  King  and  his  conscience.  When 
it  is  therefore  imputed  to  him  that  ids  conscience  is 
stained  by  falsehood,  injustice,  cowardice,  or  partial- 
ity, and  tiiat  he  has  become  faithless  to  his  heavenly 
King,  he  knows — for  he  nmst  know — tiiat  his  inward 
life  stands  or  fails  with  his  lidelity  to  his  Lord,  it 
matters  not  from  wliat  side  tlie  imputation  may 
come.  He  must  likewise  refute  the  ini|)Utation  that 
he  employs  his  wliole  life  in  pohtical  law  questions  ; 
for  there  are  other  things  to  be  attended  to  in  re- 
ligious, ecclesiastical,  moral,  and  social  life,  than 
contending  for  the  most  perfect  political  and  social 
forms.  The  same  fanatical  external ization,  which  in 
the  Middle  Ages  took  pleasure  in  aljsolute  eccl(!sias- 
ticism,  can  become  absolute  politicalism  in  modern 
society.  But  if  conditions  arise  in  tiie  life  of  na- 
tions in  which  the  Apostle's  definition  is  not  of  ab- 
solute application  to  the  civil  power,  when  the 
sword  is  a  terror  to  the  good,  then  does  the  defini- 
tion cease  to  be  of  application  at  its  time  to  vTTff)- 
i/oKTa.  But  even  in  such  a  c:ise  God  could  make 
a  Russian  winter  do  more  for  Germany,  tlian  man, 
alienated  from  God,  could  do  for  France  l)y  a  series 
of  revolutions.  Of  course,  freedom  never  takes 
place  without  enthusiastic  lil)erat,ors,  wlio  know  how 
to  distinguish  God's  fiery  sign  from  human  incen- 
diarism. But  every  one  must  know  for  himself 
what  his  duty  is  in  his  particular  calling.  [The  \\ii- 
sitions  of  Dr.  Lange  are  justly  taken,  but  may  re- 
quire some  modification  for  a  region  wiicre  the  civil 
powi'r  is  more  directly  formed  and  sustained  by  tiic 
indivi(]ual  members  of  tiie  State.  In  that  case,  the 
personal  responsibility  in  political  affairs  is,  of 
course,  largely  augmented;  to  the  duty  of  obedience 
and  tribute,  that  of  political  knowledge  and  pru- 
dence is  added.  The  ideal  nmst  be  fi^rmed  by  Chris- 
tian reflection,  and  by  Christian  effoit  we  must  seek 
to  make  it  a  reality.  Tiie  abstract  right  of  revolu- 
tion, wliich  Dr.  Lange  himself  does  not  deny,  will 
be  the  more  an  abstraction  as  lawful  means  are  at 
hand  to  alter  the  organic  law  of  the  State.  Thu.'^ 
popular  government,  vthen,  and  onli/  when,  the  peo- 
ple are  permeutcd  bif  (JhriMian  prhicl/de,  contains 
in  itself  the  i)reventive  of  revolutionary  e.xce.^s. 
IIow  insupportal)le  it  c.m  l)ecome  when  tiiis  condi- 
tion is  wanting,  history  tells  plainly  enough. — R.] 

4.  From  tlie  experience  through  which  the  Apos- 
tle had  iirevioii-'ly  passed,  he  had  l)een  often  pro- 
tected by  the  sword  of  the  Roman  authorities  against 
the  mutinies  of  Jewish  fanaticism.  Learned  people 
have  observed,  that  he  hius  written  these  exhorta- 
tions to  Rome  although  Nero  was  Emperor  there. 
Other  scholars  have  remarked,  on  the  otluT  hand, 
that  the  fivi;  good  years  of  N'ero's  reign  had  not  yet 
come  to  an  end.  But  it  is  certain  that,  in  tiic  ordi- 
nance of  tiie  State  for  postmty,  as  well  as  in  the  in- 
stitutiiin  of  the  Church,  the  Apostle  |>erceives  the 
historical  opposition  to  the  irerminating  antichris- 
tianity  in  the  world,  acconiing  to  2  Tliess.  ii.  But 
he  did  not  regard  liis  Iil)erty  of  judgment  thereby 
bound  (see  2  Tim.  iv.  17). 

0.  To  what  extent  is  the  State  a  Divine  institu- 


tion ?  Elaborate  discussions  on  this  question  arf 
summed  up  and  deliberated  upon  by  Tholuck,  pp. 
681-689.  According  to  the  principles  of  Roman- 
ism, the  State  is  merely  a  human  ordinance  (see 
Tholuck,  p.  684  ;  Gieseler,  Kirvhengesrh.,  ii.  2,  pp. 
7,  lu8). — The  germ  of  the  Divine  institution  oi  the 
State  lies  in  the  Divine  institution  of  the  family,  in 
the  authority  of  the  head  of  the  family  in  particu- 
lar, as  well  as  in  the  substantial  relations  of  human- 
ity. But  as  the  Old  Testament  gift  of  the  law  is  the 
institution  of  a  theocracy,  which  still  embraces  in 
common  the  twin-offspring  of  State  and  Church,  so 
is  there  contained  also  in  the  Old  Testament  a  Divine 
sanction  of  the  State — a  sanction  which  pledges  the 
future  sanctified  State  to  reciprocity  with  the  future 
Church.  And  this  presages  that  it  is  just  as  de- 
structive  to  make  the  State  the  servant  of  the 
Church,  as  to  make  the  Church  the  bondwoman  of 
the  State, 

[The  Scylla  and  Charybdis  of  European  Chris- 
tianity, as  related  to  the  State,  are:  Romanism,  which 
subordinates  the  State  to  the  Church,  and  Erastian- 
ism,  which  subordinates  the  Church  to  the  State. 
The  American  theory  is :  that  both  are  coordinate, 
the  State  protecting  the  Church  in  civil  rights,  the 
Church  sustaining  the  State  by  its  moral  influence. 
Yet  even  here  it  is  questioned  whether  this  is  the 
correct  theory.  It  is  an  experiment,  fraught  with 
great  blessings  indeed,  but,  as  yet,  only  an  experi- 
ment. The  (langers  here  are  similar :  (1.)  Roman- 
ism, which  would  make  its  Church  the  State  ;  in  a 
popular  government,  as  really  as  in  a  despotism,  and 
even  more  fatally,  since  the  genius  of  the  Church 
must  then  become  that  of  the  State — what  that  is, 
is  obvious.  (2.)  On  the  other  hand,  we  find  the 
theocratic  tendency  of  Puritanism  manifesting  itself 
continually.  Tiiis  would  identify  Church  and  State, 
ratiier  by  making  the  State  the  Church,  pressing 
upon  it  the  duty  of  legislating  men  into  morality, 
and  even  holiness.  Here  we  must  class  the  politico- 
religionism,  which  has  become  so  common  during 
thp  last  ten  years. — Still,  the  constant  tendency  of 
Christendom  to  make  a  practical  synthesis  of  Church 
and  State,  is  an  unconscious  pro[)hecy  of  an  era 
when  both  .shall  be  united  in  a  chr'iKloi-racii. —  K.] 

f).  On  the  right  of  the  death-penalty  with  refer- 
ence to  the  sword  of  authority,  see  Tholuck,  p.  (>0L 
We  must,  of  course,  distinguish  between  the  right 
of  using  the  sword  and  the  duty  of  its  use.  [Ad- 
mitting that  the  Apostle  is  describing  an  ideal  of 
civil  governnu-nt,  we  still  find  here  the  rhiht  of  capi- 
tal pimi.>*hment.  Of  course,  just  in  so  far  as  the 
actual  government  has  been  lielow  this  ideal,  has  this 
right  been  abused.  Still,  tlie  right  remains  justified 
fiy  the  tluMjry  of  punishment  here  advanced,  by  the 
necessities  of  self-preservation  on  the  part  of  soci- 
ety representeii  by  the  j)unisliing  power.  The  right 
to  punish  also  im])lies  the  right  to  pardon  ;  and  the 
measure  of  the  right  (».  c,  the  conformity  to  the 
ideal  here  presented)  will  be  also  the  measure  of  the 
sense  of  responsibility,  both  as  to  the  punishing  and 
pardoning  power.  The  iistial  ohjeetions  to  capital 
punishniciit  misapprehend  (<(.)  the  nature  of  punish- 
meiit  in  general  ;  {h.)  the  Divine  authority  in  civil 
government. — R.] 


IIOMILETICAL   AXD    PRACTICAL. 

Obedience  toward  the  powers  that  be  is  every 
Christian's  duty.     1.  Without  difference  of  posse* 


CHAPTEP.  XIII.   1-6. 


403 


Bions ;  2.  Of  position ;  3.  Of  culture ;  4.  And  of 
confession  (ver.  1). — In  bow  far  are  there  no  powers 
that  are  not  ordained  by  God  ?  1.  So  far  as  God 
himself  is  a  God  of  order,  who  will  tberefore  have 
order  in  civil  affairs  ;  2.  So  far  as  God  is  also  a  God 
of  love,  who  designs  to  do  good  for  us  bj'  the  pow- 
ers which  He  has  ordained  (vera.  1-4). — Resistance 
to  the  powers  that  be,  regarded  as  resistance  to 
God's  ordinance  (ver.  2). — To  do  good  is  the  best 
protection  against  all  fear  of  civil  authority  (ver.  8). 
— Praise  from  the  civil  magistrates.  1.  Who  shall 
obtaijj  it?  Every  one  who  does  good — that  is,  every 
one  who,  a.  does  not  submit  slavishly  ;  but,  6.  obeys 
the  laws  of  the  country  by  voluntary  obedience. 
2.  In  what  should  it  consist?  a.  Not  so  much  in 
showy  medals  and  ribbons,  for  which  many  are  so 
eager,  as,  b.  in  the  simple  recognition  of  the  faith- 
fully discharged  duty  ol  the  citizen  (ver.  3). — The 
civil  authorities  should  likewise  sei-ve  :  1.  God  ;  2. 
Men  (ver.  4). — The  holy  judicial  office  of  the  magis- 
tracy. 1 .  From  whom  is  it  derived  ?  From  God, 
who  is  a  righteous  God,  and  to  whom  no  wicked  per- 
son is  pleasing  (Ps.  v.  4).  2.  What  belongs  to  it  ? 
The  exercise  of  penal  judgment,  and,  above  all,  the 
right  of  life  and  death.  3.  How  should  they  exer- 
cise it?  In  the  ennobling,  but  also  humiliating,  con- 
sciousness that  they  are  God's  ministers  (ver.  4). 

Luther  :  Worldly  power  is  for  the  sake  of  tem- 
poral peace ;  therefore  the  conscience  is  bound,  by 
dutiful  love,  to  be  subject  to  it  (ver.  5). — See  how 
good  it  is  to  pay  taxes  and  be  obedient ;  for  you 
thereby  help  to  protect  the  pious  and  punish  the 
wicked.  Therefore  do  not  be  provoked  at  it 
(ver.  6). 

Starke  :  If  persons  in  authority  would  attract 
their  subjects  to  obedience,  they  should  administer 
their  office  well,  and,  to  that  end,  should  remember: 
1.  That  they  are  by  nature  no  better  than  other 
men ;  2.  That  they  will  therefore  die,  just  as  all 
others  ;  3.  That  they  will  have  to  give  a  far  greater 
account  than  their  subjects  before  God's  judgment- 
bar,  because  of  their  offiaial  prerogatives  and  gov- 
ernment (ver.  1). — Lange  :  When  those  in  authority 
read  and  hear  that  their  station  is  from  God,  they 
should  examine  themselves  as  to  whether  they  are 
to  their  subjects  what  the  head  is  to  the  body  and  its 
members  (ver.  1). — Hedinger  :  The  powers  that  be, 
God's  minister !  How  much  is  expressed  by  this  ! 
Therefore  there  are  no  masters  above  God.  He  will 
hereafter  hold  to  account,  and  throw  a*ide,  all  titles 
of  honor  (ver.  4). — Ye  subjects,  give  freely  your 
possessions  and  blood,  but  not  your  conscience 
(ver.  6). 

Gerlach  :  Though  the  office  be  divine,  the  in- 
cumbent may  possess  it  illegally,  and  abuse  it  (ver. 
I). — "  Needs"  here  means  not  external  compulsion, 


but  the  inward  necessity  of  being  obedient  to  God 
(ver.  5). 

Lisco  :  The  believer's  holy  love  is  the  fulfilment 
of  the  law ;  first  of  all,  in  relation  to  the  powers 
that  be  (vers.  1  ff.). — Obedience  is  a  matter  of  con- 
science with  the  Christian  ;  it  is  an  inward  and  sin- 
cere  obedience  (ver.  5). 

Heubner  :  The  Christian  attitude  toward  the 
authorities  (vers.  1  ff.). — The  limits  of  obedience 
toward  the  powers  that  be  are  defined  by  con.science, 
faith,  and  God's  commandment ;  Acts  v.  29  (ver.  1). 
— The  Christian  mode  of  obedience  is  free,  pure, 
conscientious,  and  not  from  compulsion  or  feat 
(ver.  5). 

Schleiermacher  :  On  the  proper  relation  of  the 
Christian  to  his  ruler.  1.  How  utterly  improper  it 
is  for  the  Christian  to  be  subject  merely  to  avoid 
punishment ;  2.  How  natural  and  necessary  it  is  foi 
him  to  be  subject  for  conscience'  sake  (preached  in 
January,  1809) ;  vers.  1-5. 

[Henry  :  Magistrates  act  as  God's  ministers : 
1.  In  the  administration  of  public  justice ;  2.  The 
determining  of  quarrels ;  3.  The  protecting  of  the 
innocent ;  4.  The  righting  of  the  wronged  ;  5.  The 
punishing  of  offenders ;  6.  And  the  preserving  of 
national  peace  and  order,  that  every  man  may  not 
do  right  in  his  own  eyes. — Waterland  :  It  is  the 
duty  of  those  in  authority :  1.  To  correct  those 
that  needlessly  and  causelessly  disturb  the  public 
tranquillity ;  2.  To  remove  those  that  libel  the  es- 
tablished religion,  without  offering  any  better,  or 
an  equivalent ;  8.  To  curb  the  insolence  and  hum- 
ble the  pride  of  such  as  fly  in  the  face  of  author- 
ity, and  pretend,  without  commission  or  qualifica- 
tions, to  instruct,  and,  under  that  color,  to  insult 
their  superiors. — Scott  :  As  to  the  efforts  vviiich  are 
anywhere  made  by  those  on  whom  trusts  constitu- 
tionally  devolve,  to  preserve,  increase,  or  assi.st  the 
real  Uberty  of  mankind,  personal,  civil,  or  religious, 
or  to  check  the  career  of  despotism  or  oppression 
over  men  of  any  climate,  complexion,  or  religion  : 
let  us  zealously  forward  them  with  our  prayers,  and 
by  every  mean  consistent  with  the  peace  and  good 
order  of  the  community  ;  and,  if  we  would  enjoy 
the  blessing  of  good  government,  we  should  pray 
earnestly  and  constantly  for  our  rulers,  and  all  in 
authority ;  else  we  have  no  ju.st  cause  to  complain 
of  any  real  or  supposed  grievances  to  which  we 
may  be  subjected  by  them. — Clarke  :  When  a  ruler 
governs  according  to  the  constitution  of  his  country, 
and  has  his  heart  and  life  governed  by  the  laws  of 
God,  he  is  a  double  blessing  to  his  people  ;  while  he 
is  ruling  carefully  according  to  the  laws,  his  pious 
example  is  a  great  means  of  extending  and  confirm- 
ing  the  reign  of  pure  morality  among  those  vhom 
he  governs. — J.  F.  H.] 


404 


THE   EPISTLE   OF  PAUL   TO   THE   ROMANS. 


FocRTH  Section. — Proper  conduct  toward  the  world  in  genei-al.  Legal  fel'owship  with  the  wotid 
Jiecnnni/ion  of  the  rights  <■/  the  world  in  the  jitslice  arid  also  in  the  stremjth  of  love  fv  our  neighbor 
Sep  iralion  from  the  UHgodli7ie.ss  of  the  ancient  world  {the  darkness  of  heathenism).  UriiversoUifm 
and  its  sanctijication  through  true  separatitm. 

Chap.   XIII.   7-14. 

7  Render  therefore  \^nu  therefore]  '  to  all  their  dues  :  tribute  to  whom  tributt. 
is  due  ;  cu.stom  to  whom  custom  ;  fear  to  whom  fear  ;  honour  to  wlioni  honour. 

8  Owe  no  man  any  thing,  but  [except]  to  love  one  another:    for  lie  that  [who] 

9  loveth  anotlier  hath  fulfilled  the  law.  For  this,  Thou  shalt  not  commit  adiilterj, 
Thou  shalt  not  kill.  Thou  shalt  not  steal,  Thou  shalt  not  bear  false  witness 
[omii  Thou  shalt  not  bear  false  witness],*  Thou  shalt  not  covet ;  and  if  there  be 
any  other  commandment,  it  is  briefly  comprehended  in  this  saying,  namely,' 

10  Tliou  shalt  love  thy  neighbour  as  thyself.*  Love  worketh  no  ill  to  his  neigh- 
bour :    therefore  love  is  the  fullilUng  [love  therefore  is  the  fulfilment]  of  the 

1 1  law.  And  that  [this  the  rather  because],'  knowing  the  time,  that  noAV  it  is  high 
time  to  awake  °  out  of  sleep  :    for  now  is  our  salvation  nearer  than  when  we 

12  believed.     The  night  is  far  spent,  the  day  is  at  hand:   let  us  therefore  cast  off" 

13  the  works  of  darkness,  and'  let  us  put  on  the  armour  of  light.  Let  us  walk 
honestly  [seemly],'  as  in  the  day  ;  not  in  rioting  and  drunkenness,  not  in  cham- 

14  boring  and  wantonness,  not  in  strife  and  envying :  But  put  ye  on  the  Lord 
Jesus  Christ,  and  make  not  [do  not  make]  *  provision  for  the  flesh,  to  Juljil 
the  lusts  thereof. 


>  Vcr.  ".— [Kec,  N'.  D".  Y.  L.,  insert  ovv  (Philippi,  "De  Wettc)  ;  omitted  in  N">.  A.  B.  T)'.,  by  Lachmann,  Tlsch- 
endorf,  Mcyi^r,  Alt'ord,  TrepcUes,  and  many  others.  Dr.  I.iinge  thinks  the  omission  favors  his  view,  that  a  new  section 
sboald  l)p(,an  here ;  while  Philiipi  and  I)o  NVctte  think  this  view  of  the  connection  led  to  the  early  omission. 

*  Ver.  9. — [The  /fee.  inseits  oii  i^eviojuapTup^acii  ou  insufiicient  authority  (N.,  versions  aid  fathers).  It  is  omitted 
in  A.  B.  D.  F.  L.,  m:iny  cuisives,  &c.  ;  l)y  Luohmann,  and  modern  cdiiors  and  commentators  without  excoi>tio;i.  Even 
iJr.  llodtce,  who  rarely  devi:ites  Iroin  the  RiC,  except  under  overwhelming  authority,  regects  it.  The  insertion  is  at 
once  explaine<l  by  the  Decalosrue  itself. 

'  Ver.  9.— (H.  F.  omit  ei*  Tip.  It  is  found  in  N.  A.  I).  L. ;  adopted  by  many  editors,  braekettcd  by  L:ichmann, 
Alford,  Trepelles.  Tt  niipht  easily  liave  been  omitted  as  unnoecssarj-,  hence  to  be  retained.— /^cc,  with  A.  L.  :  iv  Toiiry 
T<j»  Aovui ;  N.  U.  1).  F.,  Lachmann,  Tischendorf,  TreKclles,  and  most  :   iv  tiu  Aoyw  toutu. 

«  V'er.  9.— |N.  A.  B.  I).  (Lachmann,  Tischendorf,  Alford,  Trepelle-*):  atavTov,  iiistoad  of  iav-rov  (F.,  fhthcrs, 
iZ.c,  ^kieyor,  I'hilippi,  &r.).  The  latter  is  for  the  second  person,  however;  and  may  have  been  changed,  either  as  a 
prammutical  correction,  or  from  the  repetition  of  the  S,  which  precedes.    On  ia.vr6v  for  the  second  person,  see  Winer, 

p.  H2.  ...   X 

*  Ver.  11. — [Dr.  Lanpe's  text  reads:  TJnd  Sokhes  wisseiid,  wissen  wir  attch.  See  the  Exeg.  Aoli-s  on  this  luterprota- 
tion,  and  that  piven  above  in  brackets. 

•  Ver.  11.— [The  suhjoct  of  the  infinitive  is  omitted  in  the  E.  V.  The  Brc,  N'.  D.  F.  L.,  have  riiia<i;  x'.  A.  B. 
C.  :  v/xa«-  The  foi-mer  is  adopted  by  most  editors;  Alford,  however,  having  discovered  that  B.  drives  the  latter,  has 
adopted  it.  Lachmann,  Tischendorf,  and  most,  place  ^fiij  before  riiiat  (so  N.  A.  B.  C.  D.).  llem-e  :  it  is  already 
time  til, it  w  should  awckr,  is  the  cnncct  rendering. 

'  Ver.  12.— [The  R'C.  (with  N'.  C.  D"  '.  F.  !>.,  and  fathers)  reads  xai  befiro  iv6va-uij.t9a.  A.  B.  C.  D'., 
versions  and  fathers:  ivS.  Si.  n'.  omits  the  coniunctmn  :ilt<>gether.  Lachmann,  Tischendorf,  Dc  Weitc,  Alford, 
Wordswoitn,  Tregelles,  accept  Si,  since  km  might  l-e  substitntnl  on  account  of  the  failure  to  recognize  the  contrast. 
Philippi  and  Meyer  accept  xai,  because  Si  might  have  been  inserted  from  the  i)revious  part  of  the  verse,  or  to  corre- 
spond Willi  it.     No  change  is  required  in  the  E.  V.,  to  express  the  slightly  eontrastive  force  of  Si. 

»  Vcr.  ly.— jAmer.  Bible  Union.  Noyes  :  bfomiiiply  ;  Five  Ang.  Cletgyim  n  :  smnly.  The  latter  is  more  in  keeping 
w  th  the  stvb.'  "f  the  K.  V.     1  Cor.  xiv.  40  :  dectntly  (and  in  order).     Scmly  is  fonnd  in  Chaucer  in  precisely  the  sense 

here  intcn«icd  by  f  vi(rxi>*°''"S  •  .  ,    .. 

•  Ver.  U.  — (l)r.  Langc's  view  wonld  be  thus  expressed  :  Po  not  make  such  provision  for  the  flesh  as  to  satisfy  us 
lusts.  Noyes  :  Think  not  about  satisfying  the  lusts  of  thollcsh.  Alford  :  Take  not  (any)  forethought  for  the  llesh,  to 
fulfil  its  lubts.    See  the  £xeg.  JVoUs.—li.l 


EXEGETICAL  AND  CRITICAL. 

Preliminari/  Remark. — Tlii.s  .icctioii  i.s  connpcti'fl 
DV  ver.  7  with  the  precedinf;.  Wliilo  the  previoti.s 
ecftioii  iJfliiii's  till'  n-latidii  ot  Chri.^tiaii.s  to  tlic  Slate 
to  whiuli  tlu'y  belong  a.f  citi/eii.^,  the  pro.seiit  section, 
on  till.'  other  liaml,  regiilate.s  their  relation  to  the 
world  in  general,  in  its  friendly  and  liostile  side,  in 
fellowship  and  reptil.><ion  ;  and  ver.  7  treat,s  of  their 
relation  to  authorities  in  the  world  in  general.     We 


have  not  merely  to  do  with  our  own  eivil  authoritiea 
and  our  own  State,  hut  also  with  foreign  States  and 
dignitaries.  The  traveller  does  not  have  to  pay 
tribute  to  a  foreign  State,  but  he  has  to  pay  duty  ; 
in  all  cases  we  sliould  exhibit  becoming  Imnor  and 
respect  toward  every  one.  According  to  Tholuck, 
ver.  7  contains  "  a  sniumary  of  the  various  dutiea 
toward  all  kinds  of  authorities ;  first  of  all,  toward 
the  subordinate  ta,\-olKcers,  then  to  judges  and 
majiislrates." 


CHAPTER  XIII.   7-14. 


40J 


[The  view  of  Tlioluck,  which  is  that  of  Meyer, 
Philippi,  Alford,  and  most,  implies  that  ver.  7  be- 
longs to  the  preceding  section.  At  first  sight  this 
division  seems  correct ;  but,  really,  ve^.  7  is  both  a 
hortatory  summing  up  of  what  precedes,  and  a  tran- 
sition to  the  more  general  admonitions  which  follow. 
If  ovv  be  read  (see  Textual  Note  '),  the  former  be- 
comes more  prominent ;  if  omitted,  the  latter. — R.] 

Ver.  7.  Render  to  all  their  dues  [wtto- 
6oxi  nciaiv  tat;  o'fuXdi;^.  Jlaai,v.  Ac- 
cording to  Estius,  Klee,  and  others,  this  refers  to 
all  men  ;  according  to  Meyer  [Philippi,  and  many 
others],  it  refers  merely  to  magistrates,  as  if  our 
respect  were  due  to  them  alone  !  The  antithesis  is : 
Owe  no  man  any  thing. 

Tribute  to  •whom  tribute  is  due  [tw  rov 
qioQov  xbv  qi6()ov'\.  Tholuck,  Meyer,  and  oth- 
ers, would  supplement  anodoTi  by  a  anairovvri,. 
But  the  addition  is  already  indicated  in  the  rdti,- 
6?f  J.ac,  and  ocffihri  follows  immediately  afterward. 
Fear  and  honor  are  asked  from  nobody,  not  even  by 
magistrates,  in  the  form  of  paying  tribute  and  duty  ; 
and  even  with  tribute  and  duty  we  should  not  wait 
until  compelled  to  pay  them.  Grotius  has  supplied 
oqfU.fTai- ;  KoUner,  oquhn  ;  against  which  Meyer 
observes,  that  it  is  philologically  incorrect,  because 
riT)  does  not  stand  for  to.  But  were  m  the  reading, 
the  idea  of  an  organic  distribution  would  easily 
arise  ;  this  was  avoided  by  the  Apostle's  placing  tw 
contractively  for  rovrot.  According  to  Grotius,  sim- 
ply the  Art.  pi-cepo.sitivus  is  placed  for  the  mibjunc- 
iivus,  which  is  reversed  in  chap.  xiv.  2-5.* 

Custom  [to  TtAoc;].  Grotius:  Vectigalia 
pro  7nercibus  dantur,  tnbuta  pro  .folo  out  capiie. 
We  must,  at  all  events,  understand  here,  by  custom, 
the  Roman  internal  tax  on  goods.  [As  tribute  was 
due  to  home  authorities,  while  custom,  duties,  &c., 
are  due  to  foreign  authorities  as  well,  there  seems  to 
be  an  extension  of  thought  beyond  the  obligations 
referred  to  in  vers.  1-6.  Bengel  is  quite  incorrect 
in  making  cfoooi;  the  genus,  and  rikoq  the  species. 

[Fear,  rbv  q>6^ov;  honor,  t'tjv  tt.ntjv. 
Those  who  confine  the  reference  to  magistrates, 
apply  the  former  word  to  the  proper  sentiment  and 
conduct  toward  the  higher  magistrates,  especially 
judges,  the  latter  to  magistrates  in  general  (Meyer, 
Pliilippi).  De  Wette,  however,  refers  the  former  to 
judges,  the  latter  to  magistrates  in  general,  espe- 
cially the  higher  ones ;  while  Alford  refers  "  qopot; 
to  those  set  over  us  and  having  power;  Tt/a/,  to 
those,  but  likewise  to  all  on  whom  the  State  has 
conferred  distinction."  If  the  wider  view  of  the 
verse  be  accepted,  then  (with  Hodge,  Webster  and 
Wilkinson,  and  others)  the  one  means  the  reverence 
paid  to  superiors,  the  other,  the  courtesy  due  to 
equals. — R.] 

Vor.  8.  Owe  no  man  any  thing  \^firj(ifvl 
fitjdiv  oqilktri.  Dr.  Lange  renders :  Bleibt 
Niemard  und  Nichts  sclmldig,  which  he  considers 
an  improvement  of  the  old  version :  Niemand  nic/its. 
— R]  The  four  preceding  categories  are  here  gen- 
eralized to  the  idea  of  the  universal  dut^/  to  our 
■  neighbor.  Tholuck  is  doubly  inexact  when  he  says : 
■'  The  Apostle  proceeds  from  the  duties  of  subjects 


*  [The  mass  of  commentators  supply  airaiTovvri  (so 
Winer,  p.  548),  probably  because  they  limit  the  reference  in 
this  verse  to  magistrates.  But  Dr.  Iiangte's  view  is  prefer- 
able. "  The  sentence  is  elliptical  for  Si  rov  <^.  o'^tiAere 
TouTo)  rov  <|)."  (Webster  and  Wilkinson).  So  E.  V.,  sub- 
Btantially. — E.] 


to  universal  Christian  duties."  [De  Wette  :  "  Th* 
Apostle  proceeds  at  once  from  the  vestibule  of 
morality  into  her  very  domain." — R.] 

Except  to  love  one  another  [tl  /lij  ri 
aXXri  kovq  ay  a  no.  v.  Philippi:  "A  Pauline 
argute  dictum  or  acumen.''^ — R.]  In  relation  to  the 
definite  discharges  of  duty,  the  Christian  should 
strive  to  perfectly  discharge,  and  to  keep  discharged, 
his  duty  in  every  direction  ;  in  relation  to  love,  as 
the  source  of  duties,  he  should,  on  the  other  hand, 
be  conscious,  and  constantly  be  more  so,  of  an  infi 
nite  and  permanent  indebtedness.  The  duties  are 
externally  a  JiuUum,  but  the  duty  of  loving  our 
neighbor  remains  an  mji'xitum.  And  the  more  clear 
the  Christian  becomes  on  one,  the  more  clear  he  be- 
comes on  the  other.  [Bengel :  "  Amare,  dtbilum 
immort'de.  JSi  amabatin,  n  I  dcbe/is,  nam  amor  im- 
plet  legem.  Amarc,  libe^-tan  est.''''  So  most  com- 
mentators from  the  times  of  Chrysostom.  Augus- 
tine :  "  Semper  debko  charitatem  qua  sola  etiam 
reddita  relinet  debitonm  "  (Ep.  62). — R.] 

'OqidXiri  is  not  indicative  (Reiche,  and  oth- 
ers), but  imperative,*  by  which  the  sentence,  "  ex- 
cept to  love  one  another,"  must  be  understood  thus : 
except  that  which  you  cannot  pay  as  a  debt.  Meyer 
emphasizes  the  subjective  rendering:  Consider  your- 
selves as  debtors  of  love.  Even  in  the  "  Owe  no 
man  any  thing"  there  is  undoubtedly  an  appeal 
made  to  the  consciousness  and  its  method  of  action. 

Hath  fulfilled  the  law.  11  in  ).  r}  (>  o)  y.  i . 
[Perfect  of  completed  action  (Meyer). — R.]  It  is 
by  love  that  the  fulfilment  of  the  law  is  fundamen- 
tally  decided  ;  chap.  xiv.  13.  Reiche,  and  others : 
Jd  quod  in  lege  summmn  est.  Instead  of  this,  we 
must  place  :  Quod  Icgis  privcipium  est.  That  no 
justification  is  here  implied,  is  plain,  first,  from  the 
fact  that  the  Apostle  regards  this  loving  as  possible 
only  on  the  ground  of  justification ;  and  second, 
from  the  fiict  that  he  lays  down  this  lovivg,  enjphat- 
ically  construed,  as  an  ideal  which  has  not  been 
reached  so  long  as  we  are  still  universal  debtors  in 
individual  matters. 

[Although  ver.  9  shows  that  the  Mosaic  law  is 
meant,  yet  it  is  to  be  doubted  whether  there  is  any 
"  apologetic  reference  to  the  upholders  of  the  law  " 
(Alford).  When  De  Wette  says  :  "  He  who  prac- 
tises love,  tie  higher  duty,  has,  even  before  he  does 
this,  fulfilled  the  law,  the  lower,"  he  seems  to  ignore 
the  true  position  of  the  law  in  the  Chiistian  dispen- 
sation. "  The  law,  as  a  rule  of  gratitude,  is  com- 
pletely fulfilled  by  love,"  seems  a  better  view.  For 
the  former  part  of  the  verse  implies  that  we  never 
attain  to  this,  but  still  "  owe  "  this  love  increasing- 
ly. Hence  the  reference  here  is  to  the  completed 
ideal.  "  The  expression  implies  more  than  a  simple 
performance  of  the  precepts  of  the  law ;  true  love 
does  more  than  this:  it  ?tMs,  a,  comphteness  to  the 
performance.  It  reaches  those  lesser  courtesies  and 
sympathies  which  cannot  be  digested  into  a  code 
and  reduced  to  rule.  To  the  bare  framework  of  law, 
which  is  as  the  bones  and  sinews,  it  adds  the  flesh 
which  fills  it,  and  the  life  which  actuates  it "  (Web- 
ster and  Wilkinson). — R.] 

*  [This  is  required  by  the  context  with  its  frequent  itn 
perativi'S,  and  also  bj-  the  subjective  negatives.  The  indi- 
cative would  require  ov^ei'l  ov&iv.  Of  eouiso.  the  mesin- 
ing  is  very  wide,  including  all  possible  oblig;itons,  and  not' 
to  be  limited  to  a  caul  ion  agaiupt  ijecnniary  indtbl  cdness. 
Fritzschc,  and  otbers,  take  oiJciAeTe  in  a  different  sense  in 
the  second  clause  (a  kind  of  pnronomasin)  :  ''  Owe  no  man 
any  thing,  but  ye  ought  to  love  one  a-jother."  This  i£- 
quite  unnecessary,  however.-  -11.1 


106 


THE   EPISTLE   OF  PAUL   TO   THE   ROMANS. 


Ver.  9.  For  this,  Thou  shalt  not,  &c.  [to 
yap  ci',  x.T./.]  It  is  self-evident  tliat  tlie  Apos- 
tle does  not  take  the  negative  coinniandments  of  the 
Decalogue  In  a  merely  literal  sense.  This  is  clear 
also  Iroin  the  prominence  which  he  gives  to  the 
last :  Thou  shalt  not  covet  (Luther  :  Covet  noth- 
ing ;  an  emphasizing  of  the  oltject ;  chap.  vii.  7  is 
against  this).  It  also  follows,  from  the  fact  that  this 
perfect  negative  conduct  is  not  conceivable  without 
a  corresponding  positive  conduct.  Tlioluck :  "  In 
the  enumeration  of  the  commandments  in  ver.  9, 
that  respecting  adultery  precedes  the  one  respecting 
murder.  There  is  the  same  order  in  Codd.  Alex. 
LXX.,  Exod.  vi. ;  the  same  in  Philo,  and  in  the  New 
Testament,  James  ii.  11;  Mark  x.  19;  Luke  xviii. 
20.  Philo  establishes  it,  by  saying  :  adultery  is  the 
most  heinous  criibe."  For  further  particulars,  see 
Tholuck,  p.  694. 

Briefly  comprehended.  'Avaxeipalat- 
ovr  ;  see  Eph.  i.  lu.  In  the  expression  there  is 
comprised  the  idea,  that  all  which  is  explained  from 
the  principle  (for  example,  the  Ten  Commandments 
from  the  law  of  love)  is  again  summed  up  in  the 
fulfilment  of  the  principle.  Therefore  not  merely 
<T(' »' TO. H  (>)!,•  oinaQr  i'Zftai,  (Chrysostom).  [So 
Meyer,  Tholuck,  Philippi :  recapitu/ated  ;  De  Wette, 
Alford  :  brourjltt  under  one  head.  Dr.  Lange  in- 
cludes both  ideas.  Briejli/  might  be  omitted  from 
the  E.  V.  with  propriety. — R.] 

Ver.  10.  Love  worketh  no  ill  to  his  neigh- 
bor. [Philippi  remarks  that  the  Greeks  usually 
write  iif/ci^KrOai  ■ti.vd  ti,  while  Paul  here  has:  rm 
TT/.tjfTiov  xaxov  ovx  kfiyd'^trai,. — R.]  The 
Apostle's  maxim,  in  the  form  of  an  oxymoron,  sub- 
stantiates what  has  already  been  said,  since  love  ap- 
pears as  the  great  positive  fulfilment  of  the  law,  be- 
cause it  worketh  no  ill  to  the  neighbor.  The  perfec- 
tion (defineil,  in  the  main,  negatively)  of  the  Deca- 
logue becomes  the  measure  of  the  perfection  (de- 
fined, in  the  main,  positively)  of  the  gospel. 

[Love  therefore  is  the  fulfilment  of  the 
law,  7t ).  rj  ()  01  fi  a  oi'v  v6}iov  tj  dydTTtj.  Ful- 
Jilmcnt,  ratlier  than  "  fulfilling,"  which  would  be  the 
proper  rendering  of  n'/.i]i>M(Ti,i;.  Meyer  :  "  In  the 
love  to  one's  neighbor,  that  takes  place  by  means 
of  which  the  law  is  fulfilled."  He  further  adds,  that, 
in  1  Cor.  xiii.  4-7,  Paul  gives  a  commentary  on 
love's  working  no  ill,  kc.  Comp.  Gal.  v.  14,  Lauge's 
Comtn.,  pp.  l;i5  tf. — R.] 

Ver.  11.  And  this,  knowing  the  time  [xal 
Tor  TO  f  t(S6r  fi;  Tov  x  ai(>  6  v .  Dr.  Lange  : 
*'  And  knowing  tliis,  we  know  also  the  time,"  &c. 
See  below. — R.j  According  to  Bengel,  xal  rovro 
must  be  supplemented  by  noinrt  ;  according  to 
Estius,  by  agcre  dehemus  (Tholuck,  noi(7)iifv).  Mey- 
er goes  back  to  the  precept  in  ver.  8  :  /oyrVfrt  /<//()*!' 
offi/.fTf.  Yet  not  only  is  tiiat  precept  quite  remote, 
but  there  is  also  here  a  change  from  the  second  per- 
son to  the  first.  If  we  look  at  the  actual  connec- 
tion, tl'.e  Apostle  cannot  simply  say  :  Let  us  do  that 
— love  our  ncighl)or  as  ourselves.  The  more  direct 
thought  is  :  Let  us  discharge  all  our  obligations,  for 
wc  know  that  the  erul  is  nigh.  But  the  Apostle 
does  not  say  :  "  the  end  is  nigh,"  but,  "  the  day  of 
salvation  is  nigh."  Therefore  it  is  advisable  to  ac- 
cept an  ellipsis;  xal  toPto  ttdnrn;  rhv  xat.(>6v  o'l- 
Aaiiiv,  or,  fiAnrn,  iainv.  Because  we  know  that 
love,  which  fulfils  the  law,  is  present,  we  know  the 
importance  of  the  thne,  namely,  that  the  time  of 
perfect  salvation  is  nigh.  To  what  extent?  Be- 
•ause,  by  love,  the  works  of  night  must  vanish — 


adultery,  murder,  theft,  covetousness ;  therefore  the 
day  of  the  complete  righteousness  of  life  must 
dawn.  If  this  combination  be  deemed  doubtful, 
Meyer's  construction  should  then  be  preferred. 

[Dr.  Lange's  view  is  indeed  doubtful.  Or  the 
whole,  it  seems  unnecessary  to  supply  any  thing,  but 
rather  (with  Hodge,  Meyer,  Pliihppi,  and  many  otli- 
ers)  to  take  xai  as  =  et  quidcw,  and  indfed,  liie 
rather,  and  to  refer  to? to  to  what  precedes — i.  e., 
to  the  injunction  of  ver.  8,  as  afterwards  expand(!d. 
This  is  classical  usage,  though  Tarra  is  more  com- 
mon in  such  cases  than  TorTo.  The  demonstrative 
pronoun  is  thus  used  "  to  mark  the  importance  of 
the  connection  between  two  circumstances  for  the 
case  in  hand  "  (Hodge).  Luther  and  Glilckler  con- 
fuse the  construction,  by  joining  tot  to  with  ft- 
rfoTfi,-.  The  participle  is  not  =  considering  {Gvo. 
tius,  Hodge,  and  others),  but  is  causal,  since  ye 
know. — The  time.  This  is  explained  by  the  next 
clause,  that  it  is  high  time. — R.] 

To  aw^ake  out  of  sleep  [tj  vnvov  lyfQ- 
i>tjvat..  Dr.  Lange  paraphrases  thus  in  his  text: 
"  to  fully  arise,  or,  that  we  should  iniinediately  have 
arisen." — R.]  How  very  metaphorical  a  meaning 
the  Apostle  gives  to  the  word,  as  a  designation  of 
the  sleep  of  sin,  and  of  the  darkness  and  bondage 
of  the  judgment  of  conscience  by  the  blindness  of 
sin,  is  plain  from  his  subsequently  describing  just 
this  excited,  external  watching,  as  works  of  dark- 
ness. According  to  Reiche,  iiTrrot,-  is  an  image  of 
the  Christian's  condition  on  earth  ;  this  is  opposed 
by  Meyer,  p.  481.  [This  condition  of  sfeep  is  that 
of  Christians  also,  as  the  verse  obviously  implies, 
but  only  relatively  so  (Philippi,  De  Wette,  and  oth- 
ers).— R.] 

For  now  is  ovur  salvation  nearer  [vr  v 
yaQ  lyyt<Tf(iov  rpioiv  ij  (T  (•>  t  tj  (j  i  a\  Witl 
Luther,  and  most  commentators,  we  refer  the  i^umy 
to  //  <T(r)Tf/()«'a,  and  not,  with  Meyer,  to  tyyi- 
Tf(iov;  because  it  would  not  be  like  Paul  to  say 
that  salvation,  absolutely  considered,  is  already 
brought  nearer  to  us  believers.  ^(t)rij()ia  is  here 
the  completion  of  the  redemptive  salvation  of  the 
messianic  kingdom.  Therefore  Meyer  .says  :  "  Tliis 
kingdom  begins  by  means  of  the  seamd  coming  of 
Christy  which  Paul  regarded  near  (Usteri,  Lchr- 
hegriff,  p.  o55).  It  was  by  not  recognizing  this — 
although  Paid  brings  so  impressively  into  the  calcu- 
lation the  short  time  from  his  conversion  to  the 
period  of  his  writing — that  men  have  been  induced 
to  accept  very  preposterous  interpretations  ;  for  ex- 
ample, that  salvation  by  death  is  meant  (Photius, 
and  others),  or  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem,  which 
was  of  good  results  for  Christianity  (according  to  the 
earlier  commentators,  and  also  Michaelis),  or  the  in- 
ward (ToiT>;{ilrt,  the  spiritual  salvation  of  Christianity 
(Moms,  and  others)." 

According  to  Tholuck,  wc  can  only  grant  that 
Paul  indulged  the  hope  of  the  speedy  coming  of 
Christ — perhaps  even  to  live  to  see  it — but  yet  that 
he  had  no  fixed  pi'riod  of  time  for  it.  According  to 
Meyer's  rude  view,  we  would  have  to  imagine,  with 
the  El)ii)nitcs,  a  twdfold  aioTtniia  ;  one  of  which, 
the  spiritual  salvation,  has  already  happened  ;  the 
other,  the  second  coming  of  Christ,  is  near  at  hand, 
while  between  the  two  there  is  to  be  a  gloomy  |)0- 
riod.  But  this  is  not  the  view  of  the  Apostle. 
Rather,  the  first  or  principial  ff(.)r;/(»«rt,  which  ia 
already  the  saving  posscs.-<ion  of  Cinistians,  is  in  the 
course  of  permanent  and  full  development  toward 
the  final,  pcriphcricul  salvation.     There  is  a  dail^ 


CHAPTER  XIII.   Y-14. 


401 


progress  from  ffontj^lcc  to  ffoiTfjQta.  And,  particu- 
larly with  Paul,  a  new  era  of  the  development  of 
ffoiTtjoia  will  come,  after  Christianity  shall  have 
spread  from  Rome  tliroughout  the  whole  West, 
which,  according  to  the  purpose  of  the  Epistle,  is 
near  at  hand  ;  and,  with  this  Christianization  of  the 
Roman  world,  the  completed  aontj^ia  will  be 
brought  nearer.  These  great,  vital,  and  dynamic 
views  of  the  Apostle  are  very  different  from  the 
modern  assumptions  of  the  Parousia  imputed  to 
him.  Tholuck  :  "  The  period  from  the  appearance 
of  the  regrmtn  glorice^  when  compared  with  its  glory, 
is  described  as  a  nocturnal  period.  Spiritual  sleep 
will  be  shaken  off  when  the  ref/nuni  gratice  comes  to 
men  (Col.  i.  12,  13);  and  how  nmch  more  will  this 
be  the  fact  when  the  rcgmtni  glories  approaches  !  " 

[Stuart,  Hodge,  Webster  and  Wilkinsoia,  and  a 
large  class  of  commentators,  understand  by  amrtj- 
^la,  the  consummation  of  salvation  in  eternity — 
deliverance  from  the  present  evil  world.  Dr.  Hodge 
objects  at  some  length  to  tlie  reference  to  the  second 
coming  of  Christ.  On  the  other  hand,  most  modern 
German  commentators  defend  this  reference.  01s- 
hausen,  De  Wette,  Philippi,  Meyer,  and  others,  think 
no  other  view  in  the  least  degree  tenable  ;  and  Dr. 
Lange,  while  careful  to  guard  against  extreme  theo- 
ries on  this  point,  denies  the  reference  to  eternal 
blessedness,  and  admits  that  the  Parousia  is  intend- 
ed. This  opinion  gains  ground  among  Anglo-Saxon 
esegotes.  ■  The  main  objection  to  it  is  thus  met  by 
Dean  Alford  :  "  Without  denying  the  legitimacy  of 
an  individual  application  of  this  truth,  and  tlie  im- 
portance of  its  consideration  for  all  Christians  of  all 
ages,  a  fair  exegesis  of  this  passage  can  hardly  fail 
to  recognize  the  foct  that  the  Apostle,  here  as  well 
as  elsewhere  (1  Thess.  iv.  17 ;  1  Cor.  xv.  51),  speaks 
of  the  coming  of  the  Lord  as  rapidlt/  approaching." 
As  to  this  being  inconsistent  with  inspiration,  he 
refers  to  Mark  xiii.  32 :  "  Of  that  day  and  hour 
knoweth  no  man,"  &c.  "  Tlie  fact  that  the  nearness 
or  distance  of  that  day  was  unhiown  to  the  Apostles, 
in  no  way  affects  the  prophetic  announcements  of 
God's  Spirit  by  them,  concerning  its  preceding  and 
accompanying  circumstances.  The  ^  day  and  hour '' 
formed  no  part  of  their  inspiration  ;  the  details  of 
the  event  did.  And  this  distinction  has  singularly 
and  providentially  turned  out  to  the  edification  of  all 
SHbsequent  ages.  While  the  prophetic  declarations 
of  the  events  of  that  time  remain  to  instruct  us,  the 
eager  expectation  of  the  time,  which  they  expressed 
in  their  day,  has  also  remained,  a  token  of  the  true 
fraine  of  mind  in  which  each  succeeding  age  (and 
each  succeeding  age  d  fortiori)  should  contemplate 
the  ever-approaching  coming  of  the  Lord.  On  the 
certainty  of  the  event,  our  faith  is  grounded  ;  by  the 
uncertainty  of  the  time,  our  hope  is  stimulated  and 
our  watchfulness  aroused."  This  ignorance  of  the 
time  of  the  coming  of  Christ  Dr.  Hodge  himself 
brings  forward,  yet  not  to  account  for  the  expecta- 
tion so  much  as  to  deny  it.  It  is  difficult  for  an  un- 
lettered believer  to  read  the  New  Testament  and  not 
find  tliis  expectation,  while  even  the  most  learned 
commentators  now  find  it. — R.] 

Than  when  we  believed.  (Calvin,  and  oth- 
ers), Luther  says  incorrectly :  Tlian  when  we  believed 
it.  [The  aorist  refers  to  the  definite  time,  when  we 
Jir.st  believed.     So  1  Cor.  iii.  5  ;  xv.  2,  &c. — R.] 

Ver.  12.  The  night  is  far  ppent,  &c.  [17  vvi 
TtQoi/.Q^^'fv ,  x.T./.]  According  to  Meyer,  the 
night  would  be  the  time  before  the  second  coming 
of  Clirist ;  and  the  near  day,  on  the  other  hand,  the 


second  coming  itself.  Certainly  we  do  not  read 
"  The  night  is  gone,  but  the  day  is  come."  But  i 
does  not  follow  from  this  that  Paul  supposed  tha* 
the  day  would  not  break  until  the  second  coming 
The  day  will  break  a  hundred  times,  in  ever  greatei 
potencies,  between  the  first  and  the  second  comiB* 
of  Christ.  Consequently,  a  chronological  antithesia 
is  not  here  in  question.  The  night  is  the  spiritual 
condition  of  heathen  Rome ;  tlie  breaking  day  ia 
the  future  of  Christian  Rome.  'H  vhi  n(joe- 
xoH'fv.  [The  sense  of  the  passage  in  itself  consid- 
ered is  perfectly  plain  ;  but  the  precise  reference  ia 
determined  by  the  view  taken  of  ver.  11.  Admit- 
ting such  recurring  daybreaks  as  Dr.  Lange  suggests, 
they  are  still  only  preludes  to  "  that  day "  when 
there  shall  be  "  no  night." — R.] 

Let  us  therefore  cast  oflf  the  w^orks  o£ 
darkness  [ ec  ;t o  fl  oi /<  ?  0  a  ovv  r  a  eq  ya  rov 
(Txorov^.  The  verb  should  be  rendered  :  put  off, 
if  the  figure  of  clothing  be  admitted  ;  put  away,  if 
Dr.  Lange's  view  be  accepted. — R.]  Meyer :  "  As 
one  lays  off  his  clothing.  This  view  (against 
Fritzsche)  corresponds  to  the  correlative  tr()i<ni')- 
ftfOa  ;  comp.  on  Eph.  iv.  22."  [So  De  Wette,  Phi- 
lippi,  Harless,  Hodge,  Alford,  Webster  and  Wilkin- 
son, Jowett,  and  most. — R.]  But  the  works  of 
darkness  are  not  the  same  as  the  clothing  of  night. 
There  is  a  dift'erence  between  nocturnal  revels  and 
nocturnal  clothing.  The  moral  side  of  the  heathen, 
and  especially  the  Roman,  night-life,  moves  before 
the  Apostle,  and  he  makes  it  designate  evil  works 
in  moral  darkness  in  general.  The  Roman  of  that 
time,  giving  himself  up  to  dissolute  nocturnal  feasts 
and  works  of  debauchery,  but,  on  the  return  of  day, 
assuming  the  favorite  Roman  costume  of  arms — a 
very  perceptible  contrast  to  these  Roman  Christians 
— is  presented  to  them  by  the  Apostle  as  a  picture 
of  a  moral  and  religious  contrast. 

And  let  us  put  on  the  armour  of  light  [iv- 
(i  V  (T  (<)  ,u  f  &  a  <)  £  Tc'c  6  7T  ?.  a  rev  qioroc.  See 
Textual  Note  '].  Not  instruments  (Morns),  clothes 
(Beza,  and  others),  .«hining  arms  (Giotius),  but  the 
armor  which  the  Roman  wears  by  day,  as  a  figure 
of  the  spiritual  means  of  conflict,  and  of  the  con- 
flicts which  belong  to  the  light ;  they  are  presented 
by  it,  and  wielded  in  its  element  (see  Eph.  vi,  IS). 
The  light  is  the  master  from  whom,  for  whom,  and 
with  whom,  this  armor  is.* — ^Er<)v;<T&ai:  Tholuck  : 
"  The  figure  of  most  intimate  union  with  Christ,  as 
the  garment  with  the  body ;  Gal.  iii.  27  ;  Eph.  iv. 
24  ;  Col.  iii.  10.  Also  in  the  classics,  see  Wet- 
stein." 

Ver.  13.  Let  us  walk  seemly,  as  in  the 
day  [oic;  iv  -fj/fiQa  fvaytjii6vo)i;  nf^ma' 
r  rjffo'//  fv].  As  if  that  day  had  already  come, 
when  it  will  be  a  characteristic  of  public  respecta- 
bility to  live  a  moral  Christian  life,  and  therefore  to 
live  decorously.  Ei(T/t]ii6vM<;  [referring  to  the 
moral  decorum  of  the  conduct  (Meyer). — R.],  1  Thess 
iv.  12  ;  1  Cor.  vii.  35  ;  xiv.  40,  because  that  day  ia 
already  breaking. 

Not  in  rioting,  &c.  [Webster  and  Wilkinson  : 
"Three  classes  of  sins  are  specified,  to  each  of 
which  two  words  are  appropriated,  viz.,  intemper- 
ance, impurity,  discord :  the  first,  public  or  social 
vice  ;  the  second,  private  and  secret  vice ;  the  third, 

*  [Dr.  Hodge  :  "Those  virtues  and  good  deeds  which 
men  are  not  ashamed  of,  because  they  will  bear  to  be  seen." 
Too  one-sidcd  a  conception  of  the  figure.  Alford :  "  Th« 
arms  helovging  to  a  nolilier  of  Ughl.''''  The  Christian's  cloth 
ing  as  a  child  of  the  day  is  :  armor! — E.] 


408 


THE   EPISTLE    OF   PAUL   TO    THE   ROM.Os'S. 


ecclesiastieo-political  vice,  the  vice  infecting  commu- 
nities even  O'liristian."  To  this  must  be  added 
Meyer's  remark,  that  the  tiiree  members  stand  in 
the  internal  relation  of  cause  and  ettect.  Comp. 
Gal.  V.  lU-21  (Lange's  C<>mm.,  \>.  138),  where  five 
of  tlie  six  words  are  found. — K.] — liimioi.ii,  carous- 
als* Meyer  tranilates,  "  with  nocturnal  riotings," 
by  regarding  the  following  dative  as  the  dative  of 
manner.  This  will  not  apply  well  to  j:f<>i,7TciTnv. 
[Philippi  takes  the  datives  ius  local,  which  seems 
the  simplest  view.  Fritzsche,  dat.  conitnodi. — R.]  — 
Chambering,  x  o  /  t  a  t  y  [con(fressit>us  venereis'], 
feasts  of  del)auchery,  reii  lezvotis,  chambers  and 
houses  of  debauchery,  works  of  debauchery  itself. — 
[Wantonness,  aa t/.yfi(it.i;.  On  this  word,  see 
Tittniann,  Si/n.,  p.  15L  The  plural  shows  that  the 
various  manifestations  of  wantonness  are  referred 
to. — K.] — Envying,  u///w,  jealonsi/.  The  re- 
verse side  of  nocturnal  lusts  and  pleasures  is  noc- 
turnal quarrels,  especially  matters  of  jealousy,  and 
the  forms  still  prevailing  among  the  works  of  dark- 
ness in  our  day,  es[)ecially  in  Italy  and  Si)ain. 

Ver.  14.  But  put  ye  on  the  Lord  Jesus 
Christ.  'Evi)r!iT,'>ai,,  Gal.  iii.  27 ;  Eph.  iv.  24 ; 
Col.  iii.  10.  [Hodge  :  "  To  be  intimately  united  to 
Him,  80  that  He,  and  not  we,  mav  appear."  So  De 
Wette,  Philippi,  &c.— R.]  Tholuck  :  "  Christ  was 
already  put  on  at  baptism,  Gal.  iii.  27  ;  but  this 
ivi)i'KTOai,  jnst  as  the  being  light,  must  also  be  con- 
tinually renewed.  Besides,  we  nuist  take  into  con- 
sideration the  aorist  form  :  The  putting  on  as  a  gar- 
ment denotes  the  entrance  of  the  most  intimate 
communion."  Meyer  :  "  Even  in  the  classics,  ivdi'i- 
ktOcu  tu'«  denotes  assuming  soniebod)''s  manner 
of  thought  and  action." 

And  make  not  provision  for  the  flesh,  &c. 
[  X  a i  T ^ i;  f! a()  /.oi;  n o  ovoiav  /i  rj  n o  i,  f  l a  I)  i 
tl<;  e  /r  n9- 1 '  /« t «  ? .  Dr.  Lange  :  l/nd  die  Pflege  des 
FhUches  macht  eurh  iiirht  zur  pflege  dcr  Liiste ; 
and  of  the  care  of  the  flesh  do  not  make  for  ynitr- 
gelres  a  cure  of  its  lush.  Tlie  order  of  the  Greek 
seems  to  favor  this,  but  this  implies  a  proper  care 
of  the  flesh  ;  so  that  this  can  only  be  a  tenable  view 
provided  ado's,  does  not  have  an  ethical  sense  here. 
On  this  point,  see  below. — R.]  Luther's  translation 
is  doubly  incorrect :  Take  c  ire  of  the.  bodi/,  yet  so 
that,  &c.  First,  the  sentence  is  not  divided  into  a 
positive  and  negative  precept ;  seccnd,  the  question 
is  concerning  the  (7d^>i,  and  not  concerning  the 
(TM/ia.  The  sentence  contains  the  expression  of  the 
moral  limitation  of  the  external  perception  of  a  st;lf- 
evident  duty.  The  duty  is  Ttiiuvoia  t/^s'  rrcti/xot; ; 
the  enjoined  limitation  is  the  /< //  tic  imf)-.  Ac- 
cording to  Fritzsche,  adol  can  only  be  understood 
as  euro  libiduiosa,  and  therefore  the  whole  sentence 
is  a  prohibition.  Tholuck  and  Meyer,  on  the  other 
hand,  observe  that  the  ndi^/l,  \niderstood  in  this 
sense  as  sensual  lust,  should  even  be  crucified  ;  Gal. 
V.  24.  Meyer  describes  the  adn'i,  as  it  is  here  un- 
derstood, as  the  lower  animal  part  of  man,  the  foun- 
tain and  seat  of  sensual  and  sinful  desires,  in  an- 
tithesis to  the  nvniift.  His  calling  rsdot  the  material 
of  the  iTniiin,  is  better.  [Philippi  :  "  (Tf<(<i  has  here 
a  purely  physiological  sense." — K.]  Tholuck  cites 
(jdlen's  medical  usus  loquendi  to  prove  that  the 
TTiiovoia  must  be  understood  aa  care  seusu  bono  ; 
but  Eph.  v.  29  and  1  Cor.  xii.  23  arc  of  special  ap- 


*  [Sucl'.  M  the  fcnstH  of  Bncchus,  and  jiIbo  "the  pommon 
boi-stcrons  carousing  of  intompcrate  young  men"  (Hodge). 


plication  here.  The  distinction  between  what  ii 
vicious  in  tlie  true  care  of  the  flesh,  as  is  shown 
particularly  in  respectable  clothing — to  which  the 
antithesis,  "  put  ye  on  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ,"  .spe- 
cially refers — is  not  merely  expressed  by  the  /lij  ti 
i/iiOi'/itai;:  not  so  that  the  ini.Oriilut,  arise  from 
it;  but  also  by  the  middle:  noutnOf,  make  for 
yourselves.,  in  which  reference  is  made  to  tlie  subjec- 
tive sell-deception,  the  7T(idin,i;  roT'  ffoi/iaroi;  in  the 
gratification  of  sensuous  necessities. 

[The  view  given  above  is,  in  the  main,  that  of 
De  Wette,  Philippi,  and  niany  others.  It  opposes 
Luther's  limitation  of  the  negative  to  n'l;  i7Ti,0i'- 
fitui;,  but  does  not  take  the  whole  passage  as  pro- 
hibitory. Hodge,  Stuart,  Alfurd,  and  others,  ren- 
der (as  in  E.  V.) :  Make  no  provision  (whatever)  for 
the  flesh  (the  carnal  nature,  in  the  ethical  sense)  to 
fulfil  its  lusts  (so  as  to  fulfil  iheni,  and  also,  because 
such  provision  would  fulfil  them  ;  the  result  imd 
object  blended  in  the  thought).  The  objections  to 
this  view  are,  that  7r(iuroia  is  used  generally  in  a 
good  sense  ;  that  the  prohibition  is  too  mild,  if  flesh 
were  used  in  the  ethical  sense,  &c.  But  the  ethical 
sen.se  has  been  the  prevalent  one  in  the  Epistle. 
The  grammatical  difticulty  is  very  slight,  since  «»/ 
has  suffered  a  slight  trajection.  Besides,  the  order 
seems  to  have  been  cho.-eu  to  give  prominence  and 
emphasis  to  aa(j/.6i; ;  such  emphasis  is  altogether 
unnecessary,  unless  it  has  its  ethical  force.  Its 
prominent  position  brings  it  into  obvious  contrast 
with  'Jti(Torv  A'(<i.(tt6)' ;  this  contrast  of  itself  seems 
to  determine  the  meaning.  These  latter  considera- 
tions seem  to  have  escaped  the  German  commenta- 
tors. Comp.  Alford  also,  who  claims  that  the  order 
would  have  been  difl'erent  had  Paul  designed  to  con- 
vey the  meaning  defended  by  Meyer,  kc. — R.] 


DOCTRINAL  AND  ETHICAL. 

1.  The  debt  of  love  denotes  the  duty  of  love  for 
our  neighbor,  as,  according  to  the  law,  it  is  a  re- 
quirement of  infinite  force  ;  and,  according  to  the 
believer's  new  principle  of  life,  it  is  an  infinitely  im- 
pulsive power.  The  unity  of  this  debt  divides  itself 
into  the  difterently  formed  obligations  of  various 
duties  to  our  neighbor. 

2.  Love  is  the  fulfilment  of  the  law  :  (1.)  So  far 
as  the  whole  law  is  only  an  outline  of  love  to  be 
filled  up.  (2.)  So  far  as  it  precludes  every  trans- 
gression of  the  law.  (3.)  On  the  other  hand,  every 
comniimdment  is  realized  as  a  vital  principle  in  the 
new  life.  It  is  as  love  that  God  has  given  the  law, 
as  our  call  to  our  destination.  It  is  as  love  that 
Christ  has  fulfilled  the  law  for  our  reconciliation. 
It  is  as  love  that  the  law  of  the  Spirit  lives  in  our 
faith,  and,  l)y  the  fellowship  of  Christ,  supplies  the 
defects  of  our  deeds,  so  that,  in  the  imitation  of 
Christ,  that  fellow.ship  may  ever  be  elevated  higher 
and  higher. 

3.  The  new  era  of  love,  a  dayspring  of  the  new 
era  of  light,  with  which  the  completion  of  salvation 
approaches. 

4.  If  we  would  define  more  specifically  the  reliu 
tion  of  Paul,  as  well  as  of  all  the  apostles,  to  the 
second  coming  of  Christ,  we  must  distinguish  :  (1.) 
Between  the  rvli(/u>us  measure  [Zdtmass,  measure 
of  time]  of  (Jod's  kingdom,  and  the  chronological 
measure  of  the  world  ;  (2.)  Between  the  apostolical 
prospect  of  a  future  of  glory  which  will  be  unfolded 
every  day  in  new  morning  periods,  and  the  meagre- 


CHAPTER  Xin.  7-14. 


40i 


•ess  of  the  Ebionitic  idea,  which  has  only  a  marvel- 
lous meteor  oi'  the  Farousia,  on  the  one  hand,  far 
behind  it,  and,  on  the  other,  far  before  it,  while  it 
finds  itself  placed  in  a  troublous  period  and  an  ordi- 
nary course  of  the  world.  The  present  age  in  prin- 
ciple ceased  at  tlie  death  and  ret^urrection  of  dirist, 
and  the  future  age  is  already  present  in  the  heart  of 
the  Church  and  in  the  world's  great  crisis  of  devel- 
opment, tliough  everywliere  still  externally  surround- 
ed by  the  nociurnal  shades  of  the  old  age.  And  be- 
cause it  has  been  long  present  in  principle,  and  in 
power  brealvs  forth  every  day  more  gloriously,  our 
full  salvation  is  brought  continually  nearer,  particu- 
larly in  all  the  great  epochs  of  the  extensive  and  in- 
tensive enlargement  of  God's  kingdom — all  of  which 
are  presages  of  the  Paroviia,  which  is  infinitely 
uear  to  religious  anticipation,  and  yet,  chronological- 
ly, is  indeterminably  remote.  All  that  must  still 
precede  that  external  Faroxsia,  Paul  indicates  in 
Rom.  xi.  and  2  Thess.  ii.,  and  John  elaborately  de- 
scribes in  figures  in  the  Book  of  Revelation. 

5.  The  very  fact  that  wickedness  seeks  the  veil 
of  night,  is  a  witness  for  God's  word  ;  and  as  night 
is  an  image  of  spiritual  darkness,  and  day  is  an 
image  of  spiritual  and  heavenly  light,  so  are  the 
works  of  night — sleep,  on  the  one  hand,  and  sinful 
nocturnal  deeds  on  the  other — images  of  different 
forms  of  spiritual  corruption,  the  gross  sins,  which, 
indeed,  are  not  only  figures,  but  also  phenomena,  of 
spiritual  corruptions.  On  the  other  hand,  the  put- 
ting on  of  the  day,  the  armor  of  the  day,  have  their 
spiritual  meaning.  The  armor  was  a  very  striking 
figure  to  the  Romans  in  particular. 

6.  The  two  great  antitheses  of  nocturnal  life : 
Lust  and  strife,  pleasure  and  murder. 

7.  With  the  salvation  of  Christianity  to  the  be- 
liever there  has  also  broken  for  humanity  the  morn- 
ing of  morality,  of  good  manners,  and  of  true  deco- 
rum. 

8.  The  13th  verse  is  an  imperishable  reminder  of 
Augustine's  conversion  (see  Conf.  viii.  12,  28). 


HOMILETICAL  AND   PRACTICAl. 

Ver.  7.  To  every  one  his  due  !  The  Christian's 
royal  motto :  1.  In  reference  to  his  relation  to  the 
civil  authority ;  2.  In  his  intercourse  with  every 
man. 

Heubner  :  The  respect  which  we,  as  Christians, 
owe  to  the  civil  authorities,  is  more  than  the  exter- 
nal fulfilment  of  duty. 

Vers.  8-10.  Perseverance  in  love.  It  is  :  1.  In 
respect  to  our  neighbor  a  debt,  which  never  can  be 
paid  ;  2.  In  respect  to  the  law,  it  is  its  fulfilment 
(vers.  8-10). — The  debt  of  love  toward  our  neigh- 
bor. 1.  It  is  a  very  great  debt ;  a.  because  there 
are  so  many  creditors ;  b.  because  their  demands 
constitute  a  very  important  total ;  c.  because  it  can 
never  be  completely  cancelled.  2.  But  it  is  never- 
theless a  fiweet  debt ;  a.  because  it  is  not  thought- 
lessly paid ;  b.  because  it  harmonizes  with  God's 
commandment ;  c.  because  even  the  attempt  to  dis- 
charge it  makes  the  heart  very  happy  (vers.  8-10). 
— The  debt  of  love  is  the  only  debt  of  the  Christian 
toward  his  neighbor  which  is  not  only  permissible, 
Dut  even  commanded  (ver.  8). — The  commandment 
ef  love  toward  our  neighbor  as  the  substance  of  all 
the  commandments  of  the  second  table  (ver.  9). — 
Why  does  love  work  no  ill  to  the  neiglibor?  1. 
Because  it  proceeds  from  the  root  of  God's  eternal 


love  for  men ;  2.  Because  it  will  serve  God  in  the 
neighbor  (ver.  10). — Love  the  fulfilment  of  the  law. 
1.  The  truth  of  this  apostolic  sentiment ;  2.  The  im 
portance  of  it  (ver.  10). 

Stakke  :  The  heart  is  known  by  its  behavior 
just  as  the  sun  is  by  its  beams  (ver.  9). — Christ's 
garden  not  only  produces  no  injurious  trees,  but 
even  no  useless  ones  (ver.  10). — Eedikger  :  The 
eternal  debt  of  love  !  Be  not  weary,  brethren  !  He 
who  loves,  will  be  loved  in  return ;  though  it  be  not 
by  the  thankless  world,  it  will  be  by  God  (ver.  8). — 
Let  no  one  excuse  himself  on  the  ground  of  igno- 
rance ;  let  no  one  say,  "  Who  would  know  the  many 
commandments  and  prohibitions  ?  "  The  whole  law 
is  contained  in  the  one  word  love ;  Micah  vi.  8 
(ver.  9). 

Spenkr  :  There  is  one  debt  which  we  all  owe — 
to  love  one  another ;  that  is  such  a  debt,  that,  if  we 
should  daily  count  it  up,  it  would  always  remain  just 
as  great  as  it  had  been  (ver.  8). — Though  a  thing 
may  sometimes  appear  to  be  forbidden,  if  love  re- 
quires it,  it  is  not  forbidden,  but  rather  commanded ; 
on  the  other  hand,  sometimes  something  may  appear 
to  be  commanded,  but  if  it  is  in  conflict  with  love,  it 
is  not  commanded  (ver.  10). 

Gerlach  :  The  debt  of  love  is  never  wholly  pay- 
able ;  its  fulfilment  increases  the  demands  made 
upon  it,  for  it  makes  love  warmer  (ver.  8). 

Lisco  :  The  believer's  holy  love  fulfils  its  obliga- 
tions even  toward  every  body  without  exception 
(vers.  8-^10).  —  The  one  requirement  of  love  is 
divided  into  two  chief  commandments,  in  Matt.  xxii. 
37-40. — Hkubxer  :  The  magnitude  of  the  command- 
ment of  love  (vers.  8-10). — The  harmonizing  of  the 
Divine  should  and  the  human  Kould  can  only  take 
place  by  love  ;  by  it,  compulsion  is  transformed  into 
freedom  (ver.  9). — Every  wicked  thing  is  invariably 
an  unkindness  (ver.  10). 

Besser  :  He  who  shows  love  to  another  in  order 
to  get  clear  of  him,  has  not  love  (ver.  8). 

Schweizer  :  Love,  the  fulfilment  of  the  law,  or, 
love  performs  what  the  law  cannot  obtain.  The  law 
does  not  deliver  us  :  1.  Because  it  is  a  multiplicity 
of  commandments  and  prohibitions,  which  perplex 
us  ;  2.  Because  it  pronounces  a  curse  on  every  one 
who  transgresses  a  single  point ;  3.  Because  it  ia 
presented  to  us  as  an  external  power  issuing  its  com- 
mands to  us  ;  4.  Because  it  takes  refuge  in  threats 
and  promises.  Christian  love  is  the  contrary  of  all 
this. 

Yers.  8-10.  The  Pericope /o7* ///e  Fourth  Sun- 
day after  Epiphany. — Thtm  :  The  royal  law  of  love 
toward  our  neighbor :  1.  Its  great  necessity  ;  2.  Its 
inward  nature  ;  3.  Its  indescribable  blessing. — Har- 
less  :  Love  is  the  fulfilment  of  the  law.    1.  The  law, 

a.  which  makes  love  for  us  an  indebtedness  ;  b.  and 
therefore  proves  it  to  be  our  debt.  2.  Love,  a. 
which  knows  no  indebtedness  except  to  love  ;  b.  and 
therefore  does  not  come  from  the  law,  but  from 
faith. — Heubner  :  The  simplicity  of  Christian  vir- 
tue :  1.  It  proceeds  from  one  spirit  of  humility  and 
love  ;  2.  All  its  effects  harmonize  in  one — the  mani- 
festation of  love. 

Vers.  11-14.  The  decided  breach  of  believing 
Christians  with  darkness  :  1.  Wherefore  should  we 
break  ofi"  from  it  ?    «.  because  it  is  time  to  do  it ; 

b.  because  it  is  high  time.  2.  In  what  should  this 
breach  consist  ?  a.  in  laying  off  the  works  of  dark- 
ness ;  o.  gross,  sensual  sins ;  (i.  subtle,  inward  sins ; 
b.  in  putting  on  the  armor  of  light ;  a.  in  walking 
honestly  as  in  the  day ;   /9.  in  putting  on  tlie  Lord 


410 


THE   EPISTLE   OF   PAUL   TO   THE   ROMANS. 


Jesus  Christ  (or,  a.  civil  righteousness ;  /5.  rights 
eousincss  of  fuitli). 

LuTHEH  :  Do  not  torture  the  body  excessively  by 
the  intoleniMc  holiness  of  watching,  fasting,  and 
freezing,  as  the  hypocrites  do  (ver.  14). 

Stakkk  :  I  mii.st  sliow  outwardly  what  I  am  in- 
wardly. Those  who  are  inwardly  good,  must  also 
have  a  good  form  and  color  (ver.  i;{). — (^uks.nkl  : 
Time  passes  by,  and  eternity  presses  on  (ver.  11). — 
MiLLKK  :  There  is  many  a  thing  and  idea  comjjrised 
in  putting  on  Christ ;  our  Christianity  is  not  a  stag- 
nant existence,  but  a  growth  ;  it  is  no  leap,  but  a 
walk  (ver.  12). — The  armor  of  li,i;ht  well  becomes  a 
Christian.  We  nmst  either  clothe  ourselves  with 
darkness  or  with  light  (ver.  12). 

Speskr:  Let  us  put  on  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ. 
But  we  put  Uim  on  once  by  the  belief  that  we  re- 
ceive, as  our  possession.  His  righteousness  and  merit, 
which  He  has  impartcti  to  us,  and  that  we  shall  ap- 
pear in  them  alone  before  God's  throne.  We  after- 
ward put  Him  on  also  by  godly  imitation,  in  walk- 
ing as  Christ  has  walked  (ver.  14). 

Lisco  :  The  one  care  for  the  body,  in  bestowing 
upon  it  what  is  necessary,  is  natural ;  the  other  is 
sinful,  when  the  lusts  and  desires  of  the  body  are 
provided  for  (ver.  14). 

Hecbner  :  Christian  watchfulness  (vers.  11-11). 
Christian  knowledge  of  the  time.  The  time  of  Chris- 
tianity is  a  time  of  salvation  (ver.  11). — There  are 
many  awakening  voices  :  Public  serviees — preachers 
— every  stroke  of  the  bell — tiie  Bible  (ver.  11). — 
The  Christian  is  not  a  night-walker,  a  nocturnal  riot- 
er, but  a  walker  by  day  (ver.  13). — Temperance, 
chastity,  love — three  great  prime  virtues  (ver.  13). — 
Sciiweizer:  Blissful  joy  at  the  Reformation  ixs  a 
rising  light  (Sermon  on  the  Anniversary  Day  of  the 
Reformation). 

Vers.  11-14.  Tbie  Pericope  for  the  First  /Sun- 
day  of  AdMiit. — Hecbner:  The  call  of  Christianity 
is  a  call  to  awake  from  spiritual  sleep. — The  appeal 
of  Christian  watchmen  :  1.  It  is  day ;  the  sun  is 
risen  !  2.  Awake,  arise  !  3.  Be  purified  to  new  life  ! 
4.  Put  on  Christ ! — Nagki,  ;  The  awakening  voice 
with  which  the  Church  appeals  to  us  on  its  holy- 
days,  tells  us:  1.  What  time  it  is;  2.  What  it  is 
high   time   to  do. — K.vpkf:    The  advent  message: 

1.  As  a  message  of  salvation  and  joy  ;  2.  As  a  mes- 
sage for  penitence  and  renewal. — Florey  :  The  ad- 
vent season  is  a  holy  morning-time  of  the  heart  and 
life. — Hauless  :  The  festal  ornament  well-ploasing 
to  Christ :  1.  A  watchful  eye,  to  see  the  niglit  that 
covers  the  earth  ;  2.  An  enlightened  eye,  to  behold 
the  day  whieh  has  come  ;  3.  A  willing  heart,  to  do 
what  the  day  requires. — Petri  :  What  time  is  it  for 
us?  1.  To  arise  from  sleep;  2.  To  put  on  the 
armor  of  light. — Rautesukkg  :  What  belongs  to 
rising  from  .sleep  ?     1.   To  open   the  eyes  aright ; 

2.  To  put  on  the  right  garment ;  3.  To  take  up  the 
right  armor. — Tiiym  :  Paul's  vigorous  advent  preach- 
ing :  1.  On  the  advent  time ;  2.  On  the  advent 
duties  ;    3.  On  the  advent  blessing. 

[Fakindon,  on  ver.  14  :  Look  into  Christ's  ward- 
robe, and  you  will  find  no  torn  or  ragged  apparel. 
Christ  had  the  robe  of  rigliteousness,  the  garment 
of  innocency,  the  spotless  coat  of  tem|)erance  and 
ch.'i'tity,  ami  with  these  He  went  about  doing  good. 
Out  of  this  wardrobe  we  must  n)ake  up  our  wedding 
garment.  We  must  be  conf()rmal)le  to  Christ.  In 
the  ritlr  of  our  obedience,  we  must  not  wear  a  gar- 
noent  of  our  own  fancying,  an  irregular,  an  uiiprc- 
ecribed  devotion  ;  in  the  vnd:<  of  it,  we  must  glorify 


God  on  the  earth  ;  and  in  the  parts  of  it,  we  must 
not  have  a  parcel-garment.  This  garment  must  tit 
every  part,  and  be  universal. 

[Lkighto.v  :  He  that  truly  loves  his  neighbor  as 
him.>;elf,  will  be  a:5  loth  to  wrong  him  as  to  wrong 
himself,  either  in  tliat  honor  and  respect  that  is  due 
to  him,  or  in  his  life,  or  chastity,  or  goods,  or  good 
name,  or  to  lodge  so  mueh  as  an  unjust  desire  or 
thought,  because  that  is  the  beginning  and  concep- 
tioti  of  real  injury.  In  a  word,  the  great  disorder 
and  crookedness  of  the  corrupt  heart  of  man  con- 
sists in  self-love  ;  it  is  the  very  root  of  all  sin  both 
against  God  and  man ;  for  no  man  commits  iuiy 
olfence,  but  it  is  in  some  way  to  profit  or  please 
himself.  It  was  a  high  enormity  of  self  love  that 
brought  forth  the  very  first  sin  of  mankind.  That 
was  the  bait  whieh  took,  more  than  either  the  color 
or  the  taste  of  the  apple — that  it  was  desirable  for 
knowledge. 

[JoiiM  Howe,  on  ver.  10  :  Would  it  not  make  a 
happy  world,  if  we  all  so  loved  our  neighbor :  1. 
That  we  would  no  more  hurt  him  than  we  would 
ourselves ;  2.  Would  no  more  cheat  him  than  we 
would  ourselves ;  3.  No  more  oppress  and  crush 
him  than  we  would  ourselves. — What  a  spring  of 
mischief  and  misery  in  the  world  would  be  shut  up, 
dried  up,  if  that  proneness  to  hard,  harsh,  and  fre- 
quently unjust  thoughts,  were,  by  the  workings  of 
sucli  a  spirit  of  love,  erased  out  of  the  minds  and 
hearts  of  men  ! 

[BiRKiTT,  on  ver.  14:  This  implies:  1.  That 
the  soul  of  man,  since  the  fall,  is  in  a  naked  state, 
destitute  of  those  divine  graces  of  the  Holy  Spirit 
whieii  were  its  original  clothing  in  the  day  of  unde- 
filed  innocency ;  2.  That  Jesus  Christ  is  our  spirit- 
ual clothing ;  a.  in  His  righteousness,  to  panion 
and  justify  us.  He  is  our  clothing,  to  cover  the  guilt 
of  sin  out  of  God's  sight ;  h.  In  His  grace,  to  sanc- 
tify us,  by  which  He  cleanses  us  from  our  sins,  pol- 
lution, and  filthiness  ;  <•.  that  Jesus  Christ,  in  order 
to  our  spiritual  clothing,  must  be  put  on  by  faith  : 
an  unajjplied  Christ  justifies  none,  saves  none.  It 
was  not  sufficient,  under  the  law,  that  the  blood  of 
the  sacrifice  was  shed,  but  it  was  also  to  be  sprinkled, 
in  order  to  the  expiation  of  guilt. 

[DoDKRiPGE,  on  ver.  14  :  By  putting  on  the 
Lord  Jesus  :  1.  We  make  the  gospel  day  yet  liright- 
er  in  the  eyes  of  all  around  us;  2.  We  antieii)ute, 
while  here  in  this  world  of  comparative  daikness. 
the  lustre  with  whieh  we  hojie,  through  Christ's  in 
fluence  and  grace,  to  shine  forth  in  the  celestial 
kingdom  of  our  Father. 

[John  Wksf.kv  :  The  whole  law  under  whieh  we 
now  are,  is  fidfilled  by  love.  Faith,  working  or  ani- 
mated by  love,  is  all  that  (Jod  now  requires  of  man. 
He  has  substituted,  not  sincerity,  but  love,  for  an- 
gelic  perfection. — Very  excellent  things  are  spoken 
of  love — it  is  the  essence,  the  spirit,  tBe  life  of  all 
virtue.  It  is  not  oidy  the  first  and  great  command, 
but  nil  the  commands  in  one. 

[IticiiAKD  \Vatso.s",  Sermon  on  the  Armor  of 
Liilkt  (ver.  12):  I.  What  the  armor  of  light  is, 
with  whit-h  till!  A]iostle  exhorts  us  to  invest  our- 
selves. II.  Why  it  haa  the  ap[)ellation  of  "  armor 
of  light:"  (1.)  Because  of  its  heaveidy  origin; 
(2.)  Becau.se  it  is  oidy  found  where  Christianity  ex- 
ists and  exerts  its  proper  influence  ;  (3.)  Meeause  it 
corres[ionds  to  the  character  of  our  disjieii.sation, 
whieh  is  a  dispensation  of  light.  III.  The  motives 
which  should  induce  us,  in  compliance  with  the  ex- 
hortatiuM,    to  array   ourselves   with  it:     (1.)  From  a 


CHAPTER  XIV.   1-XV.   4.  41] 


•onsideration  of  the  degraded  state  of  man,  who  is 
not  invested  with  this  armor ;  (2.)  The  moral  eleva- 
tion which  this  armor  gives  to  every  one  who  is  in- 
vested with  it ;  (3.)  We  must  either  conquer  or  be 
conquered. 


[Hodge,  on  Ter.  14 :  All  Christian  duty  is  in 
eluded  in  putting  on  the  Lord  Jesus  ;  in  being  like 
Him,  having  that  similarity  of  temper  and  conduct 
which  results  from  being  intimately  united  to  Him 
by  the  Holy  Spirit.— J.  F.  H.] 


Fifth  Section. — The  true  practice  of  the  living  worship  of  God  in  the  ma7iapement  and  adjusttnent  of 
diffe^-ences  between  the  sonipulous  and  weak  {the  captives  under  the  laid),  and  the  strong  {those  inclined 
to  laxity  and  freedom).  The  Christian  universalism  of  social  life  (to  take  no  offence,  to  givr 
NO  offence). 

Chap.   XIV.   1-XV.  4. 

A.  Eeciprocal  regard,  forbearance,  and  recognition,  between  the  weak  and  the  strong ;  of  taking  offence  and  judging. 

Chap.  xiv.  1-13. 

B.  Of  giving  offence  and  despising.     Chap.  xiv.  13-xv.  1. 

O     Reciprocal  edification  by  self-denial,  after  the  example  of  Christ.    Chap.  sv.  2-4. 

A.    Chap.  xiv.  1-13. 

1  Him  that  is  weak  in  the  faith  receive  ye,  hut  not  to  doubtful  disputations 

2  [judgments  of  thoughts].'      For  one  believeth   that  he   may  eat  all   things : 

3  another,  [but  he]  who  is  weak,  eateth  herbs.  Let  not  him  that  eateth  [or,  the 
eater]  despise  him  that  eateth  not  [or,  the  abstainer]  ;  and  let  not  him  Avhich 
eateth  not  ['»•,  the  abstainer]  ^  judge  him  that  eateth  [or,  the  eater] :   for  God 

4  hath  received  him.  Who  art  thou  that  judgest  another  man's  servant  ?  to  his 
own  master  he  standeth  or  falleth ;   yea,  he  shall  be  holden  up  [made  to  stand]  ; 

5  for  God  [the  Lord]  '  is  able  *  to  make  him  stand.  One  man  esteemeth  one  day 
above  another :   another  esteemeth  every  day  alike.      Let  every  man  be  fully 

6  persuaded  in  his  own  mind.  He  that  [who]  regardeth  the  day,  regardeth  it 
unto  the  Lord ;  and  he  that  regardeth  not  the  day,  to  the  Lord  he  doth  not 
regard  it  [omit  this  clause].^  He  that  [And*  he  who]  eateth,  eateth  to  the  Lord, 
for  he  giveth  God  thanks  [thanks  unto  God]  ;   and  he  that  [who]  eateth  not,  to 

1  the  Lord  he  eateth  not,  and  giveth  God  thanks  [thanks  unto  God].     For  none 

8  of  us  liveth  to  himself,  and  no  man  [none]  dieth  to  liimself.  For  whether  we 
live,  we  live  unto  the  Lord ;   and  whether  we  die,  we  die '  unto  the  Lord : 

9  whethor  we  live  therefore,  or  die,  we  are  the  Lord's.  For  to  this  end  Christ 
both  died,  and  rose,  and  revived  [Christ  died  and  lived  agaiti],^  that  he  might 

10  be  Lord  both  of  the  dead  and  [the]  Hving.  But  why  dost  thou  judge  thy 
brother  ?  or  why  dost  thou  set  at  nought  thy  brother  ?   for  we  shall  all  stand 

11  before  the  judgment-seat  of  Christ  [God].*  For  it  is  written,"  As  I  live,  saith 
the  Lord,  every  knee  shall  bow  to  me,  and  every  tongue  shall  confess  [give 

12  praise]  to  God.     So  then  every  one  of  us  shall  give"  account  of  himself  to 

13  God.     Let  us  not  therefore  judge  one  another  any  more  : 

B.    Chap.  xiv.  13-xv.  1. 

13  But  judge  this  rather,  that  no  man  [not  to]  put  a  stumbling-block  or  an 

14  occasion  to  fall  [of  falling]  in  his  [a]  brother's  way.  I  know,  and  am  per- 
suaded by  [in]  the  Lord  Jesus,  that  there  is  nothing  [that  nothing  is]  unclean 
of  itself:''   but  to  him  that  esteemeth  any  thing  to  be  [accounteth  any  thing] 

16  unclean,  to  him  it  is  unclean.  But  [For]  "  if  thy  brother  be  grieved  with  thi/ 
meat  [if  because  of  thy  meat  thy  brother  is  gricAcd],  now  walkest  thou  not 
charitably  [thou  art  no  longer  walking  according  to  love].      Destroy  not  him 

16  with  thy  meat,  [Destroy  not  by  thy  meat  him]  for  whom  Christ  died.     Let  not 

17  then  your'*  good  be  evil  spoken  of:  For  the  kingdom  of  God  is  not  meat  and 
drink  [eating  and  drinking] ;   but  righteousness,  and  peace,  and  joy  in  the  Hoij 


412  THE   EPISTLE    OF   PAUL   TO   THE   ROMANS. 

18  Ghost.     For  he  that  [who]  in  these  thingS/ [herein] '*  serveth  Christ  is  accept" 

19  al)le  [well-pleasing]  to  God,  and  approved  of  men.  Let  us  therefore  follow" 
after  the  things  which  make  for  peace  [the  things  of  peace],  and  tilings  where- 
with one  may  edify  another  [tlie  things  which  pertain  to  mutual  edilicationj. 

20  For  meat  destroy  not  the  work  of  God.     All  things  indeed  are  pure  [clean]  ; 

21  but  it  is  evil  for  that  [the]  man  who  eateth  with  [through]  oflence.  It  is  good 
ncitiicr  [not]  to  eat  Hesli,  nor  to  drink  wine,  nor  [to  du]  any  thing  whereby 
[wherein]  thy  brother  stumbleth,  or  is  offended,"  or  is  made  \>>mii  made]  weak. 

22  Hast  thou  faith  ?  '*  have  ii  to  thyself  before  God.  Happy  [Blessed]  is  he  that 
condemneth   [who   judgeth]    not    himself  in   that   thing    ["mi7  thing     which   he 

23  allowelh.  And  [But]  he  that  [wlioj  doubteth  is  dannied  [condenmed]  if  he 
eat,  because  he  eateth  [it  is]  not  of  faith  :  for  [and]  whatsoever  is  not  of  faith 
is  sin. 

Chap.  XV.  1  We  then  [Now  we  who]  that  are  sti'ong  ought  to  bear  the  infiimitiea 
of  the  weak,  and  not  to  please  ourselves. 

C.    Chap.  XV.  2-4. 

2  Let"  every  one  of  us'"  please  his  neighbour  for  his  good  [with  a  view]  to 

3  edification.     For  even  Christ  pleased  not  himself;   but,  as  it  is  written,"  The 

4  reproaches  of  them  that  reproached  thee  fell  on  me.  For  whatsoever  things 
were  written  aforetime  were  written"  for  our  learning  [instruction],  that  we 
through  [the]  ^^  patience  and  [the]  comfort  of  the  Scriptures  might  have  [our] 
hope. 

TEXTUAL. 

•  Ver.  1.— [The  literal  rendering  is  given  above.    For  further  explanation?,  see  the  'Exeg.  Kolts. 

^  Vcr.  'i.—\Re.c.  (with  l)^.  L.,  Vulgate) :  koX  6  fiij.  N'.  A.  I?.  C.  1)'.  (mojst  modern  I'ditor.--)  :  o  Si  /x^.  Meyer  and 
Philippi,  however,  consider  the  lattiT  a  mci?hani(;i!  repetition  from  ver.  2. — The  cmondatioi;s  sugrgoeted  above  are  from 
Alford.  They  avoid  the  difftisencss  of  the  E.  V.,  but  would  scarcely  be  admissible  in  a  revision.  EiHei;  non-ealer,  would 
be  more  exact. 

•  Ver.  4. — [Rfc,  CD.  F.  L.,  Chrysostom,  Thcodoret,  read  ©eds.  N.  A.  B.  C,  early  versions:  icv'piof.  The 
latter  is  ado|)ted  by  Lachmanii,  Tiscliendoif,  Alford,  Trcuelles,  Laiige  ;  the  former  by  Philippi,  Meyer,  ne  Wette, 
Wordsworth.  The  ©tos  might  have  been  borrowed  from  ver.  2,  as  a  correction  ;  or  the  icupto?  m:iy  have  been  a  jr'oss 
derived  from  rip  i&iw  Kvpiu.    The  jjrobabilities  are  so  equally  balanced,  that  the  MS.  authority  must  decide  in  fiivor 

of    K Vpi Of . 

•  Ver.  4. — fK<c.,  (L.):  Swaroi  yap  e<rTi.v  ;  a  few  authorities  :  Swaro^  yap  ;  X.  A.  B.  C.  D.  F.  :  Swarel  yap.  The 
la.~t  is  accepted  by  Lachmann,  Tiachendorf,  Meyer,  Ue  Wette,  Alford,  Tregelles,  Lange.  Fritzsche,  Philippi :  Swarot 
yap. 

•  Ver.  6— [The  clau.SP  :  koI  o  fit)  (fipovuv  Ttjv  riixipav,  Kvpiu  ou  <}>povel,  is  omitted  in  N.  B.  C.  D.  F.,  Vulpate,  Coptic, 
by  Auguxtine,  Jerome,  Bu&nus,  I'ebigius,  Hilary,  Mill,  I.achmann,  Meyer,  Tregrlles  (in  tlie  veisions  of  the  Amer. 
Bible  ilnion  and  of  Five  Antj.  Cle^g^■men).  It  Ls  found  in  (/("C'.)  C.  L. ,  I'e.-^hito,  iu  Chrysostom  and  Theodoret ;  retained 
by  Kciclie,  iJo  Wette,  Fritzsche,  ptiiiippi,  Stuart,  Wordsworth,  Lanire.  Ti.-a-heiidorf  varies  in  his  different  editiiini>; 
Alford  brackets  it.  The  usual  expbmation  of  tbo-e  who  retain  it  is,  that  the  omi.>;.sion  was  occasioned  by  the  similar 
ending  (<f>poi/ei)  ill  both  clauses  having  misled  some  of  the  early  copyists.  To  this  Dr.  Lange  adds:  "  The  fear  that  the 
clause  might  be  used  to  support  a  di.--regard  of  Christian  holidays."  Alford  thinks  it  may  have  been  omitted  in  the 
interest  of  the  observance  of  the  Lord's  J)ay.  His  own  view  on  this  subject  probably  leads  him  to  bracket  the  clause. 
Tlie  uncial  authority  i.s  so  strongly  againct  it,  and  the  want  of  completencj's  in  the  antitheses  might  so  ea.«i!y  have  led  to 
its  insertion,  that  there  need  be  but  little  hesitation  in  omitting  it.     I)r.  Hodge  is  silent  respecting  the  whole  matter. 

•  Ver.  6.— [The  y?"-.  omits   xai    before  6  e<Tditov;  but  it  is  found  iu  all  the  MSS.,  versions  and  fathers. 

'  Ver.  8. — [The  trnn.scribcr8  have  made  confusion  with  t!ie  verb  anoBvriiTKutiev  in  this  verse.  The  bost-sus" 
fcxined  reading  i^ives  the  subjunctive  -<o/nei/  in  the  conditional  clauses,  and  the  indicative  -ofiei'  after  Tcp  Kvpi<f, 
So  Meyor,  Alford,  Tieiielles. 

''  Ver.  9. — [The  AVc.  reads  <tot  aniBavtv  xaX  avitTTT)  Kal  ave ^ r) <r t v .  Tliis  is  now  generally  rejected,  and 
airteavty  «oi  e^Tjo'ei',  accepted.  So  Lachmann,  Tischei  doif,  I'hilijipi,  Do  Wette,  Meyer,  Stuart,  AUmd,  Words- 
W'lith,  fregelles,  and  Lan'je.  Many  of  the  older  critics  also,  though  generally  retaining  (coi  I)elbre  aneOavtv.  The 
following'  note  from  Meyer  states  the  ca-e  quiti'  fully  au<l  fairly  :  "  The  origin  of  all  the  variations  am  be  readily  explained 
from  the  reading  aniOavt  Kal  i^Titrev  (Lacliinann  and  Tischeiidorf),  which  is,  all  things  cotisidered,  best  sustained,  and 
now  generally  accepted  as  original.  Somewhat  as  follows  :  to  «^T)<r»»',  avi<TTr)  was  added  as  a  gloss  ;  eomp.  1  Thess.  iv.  14. 
Then,  through  the  acceptance  of  the  gloss  hishad  of  the  oiiginal  word,  arose  the  re  iding  :  aniOave  Kai  omo-ttj  (F.  O.)  : 
throUL'U  the  acceptance  of  the  gloss  bisidiS  the  original  word  partly:  aniOayt  k.  t^jja*  k.  okcttt)  (Syr.  lirp.),  partly: 
antO.  K.  avi(rrri  k.  i^rjvev  (D*.  L.,  &c.) ;  from  which  lattrr,  then,  tluough  the  aeciiio  tal  or  intentional  repetit'on  of 
AIV,  arose  tlie  received  reading  (very  poorly  supported  and  spread  by  Erasmus).  Finally,  the  traiispo.-.itii>n  ffija*  «> 
07r«e.  K.  dve'cTTJ)  (F)'.  E.)  was  made,  after  ane0.  k.  aceo-TT)  was  read,  through  jicrvertcd  criticism;  in  the  attempt  to 
rrstorc  ffijtrti',  neither  the  spuriou.sness  of  afrffTi)  nor  the  nroper  position  of  i^riatv  being  known,  the  latter  was  under- 
stood of  the  earthly  life  of  Jesus,  and  hence  placed  before  anidavtv." 

»  Ver.  10. — [Instead  of  XpicrroO  (U'C.  N'.  L.,  many  versions  and  Cithers),  ©€oC  Is  found  in  !c'.  A.  B.  C  D.  F., 
some  fathers.  The  latter  is  accepted  bv  Fritzsche,  Lachmnun,  Tischendoit,  Meyer,  Alford,  Wordsworth,  Tregelles, 
Lange  ;  the  former  by  the  o'dcr  criticjt,  'I'holiick,  De  Wette,  I'hilipi)!.  Dr.  Hodge  says  the  latter  "  is  retained  by  most 
cri'ical  editors  ; "  but  the  current  of  criticism  n6w  sets  against  it ;  and  what  was  trui'  at  the  date  of  his  first  cdiiion 
(ISo.'i),  was  scarcely  correct  at  tlie  appoarani'C  of  the  edition  of  IHtiO.  Xpiorou  was  jirobably  inserted  to  correspond  with 
vor.  9  (or  from  2  Cor.  v.  10),  though  it  is  also  claimed  that  Siou  was  substituted  to  correspond  with  vers.  U,  12.  Much 
has  bei'U  said  on  both  sides,  but  the  MS.  authority  seems  di'cisive  in  favor  of  Utou. 

'»  Ver.  11.— [From  the  LXX.,  Isa.  xlv.  23.  Instead  of  (ut  iyiu,  the  LXX.  reads  (at  the  beginning  of  the  verso): 
Kar'  inavToii  bnvvio.  Instead  of  i(o pioXoyj^atT ai  Ty  ♦*«<(<,  the  LXX.  ^Ibllowing  the  }Iebrew)  :  Ofitlrax  nava 
fKiiaaa  luv  *it6v.  The  Alexandrine  text  of  'he  LXX.  agrees  with  this  citation.  I'hilippi  and  Mejer  think  this  a 
chango  to  conform  with  our  veise  ;  also,  that  J'aul  iiuipo.scly  varies,  to  express  a  general  thought,  which,  however,  lay 
At  the  basis  of  the  special  one  exprcsNed  iu  the  Old  Testumeut  passage. 


CHAPTER  XIV.    1-XV.   4. 


413 


"  Yer.  12.— [B.  D'.  F.  :  anoSuxrei. ;  Lachmaim,  Trcgelles.  X.  A.  C.  D'.  L.  :  Suxrei;  Philippi,  Meyer,  De  "Wette, 
AUord  brackets  duro.  The  former  is  more  usual  with  \6yov  ,  hence  the  latter  is  to  be  preferred.  The  same  authorities 
which  support  Suxret,  iusert  ov«'. 

'^  Ver.  14.— [N.  B.  C.  are  cited  by  Alford  in  favor  of  iavrov  (i?<?f.).  A.  D.  F.  G.  L.  read:  avrov  (to  which  Tregellea 
adds  B.  Birch).  The  reading  of  the  Be.  is  adopted  by  Alford,  but  mest  modern  editors  follow  tne  mass  of  uncial 
authorities.  The  only  remaining  dispute  is  wlietber  it  should  be  aiiTov  or  ovtoG.  The  foimer  is  adopted  by 
Griosbach,  Knapp,  Philippi,  Tholuck.  De  Wetie,  Meyer,  Laiige ;  the  latter  by  Lachmanii,  "Wordsworth,  Jowett, 
Tregellea.  If  Theodoret  (who  refers  it  to  Chr^5t)  be  cited  in  favor  of  the  latter,  then  Chrysostom's  explanation  :  rij 
^vo-ei,  will  support  the  former.     Tischendorf  varies  (comp.  his  Tth  ed.,  p.  58).     See  "Winer,  p.  143. 

!=<  Ver.  15.— [N.  A.  B.  C  D.  F.  G.,  Vulgate,  and  fathers  :  ei  yap  ;  adopted  by  Griesbach,  Lachmaim,  Tischendorf, 
Tholuck,  Mejer,  Alford,  "Wordsworth,  Jcwett,  Tregelies,  Lange.  iic.  (with  no  uncial  authorities)  some  versious  :  ei 
f  e  ;  adopted  by  Philippi,  Hodge,  l)e  WeMc,  and  the  older  editors.  Br.  Hodge,  in  his  new  edition,  states  the  exegetical 
grnund  for  the  hatter  reading,  but  is  hardly  justified  i;i  aridins  :  "the  major  ty  of  commentators  and  editors  retain  the 
common  text."  Certainly  the  better  supported  reading  is  the  more  dilficult  one,  hence  doubly  prefer;ible  on  critical 
grounds.  See  the  Exig.  Notes.  Stuart  says  the  sense  seems  to  require  yap,  but  takes  no  notice  of  the  fact  that  it  is 
read  in  the  uncial  MSS. 

'*  Ver.  16. — [D.  F.,  a  number  of  versions  (Vulgate,  Peshiio"),  some  fathers,  read:  riixiav.  A  gloss,  which  is  useful 
in  the  interpretation  of  the  verse.  It  sbows  that  to  ayaSov  was  early  referred  to  something  which  was  a  possession 
of  the  whole  Church,  nut  of  a  party  in  the  Roman  Church.     Comp.  the  Extg.  Koles. 

1'  Ver.  IS.— [Rec.  :  toutois,  supported  by  N'.  D^.  L.,  most  cu;pives,  many  versions  (Syriac,  Gothic),  fathers  (Chry- 
Bostom,  Theodoret,  Tertullian) ;  adopted  by  Bengel,  Fritzsche,  Philippi,  Be  Wette,  Meyer  (in  4th  ed."i,  Hodge,  and 
others.  The  singular:  toutw,  is  tound  in  N'.  A.  B.  C.  B'.  F.,  many  versions,  fathers  (Oiisen,  Rufinus.  Augustme, 
Hilary,  Pclagius,  Bede) ;  adopted  by  Lachmann,  Tischendorf,  Tholuck,  Alford,  Wordsworth,  Jowett,  Tregelles,  Lanee. 
The  uncial  authority  is  overwhelmingly  agai.  st  the  plural,  which  is  the  easier  reading ;  hence  adopted  by  those  com- 
mentators who  are  more  governed  in  their  decisions  by  exegetical  than  critical  grounds  The  later  critical  editors,  as  a 
rule,  favor  the  singular.  Meyer  thinks  it  more  probable  that  the  plural  was  altered  into  the  sing-ular  on  account  of  the 
fv  iri/eiifiaTi  ayiot,  immediately  preceding,  than  that  the  sinsular  was  changed  into  the  plural  on  account  of  the  three 
terms  of  the  last  clause  of  ver.  17.  But  he  overlooks  the  difficulty  of  the  singular.  The  change  to  the  plural  seems  far 
more  likely. 

^^  Ver.  19.— [C,  B.,  most  cursives  and  fathers  :  SiiaKainev;  adopted  by  modern  editors  generally.  N.  A.  B.  F.  L.  : 
Sto>Kop.ev.  The  vowels  were  readily  interchanged.  The  ind  cative  is  lectio  d-JJicillnna  ;  it  is  tftken  interrogatively  by 
Lachmann  (■'.'/.  min.,  not  nurj.).  but  this  does  not  accord  with  the  preience  oi  apa  ovv. 

1'  Ver.  21. — [>;'.  A.  C,  some  versions  and  fathers,  omit  ^  crxa vfiaAif  erat  j)  aa-Ofvel.  Inserted  in  is'.  B.  B. 
F.  L.  ;  retnined  by  ciitical  editors  generally.    (Lachmann,  'I'iscbendort  in  lat>  r  tditioi  s,  Tregelles). 

18  Ver.  22. — [After  iria-Tiv,  M.  A.  B.  C.  insert  tj^  ;  adopted  by  Lachmmn,  Tregelles  (no  points  inserted  between 
<rv  and  ©eoO).  This  reading  would  require  us  to  render  :  The  faiih  which  Ihou  hast,  have  it  to  Ihysef  brjorr  God.  Rix. 
B.  F.  L.,  many  versions  and  fathers,  omit  r\v.  It  is  rejected  by  Philippi,  Be  AVctte,  Tholuek,  Meyer,  "Wordsworth  ; 
brackettcd  by  Alford.  Br.  Lange  thinks  it  was  inserted  so  as  to  emphasize  n-iVris  as  something  stronger  than  a  ^■ub- 
jective  opinion.  On  critical  grounds,  the  probabilities  tire  well  balanced  ;  on  exegetical  grounds,  the  briefer  reading  is 
preferable.— The  punctuation  is  then  open  to  discussion.  If  the  sentence  be  taken  interrogativel) ,  it  should  be  pointed 
accordingly ;  if  not,  a  colon  should  be  substituted. 

'"  Chap.  XV.  2.— [After  eKao-roj,  the  Etc.  reads  yap,  which  is  found  in  no  MS.;  omitted  by  versions,  fathers, 
and  modern  editors  generally. 

2"  Ver.  2.— [Instea.l  of  ij/ioiv  (N  A.  B.  C.  Bi  '.  l.)^  -Rre  find  iiiniav  in  B^.  F.,  in  the  Vulgate,  and  a  number  ol 
fathers.    The  first  person  is  adopted  by  modem  editors. 

21  Ver.  3.— [A  vrrbaiim  citation  from  the  LXX.,  Ps.  Ixviii.  10  (Heb.  Ixix.  10  ;  Eng.  Ixix.  9).  The  LXX.  is  a  literal 
rendering  of  the  Hebrew. 

22  Ver.  4.— [The  Rrc.  reads  n-poe'vpa<f>r)  (the  second  time),  with  N'^.  A.  L.,  some  fathers.  N'.  B.  C.  B.  F.,  Vulgate, 
Peshito,  &c.  :  6ypa(^j);  adopted  by  Lachmann,  Tiscbend^rf,  Be  "Wette,  Meyer,  Alford,  Tregelles,  Lange.  B.  has 
eypa<^i)  the  first  time.  The  Amer,  Bible  Union  omits  the  verb  altogether ;  probably  a  tj-pugraphical  error,  as  there  is  no 
authority  for  it  wr/atever. 

23  Ver.  4.— (N.  A.  B.  C.  B.  L.,  repeat  Sia  before  t^s  7rapa<cA^<r€<os.  Omitted  in  R,c.,  B.  F.,  versions  and 
fathers.  It  is  adopted  by  Griesbach,  Bengel,  Lachmann,  Be  Wette,  Alford,  Wordsworth,  Trege'les  ;  rejected  by  Hodge, 
Philippi,  Meyer,  because  the  transciiber  might  so  readily  repeat  it  before  TJjs  occurring  a  second  time.  Still,  the  most 
careful  editors  retain  it.  Br.  Hodge  says,  in  his  first'and  last  editions:  "The  preponderance  of  evidence  is  greatly 
against  it ; "  and  yet,  in  citing  the  authorities  in  favor  of  it,  omits  B.  and  iS.,  the  two  most  important  uncials,  both  of 
which  had  been  collated  carefully  before  his  last  edition  appeared.— R.] 


EXEGETICAL  AXB   CRITICAL. 

General  PreUminary  Remarks. — After  the  Apos- 
tle has  described  the  duties  of  Christians,  especially 
of  the  Cliristians  at  Rome,  in  their  various  general, 
fundamental  relations:  (1.)  As  duties  toward  the 
Cliuich  ;  (2.)  Id  all  personal  relations  ;  (3.)  Toward 
the  State;  and,  (4.)  Toward  the  world,  he  proceeds 
to  lay  down  the  universal  deportment  of  the  Roman 
Church,  by  establishing  the  proper  reciprocal  con- 
duct between  the  strong  (f)ij'aTot')  and  the  weak 
iadi'varoi,  chap.  xv.  1 ;  cktOh'oT'vtii:,  chap.  xiv.  1). 

In  the  first  place,  it  is  manifest  that  such  a  dif- 
fterence  existed.  This  is  especially  evident  from 
chap.  XV.  7-9.  Second,  it  is  likewise  evident  that 
the  one  tendency  springing  from  Judaism  was  a 
legally  punctilious  tendency  ;  while  the  other,  being 
connected  with  heathen  culture  and  freedom,  -wan 
nore  liberal.  This  is  supported  in  a  very  general 
^v•ay  by  the  connection  of  this  opposition  with  the 
forms  of  opposition  which  the  Apostle  treats  in  his 
Epistles  to  the  Corinthians,  Galatians,  Colossians, 
&c.  There  is  the  following  characteristic  of  the  an- 
tithesis as  it  appears  here  :  Some  are  weak  in  regard 
to  faith,  the  freedom  of  faith,  while  others  are  strong 
La  this  respect  (chap.  xiv.  21,  22).     Some  lay  stress 


on  their  (under  conditions  which  are  not  stated)  eat- 
ing  no  meat,  drinking  no  wine  (ver.  21),  and  keep- 
ing certain  holy-days.  The  others  know  that  they 
are  free  in  this  respect,  and,  proud  of  their  freedom, 
and  regardless  of  the  consequence,  seem  inchned  to 
use  it  at  the  expense  of  fellowship  and  unanimity. 
It  is  therefore  the  contrast  of  the  'punctilious  and  the 
larqe-hearted  and  liberal  consciencet^  (that  is,  decis- 
ions of  conscience).  Hence  it  is  also  ciiaracteristic 
of  the  former  class,  that  they  are  inclined  to  judge, 
to  take  offence  ;  and  of  the  others,  that  they  are  in- 
clined to  despise,  and  thus  to  give  offe.  cc.  This  con- 
trast is  so  definite,  that  we  deem  it  best  to  divide 
the  section  accordingly.  Further,  it  follows  from 
this  that  the  more  liberal  party — we  might  even  say 
the  Pauline — was  decidedly  in  the  ascendancy  (par- 
ticularly according  to  chaps,  xiv.  1  and  xv.  1),  since 
it  was  necessary  to  make  the  repeated  admonition, 
not  to  break  ofif  fellowship  with  tlie  others.  Though 
the  Jewish-Christian  element  in  the  Church  was  a 
numerous  one,  it  does  not  follow  tliat  the  element 
of  punctilious  believers  was  equally  so. 

Finally,  it  is  absolutely  necessary  to  distinguish 
the  standpoint  of  these  punctilious  believers  as  well 
from  the  very  marked  (alike  in  degree,  but  in  fact 
divided)  standpoints  of  the  Galatiau  and  ColossiaB 


414 


THE   EPISTLE   OF  PAUL   TO   THE   ROMANS. 


fase  teachers,  as  from  the  not  less  marked  but  yet 
already  schismatic  standpoint  of  the  Petrine  party 
of  Corinth.  The  Apostle  designates  the  Galatiun 
false  teachers,  in  chap.  ii.  4,  as  false  brethren  ;  he 
conditionally  excludes  them  from  communion,  in  so 
far  as  they  persist  in  their  doctriiially  false  gospel, 
and  would  make  circumcision  (which  is  at  the  same 
time  the  requirement  of  the  legal  standpoint)  a 
necessary  condition  of  Christian  salvation.  By  these 
Ebionites  there  can  only  be  meant  Pharisaic,  purely 
Jewish,  people.*  The  Colossian  false  teachers  are, 
in  degree,  not  less  false  brethren,  because  they  like- 
wise adulterate  the  ground  of  salvation  by  dogmatic 
confidence;  but  their  cliaracteristic  plainly  leads  to 
the  suppositiou  of  Essenic  Ebionites,  for  their  wor- 
sliip  of  angels  and  their  asceticism  indicate  an  infu- 
sion of  heathen  elements  into  Judaism. f  There 
were  also  such  false  brethren  elsewiiere  (2  Cor.  xi. 
26) ;  and  the  false  apostles  in  2  Cor.  xi.  13  were, 
undoubtedly,  actually  connected  with  the  Galatian 
false  teachers.  The  Petrine  party  itself,  however, 
which  does  not  seem,  in  tlie  first  place,  to  have  ex- 
tended beyond  ethical,  liturgical,  and  ascetic  pecu- 
liarities and  inclinations  to  separation,  must  be  dis- 
tinguished from  these  agitators,  who  furthered  the 
doctrinal  adulteration  of  the  law. 

Yet  the  case  stood  still  better  with  the  weak 
bretlircn  in  Rome.  The  Apostle  treats  them  so  gen- 
tly, that  we  can  evidently  not  take  them  for  decided- 
ly Ebionitic  Christians,  nor  according  to  tiie  degree 
and  manner  of  the  Galatian  and  Colossian  false 
teachers,  nor  according  to  the  initiates  of  Ebionitism 
in  the  Corinthian  church.  He  forbids  them  only 
from  pronouncing  sentence,  from  their  own  con- 
Bcientious  standpoint,  upon  their  more  liberal  breth- 
ren ;  whereas,  he  even  takes  their  right  of  con- 
science against  the  more  liberal  brethren  under  his 
protection  ;  and  there  is  nothing  said  of  an  anathe- 
ma, a.s  in  the  Epistle  to  the  Galatians,  nor  of  a  warn- 
ing, as  in  the  E|)istlc  to  the  Colossians,  nor  of  a  cen- 
sure, &i  in  the  Epistles  to  the  Corinthians,  to  say 
nothing  of  the  severe  criticisms  in  the  Pastoral 
Epistles.  If  the  Apostle  could  have  expressed  sucii 
different  opinions  on  the  same  El)ionitic  phantom  of 
Dr.  Baur,  his  cliaracter  itself  would  be  to  us  a  phan- 
tom ;  that  is,  all  tiieology  would  itself  have  to  be 
gradually  transformed  into  a  phantom. 

By  regarding  the  mild  \  judgment  expressed  by 
the  Apostle  on  the  weak  brethren  in  the  Church  at 
Rome,  we  are  therefore  aided  in  finding  out  tiie 
character  of  their  standpoint.    Various  suppositions : 

*  [A  comparison  of  the  two  Epistles  will  show  how 
much  more  shnrply  defined  is  the  defence  of  the  liberty  of 
the  (j;ospel  in  the  Galatian  epistle.  There,  the  Apo.stte  ap- 
lears  as  a  champion  ol  mir  freedom  ;  here,  ns  a  Juilici»UB 
guide  to  those  whom  the  truth  was  makinf?  free.  Tlje 
dillurence  in  tone  is  a  striking  proof  of  pedagogic  wisdom. 
-B.] 

t  [Comp.  Lnnge's  Comm.  Cnlnisinns,  Introd.,  p.  7,  where 
the  character  of  these  false  toncherH  ts  discufsed.  The 
eJfort  to  di-flno  them  by  means  of  the  nonionclaturo  of 
Bulisequent  heresies  has  fed  to  the  (rreatest  variety  of  opin- 
ions. (Kven  the  Ebionites  do  not  date  back  of  the  destnic- 
tion  of  .Jerusalem.)  They  were  ascetics,  undoul>tcdly ; 
their  views  mieht  be  called  Kbionitic;  yet,  when  wo  recall 
the  I'hrj'uian  character  and  consider  the  larf;e  Jewish  eh- 
nioiit  In  that  reRlon,  we  sec  the  seeds  which  were  then  just 
•prin^iMg  up,  to  bear  fruil  In  tbe  horcKies  so  prolific  in  that 
region.  I'hryinan  Kbionitism  in  the  germ,  is,  perhaps,  the 
best  definition. -H.] 

t  [The  rebuke  was  mild  indeed  then,  but  how  pregnant 
its  meaning  as  wo  rosrnrd  it  to-\lay.  Where  coula  one  re- 
pent more  ap])ropriately  than  in  Homo  these  words :  "  Who 
art  thou  tlmt  judjrest  another  man's  ser\'ant7"  lie  who  is 
strongest  In  the  lloman  Church  of  to-day,  is  "weak,"  ac- 
cording to  the  Apostle's  judgment.— K.] 


1.  They  were  Jewish  Christians,  who  wished  to 
retain  the  law,  and  also  the  legal  holy-dayg,  sabbaths, 
new-moon  feasts  (the  early  commentators,  Chrysoa 
torn,  Ambrose,  &c.,  Calvin,  and  others).  Origen'a 
rejoinder :  "  Meat  and  wine  were  not  forbidden  ir 
the  law."  Tholuck  observes,  that  Paul  speaks  in 
quite  a  different  tone  against  such  Judaists.  Tiio 
laying  down  of  this  category  becomes  justifiable,  if 
we  distinguish  between  doctrinal  and  ettiicul  leijaliti, 
in  reference  to  the  laws  on  food  and  purification. 
For  the  reason  given  above,  the  question  here  can- 
not be  concerning  a  doctrinal  statute. 

2.  Jewish-Chiistia7i  ascetics.  For  examples  of 
them,  see  Tholuck,  p.  699.  But  pure  Judaism  is  a 
stranger  to  all  strictly  doctrinal  forms  of  asceticism, 
and  is  acquainted  only  with  an  ethical  form:  (L) 
That  of  the  Nazarites  for  the  whole  life  ;  (2.)  That 
of  the  Nazaritic  vow  for  a  Hmited  time ;  (3.)  The 
theocratic  general  and  special  ordinance  of  fasts ; 
(4.)  The  personal  fasting  of  individuals  in  special 
states  of  life.  But  there  can  be  nothing  said  here 
of  all  this,  and  just  as  httle  of  the  doctrinal  asceti- 
cism of  Ciiristians  of  Essenic  prejudices,*  on  whom 
the  Apostle  lias  expressed  himself  in  Col.  ii.  Thu? 
the  view  of  Baur,  and  others,  falls  to  the  ground. 
On  the  abundant  confusion  arising  from  the  suppo- 
sition that  heathen  motives  are  connected  with  the 
motives  of  the  weak  brethren  here,  see  Tholuck's 
quotations  on  the  Neo-Platonists,  the  Pythagoreans, 
and  the  Gnostic  Ebionites,  pp.  699  ff.  these  do  not 
belong  here  with  the  cited  examples  of  Jewish  Naza- 
rites, because  the  latter  never  thought  of  compelling 
others  to  adopt  their  manner  of  life. 

3.  Ethical  and  sociol  motives,  arising  from  fear 
of  mingling  with  the  heathen  sacrificial  custonis. 
Tholuck  says :  "  According  to  Augustine,  reference 
is  here  made  to  the  same  persons  as  in  1  Cor.  viii., 
the  reference  here  being  to  those  who,  because  they, 
in  buying  food  at  the  market,  could  not  sufficiently 
distinguish  the  meat  offered  to  idols,  preferred  to 
abstain  altogether  from  eating  meat.  This  expiinji- 
tion  is  implied  by  Cocceius,  and  has  recently  been 
defended  by  Michaeiis,  Philippi,  and  especially  by 
Neander,  and  certainly  has  by  far  the  strongest 
grounds  in  its  favor."  The  treak  brethren,  there- 
fore,  were  not  influenced  by  doctrinal  but  by  ethical 
motives:  (1.)  Fear  of  eating  meat  oll'ered  to  idols; 
(2.)  Of  drinking  the  wine  of  the  heathen  drink- 
offerings  (Deut.  xxxii.  38  ;  (3.)  In  addition  to  this 
was  their  necessity  of  still  retaining  as  a  pious  cus- 
tom the  Jewish  holy-iiays,  for  it  is  well  known  that 
the  Sabbath,  which  was  observed  together  with  Sun- 
day, gradually  died  out  in  the  Church  as  a  day  of 
rest.f     As  examples  of  the  abstinence  named,  tho- 

*  [Meyer,  and  others,  adopt  the  opinion  Dr.  Lango  her* 
rejeotk.  l>r.  Hodtre  seems  to  incline  to  this  view ;  but  be 
is  not  dcdded  in  his  preference  of  it,  for  he  adds  :  "There 
Is  nothini.' inoonsistent  with  the  ivssumption  that  the.we:ik 
brethren  hero  spokc-n  of  were  Bcrupiilous  Jewish  t'hris- 
tiuiis.''— 11.) 

t  (  Hean  Alford  (following  Pe  Wcttc)  presents  a  modifi- 
cation of  this  view  :  "The  over-scrupulous  Jew  bniime  nn 
wc'lic  by  riiiiipuhiiin.  He  wiis  nfvniil  of  pollution  by  cniing 
meats  saeriftcod  or  wine  ponred  to  idols;  or  even  liy  iH'ina 
brouuht  into  contact,  in  foreign  countries,  with  cuBual  and 
undiseoverable  uncleanne&s,  which  in  his  own  land  he  knew 
the  articles  olferi'il  for  fi>od  would  be  sure  not  to  have  in- 
curred. He  therefore  atistnincd  from  all  pnp-iieti  t""d,  and 
confined  himself  to  that  which  nt  j:uU\  trice  from  natunil 
growth  to  Ills  own  use."  "  All  ditflculty,  then,  is  removed, 
by  supposing  that  of  these  over-.sonipulous  Jt-ws  some  lind 
become  converts  to  the  gospel,  and  with  neither  the  obsti- 
nacy of  legal  .ludaiiS'-rs,  nor  tlio  pride  of  nscotics  (for  these 
are  not  hinted  at  here),  but  in  u>f/tkiiis.t  nf  /mlh.  nr\i  the 
scruples  of  an  over-tender  conscience,  returned  their  hablta 


CHAPTER  XIV.   1-XV.  4. 


415 


luck  cites  Daniel  (chap,  i,  8,  12,  16),  Esther  (chap. 
iv,  16),  Tobias  (chap.  i.  12),  and  the  Macca.bees  (2 
Mace.  V.  27).  The  gradations  (cited  by  Tholuck)  of 
this  scrupulousness  on  the  part  of  the  punctilious  Jews, 
do  not  here  come  into  consideration,  as  the  weak 
brethren,  according  to  Philippi's  observation,  did  not 
witiidraw  from  eating  with  the  Gentiles  (?)  and  the 
Gentile  Christians.  Likewise,  the  decree  in  Acts  xv. 
is  justifiably  cited  in  favor  of  the  view  presented. 
Tholuck,  with  Piiilippi,  is  right  in  not  admitting  that, 
because  of  an  adherence  to  speci.al  holidays,  there 
■were  two  parties  among  the  weak  brethren. 

4.  Various  views.  According  to  Erasmus,  and 
others,  both  the  tradition  of  laws  respecting  food 
and  the  fear  of  eating  meat  offered  to  idols,  were 
motives.  According  to  Chrysostom,  and  others, 
they  would  refrain  from  all  meat,  to  escape  blame,  in 
consequence  of  the  Jewish  disdain  of  swine-meat. 
According  to  Eichhom,  these  people  were  generally 
Gentile-Christian  ascetics,  who  entertained  philo- 
Bophic  and  ascetic  principles,  especially  the  Neo- 
Pythagorean.  Meyer  supposes  the  "  influence  of 
Essenic  principles,"  yet  so  that  they  are  not  led  into 
conflict  with  justification  by  faith ;  however,  he  op- 
poses Baur's  view,  that  the  people  were  Ebionitic 
Christians,  because  abstinence  from  wine  by  the 
Ebionites  has  been  nowhere  certified.  He  asserts, 
against  view  (3.),  that  the  Apostle  did  not  speak,  as 
in  1  Cor.  viii.  10,  of  the  sacrificial  character  of  meat 
and  wine — as  if  tins  had  been  necessary  in  the  pres- 
ence of  the  well-known  variance  in  the  Church  at 
Rome  !  After  all,  the  object  of  the  scrupulousness 
here  was  not  the  principal  thing,  but  the  Jaying  down 
of  the  canon  by  which  "  the  weak  and  the  strong  " 
in  a  church  specinUy  called  to  universality  have  to 
preserve  their  unanimity — the  one  class,  by  not  tak- 
ing offence  in  a  Pharisaic,  censorious  spirit,  and  the 
other,  by  not  giving  offence  in  a  reckless  arrogance 
of  freedom. 

A.  Chap.  xiv.  1-13 :  Reciprocal  regard,  for- 
bearance, and  recognition  hetiveen  the  weak  and  the 
strong.  Especially  of  the  taking  offence  and  judg- 
ing on  the  part  of  the  weak.  Meyer,  on  vers.  1-12  : 
"  Fraternal  behavior  toward  the  weak  asked  for  (ver. 
1).  The  first  point  of  difference  between  the  two 
classes,  and  the  encouragement  because  of  it  (ver.  5). 
The  proper  point  of  view  for  both  in  their  differ- 
ences (ver.  6),  and  its  establisliment  (vers.  7-9);  cen- 
sure and  impermissibility  of  the  opposite  course  of 
conduct  (vers.  10-12)." 

Ver.  1.  Him  that  is  weak  in  the  faith  [t6v 
Si  aaf)fvovvra  X'tj  TrtffTft].  The  ()f  con- 
nects with  the  foregoing ;  chap.  xiii.  14.  After  the 
Apostle  has  expressed  the  recognition  of  physical 
necessities,  and  the  necessity  of  limiting  the  pro- 
vision for  them,  he  finds  himself  induced,  first  of 
all,  to  admoni-sh  those  more  freely  disposed  in  this 
respect  to  be  forbearing  toward  the  weak  (Meyer, 
Piiilippi).  This  Tipplies  to  the  formal  connection  ;  * 
but,  according  to  the  real  connection,  he  must  come, 
at  any  rate,  to  this  difference  between  Jewish  Chris- 


of  abstinence  and  obsiTvation  of  days."  But  in  a  Church 
which  was  metropolitan,  and  hince  cosmopolitan,  other 
peculiarities  misrht  sharpen  the  distinction  between  the 
■weak  and  tlie  strong.  Such  di^-isious  are  the  result  of 
temperament,  as  well  as  of  nationality  and  education. — B.] 
*  [If  the  purely  prohibitory  sense  of  chap.  xiii.  14  be 
acceptc  i,  the  formal  connection  is  with  the  general  exhor- 
tations of  chap.  xiii.  Ae  has,  then,  a  siiecifyins  force, 
thoue-h  it  is,  perhaps,  at  the  same  time,  slightly  "contrastive 
(bo  Aiford).— E.] 


tianity  and  Gentile  Christianity  (De  Wette),  although 
only  the  first  elements  of  it  were  present  in  the 
Roman  Church. 

Weak  in  the  faith.  The  feeble  in  respect  to 
faith,  the  standpoint  of  faith  and  its  consequences. 
Since  each  party  reciprocally  held  the  other  as  the 
weaker  in  faith,  we  might  think  that  in  this  sense 
the  general  exhortation  applies  to  both  parts  in  the 
sense  of:  him  who  appears  to  you  as  weak  in  tht 
faith.  But  Paul  does  not  deny  his  standpoint ;  he 
immediately  afterward  calls  one  who  is  scrupulous 
respecting  food:  6  daOtvdjv.  And  this  is  import- 
ant ;  it  proves  that  the  Apostle  does  not  design  to 
deprive  the  strong  of  the  liberty,  which  he  himself 
takes,  of  frankly  expressing  his  judgment  on  the 
differences.  The  strong  should  therefore  stand  to 
their  conviction ;  but  they  should  not  make  any  such 
application  of  it  as  would  be  against  brotherly  love 
and  fellowship.  According  to  Tholuck,  his  reason 
for  addressing  the  strong  first  (yet  not  "altogether," 
though  "  chiefly  ")  was,  not  that  the  Gentile  Chris- 
tians constituted  the  great  majority  of  the  Church, 
but,  on  the  principle  stated  by  Chrysostom,  that  the 
weaker  part  stands  in  continual  need  of  most  care. 
Yet  the  Christians  of  Pauline  tendencies,  who  must 
not  be  identified  strictly  with  Gentile  Christians,  con- 
stitute the  body  of  the  Church. 

As  the  two  parties  were  not  at  all  separated,  the 
TTQod.aiipavtaO^f:  cannot  mean  exactly  receive;  at 
least  not  in  the  sense  of  strict  communion  (Eras- 
mus, Grotius,  Luther,  and  others),  nor  receive  him  to 
yourselves  (Olshausen  [Hodge,  Stuart],  and  others), 
according  to  Acts  xxviii.  2.  Between  these  there 
lies  the  idea  of  reception  in  the  emphatic  sense,  to 
draw  into  an  inward,  friendly  intercourse.  [Alford : 
"  '  Oive  him  your  hand,''  as  Syr.  (Tholuck) :  '  count 
him  one  of  you,'  opposed  to  rejecting  or  discourag- 
ing him." — R.]  In  such  relations  of  difference,  the 
relative  danger  of  intolerance  always  lies  on  the 
stronger  side  ;  therefore  the  case  was  very  different 
in  Rome  from  what  it  was  in  Galatia.  Yet  the  Apos- 
tle does  not  fail  to  point  out  the  intolerance  on  the 
part  of  those  who  are  punctilious. — Explanations  of 
the  7TifTTL<; : 

1.  The  religions  belief  of  the  ecclesiastical  doc- 
trine (Origen,  Augustine,  Aquinas,  Luther,  Calvin, 
Beza  ;  Luther :  the  Lutheran  theologians  in  part). 

2.  Moral  conviction,  in  reference  to  what  is  per 
missible  (Este,  Bellarmine,  Erasmus,  some  of  the 
older  Protestant  theologians,  Arminians,  Sociuians). 
[So  Stuart,  Hodge.] 

3.  Accommodating  explanations :  The  practical 
application  of  faitli  (Chrysostom,  and  others);  knowl- 
edge (Grotius,  Semler). 

Against  (1.)  it  must  be  said  (apart  from  the  fact 
that  a  difference  still  exists  between  the  doctrine 
of  faith,  as  such,  and  the  vital  energy  of  justifying 
faith),  that  the  Apostle  does  not  here  emphasize  the 
antithesis  of  truth  and  error,  but  that  of  confidence 
and  doubt.  Against  (2.)  it  may  be  said,  that  the 
reference  cannot  be,  absolutely,  to  a  merely  subjec- 
tive ideal  fidelity  to  conviction  without  the  objective 
basis  of  truth.  It  is  clear  from  ver.  6,  that  the 
Apostle  ascribes  to  both  parties  religious  faith  aa 
well  as  fidelity  to  conviction ;  that  the  weaker  br(>th- 
e»  holds,  in  a  certain  sense,  most  infi-jxibly  to  his 
conviction,  follows  from  the  fact  that  he  is  of  the 
party  that  judges,  while  the  other  is  of  the  party 
that  despises.  Ver.  23  says,  that  he  can  even  sin 
against  his  f\iith  by  eating  in  doubt ;  and  the  con 
text  says,  as  well,  that  the  less  careful  brother  can 


416 


THE   EPISTLE   OF   PAUL   TO   THE   ROMANS. 


8in  iigainst  his  faith  by  an  uncharitable  abuse  of  his 
freedom.  Thus  both  parties  have  and  exercise  faith, 
being  true  to  tlit-ir  conviction  of  faitli ;  but  the  weak 
in  faitii  show  tiieir  weakness  by  not  venturinj^,  in  the 
traditional  scrupulousness  of  their  legal  conscience, 
to  draw  tlie  full  ronclusion  from  their  justifying  faith, 
in  ortlcr  to  bre.ik  througii  their  religious  prejudices 
and  prepossessions. 

The  Apostle  proves  that  he  does  not  recognize 
this  weakness  as  a  permanent  rule  for  their  life,  by 
tlie  candidly  expressed  conviction  of  his  stand|)oint, 
as  well  as  by  his  doctrine,  in  ver.  14  ;  but  he  does 
not  wish  that  the  free  development  of  their  con- 
sistency of  faitli  should  be  affected  by  tiie  strong 
giving  them  offence,  either  to  make  them  more  scru- 
pulous, or  to  mislead  to  a  frivolous  transgression  of 
their  conscientious  limits.  As,  therefore,  faitli  in  1 
Cor.  xii.  it  is  a  vigorous  faith  in  reference  to  per- 
forming miracles,  so  here,  in  reference  to  the  prac- 
tical development  of  life  ;  in  both  cases  there  is  the 
full  consequence  of  world-conquering  confidence — 
there,  in  overcomtng  the  force  of  tlie  disturbed  states 
of  body  and  soul,  and  here,  iu  con(iueiiiig  the  |)o\ver 
of  legal  misconceptions  and  prejudices.  Tiioluck  is 
correct  in  ob.serving,  that  the  two  explanations  (of 
religious  faitli  and  fidelity  to  conviction)  do  not  con- 
flict with  each  other.  Tlie  religious  Christian  faith, 
according  to  its  practical  form  in  the  d«!veloping 
stage  of  the  dictate  of  conscience,  comprises  both 
elements ;  as  even  the  early  expositors,  who  ex- 
plained nirsTiii  by  saving  faith,  have  generally  placed 
the  a-rtitiiilo  conxcienike  along  with  it  (see  Tholuck, 
p.  70.5) ;  while,  on  the  other  hand,  it  is  made  em- 
phatic in  many  ways,  that  reference  here  is  to  the 
moral  conviction  of  those  who  believe  in  Christ  on 
the  ground  of  this  faith  (Meyer).  [Philippi,  Tho- 
luck, Meyer,  and  mo.st  German  commentator.s,  to- 
gether with  Alfbrd,  and  others,  have  carefully  guard- 
ed against  the  purely  subjective  meaning :  moral 
conviction,  adopted  by  Stuart  and  Hodge.  At  the 
eame  time,  they  very  properly  reject  the  jiurely 
objective  sense  of  ttioth,-,  Chriilian  doctrine — a 
Bcnse  which  the  word  rarely,  if  ever,  has  in  the  New 
Testament.  Hence  the  correct  rendering  is  not : 
weak  in  fn'th,  or  as  to  faith  (Hodge),  for  thus  the 
article  is  ignored,  nor  yet:  n'cuA-  in  /lis  faith,  which 
is  too  siibji'ctive,  but  (as  in  E.  V.):  vcak  in  the 
faith.  Alford  :  "  Holding  the  faith  imperfectly — 
t.  r.,  not  being  able  to  receive  the  faith  in  its 
strength,  so  as  to  be  above  such  prejudices." — R.] 

But  not  to  judgments  of  thoughts  [firj  tit; 
dm  X  ()  iiT  f  ti;  i)i.u/.n  yirr  it  i^iv .  Dr.  Lange  :  Doch 
nii-ht  zur  Ahiirthnlung  von  Bewisr/rion/en.  See  be- 
low.— R.]  //trtzoKTu,-  means,  in  1  Cor.  xii.  10  and 
Heb.  V.  14,  to  pronounce  judgment,  sentence.  /ft«- 
XnyitTiioi  generally  denotes  thoughts,  but,  regarded 
as  moral  (or  oftfu  immoral)  motives,  imaginations 
(Rom.  i.  21  ;  1  Cor.  iii.  20),  or  even  doubts  (Phil.  ii. 
14  ;  1  Tim.  ii.  8).  Accordingly,  the  connection  leads 
to  the  explanation  :  Not  to  the  judicial  decision  of 
motii'cx.  Do  not  keep  frequent  company  with  them 
for  the  ()bj)ct,  or  even  to  such  an  issue  of  the  mat- 
ter, that  till'  mutuid  motives  or  dill'crenci's  shall  be 
concluded  by  piein  iture  decision,  that  a  fault-finding 
of  the  different  tendencies  can  arise  from  it..  It  is 
evident  that  the  expression  cannot  mean  ;  "  Not  fur 
criticizing  scrupuhjus  niceties,"  as  an  exhortation  to 
the  strong  (Tholuck).*     For  the  Apostle  himself  has 

•  [So  Alford  :  •'  In  order  to  oottlo  tho  points  on  which 
ho  has  Hcruplcs."  Hoflire  :  "  Not  prosiiminfj  to  sit  in  judg- 
ment ou  tho  opinions  of  your  brethren." — K.J 


criticized  the  scrupulous  niceties  of  the  weak  suflB- 
ci<'ntly  plainly,  by  characterizing  them  as  weak,  and 
not  yielding  their  point  theoretically.  Philipjii  ia 
right  when  lie  observes  that,  throughout  the  present 
chapter,  the  Apostle  ascribes  the  x^/i'm-  to  the  we  A', 
but  the  iiiiiOtrtir  to  the  strong.  Yet  he  arrives  at; 
the  explanation:  Receive  them  affectionately,  so  that 
no  mental  doubts  arise  in  them.  Hut  this  is  !-ome- 
thing  quite  diH'ercnt  Iroiu  Lutlu'r's  expresf-ion  :  Ho 
not  perplex  their  consciences.  Meiit;il  doubts  must 
nee(is  arise  in  them,  and  even  be  awakened,  if  oi.e 
would  iud  them  to  a  more  liberal  standpoint.  But, 
in  their  theoretical  treatment,  they  must  not  be 
forced  beyond  the  measure  of  their  weakness,  but 
KUch  a  premature  decision  should  not  aUo  arise  on 
their  side.  Paul  could  well  exact  of  the  strong,  that 
they  should  not  eat  meat  for  the  sake  of  the  weak, 
&c.  ;  but  not,  that  they  should  hypocritically  deny 
their  more  liberal  view  in  mental  intercourse  with 
them,  or  allow  it  to  be  overcome  and  judged.  Thia 
submission  of  many  a  more  discerning  one  to  the 
harsh  judgment  of  the  narrow-minded  has  ever  been 
a  source  ol  serious  injury.  But  the  measure  of  pos- 
sibility should  be,  to  treat  the  dill'trences  as  non- 
essential peculiarities,  on  the  common  ground  of  be- 
ing the  measure  of  a  truly  hearty,  but  also  very 
careful,  intercourse  (comp.  chap.  xvi.  17,  18).  This 
premature  decision  of  what  the  develo[)ment  of 
spiritual  life  can  harmonize  only  in  time,  is  there- 
fore forbidden  to  both  parties.  The  strong  are, 
however,  chiefly  recommended  to  deport  tliems<>lves 
according  to  their  difficult  task,  just  because  the  oth- 
ers are  chiefly  inclined  to  judge.  This  view  becomes 
still  stronger,  if  tii;  be  taken  in  the  sense  of  result. 

If  we  distinguish  candidly  the  two  views:  1.  Re- 
ceive them,  but  not  so  that  a  reciprocal  mental  judg- 
ment is  the  result  of  it ;  2..  Receive  them,  but  not 
to  pronounce  judgment  on  their  scruples  (Grotius, 
and  others),  we  must  urge  against  (2.),  that  the  stress 
lies  on  the  modality,  on  the  manner  in  which  the 
strong  should  be  accustomed  to  cultivate  intercourse 
with  the  weak.*  Therefore  Reiche  is  right  in  re- 
ferring the  prohibition  to  both  parties,  and  Cliryso.s- 
tom  was  not  incorrect  in  attributing  criticizing  to 
the  weak.  That  ()i,c!ixi>i.(n^  may  also  mean  doubt 
(Theoi>liylaet),  does  not  come  further  into  consider- 
ation. Erasmus,  Heza,  Er.  Selimid,  have  accepted 
the  classical  meaning  of  "doubt"  for  (Sin/.oyiirnnl, 
and  "  conflict  "  for  i)icixoi(Tii;.  [So  E.  V.]  Tliere- 
fore  disputations.  Rut  these  have  ever  been  im- 
avoidable,  and  even  Paul  has  not  avoided  them. 

Ver.  2.  For  one  believeth,  &c.  [oi;  uiv 
nt.nTn''n,,  x.r.A.]  The  explanation:  He  is  con- 
vinced that  he  can  eat  every  thing  {;nffrn''n  tliT- 
rni ;  Tholuck,  Reiche,  and  others),  makes  faith  a 
subjective  opinion.  Hut  it  rather  means:  He  has  a 
confidenee  of  faith,  according  to  which  he  can  eat 
every  thing  (/.irrrf  i/nytlv  ;T«iTa;  Fritzsche,  Mey- 
er, Philipi)i). 

But   he   who   is   weak    [o    <)s    a(Tf>fr('iv. 

•  (Frllzsche,  Tholuck,  Meyer,  Be  Wettc,  Alford,  niid 
most,  :>pply  thii  nddecl  clause  (rauiiioi :  Meyer)  <if  (ho 
exhortiitloii  to  the  Btronsr  alone.  NolwitbslnndinK  Dr. 
Liinm-V  olijectinn,  it  fonns  the  prefenilile  view  ;  for  cer- 
tain'y  thn  first  part  of  the  verso  is  addressed  to  the  slronff 
exohlsivelv,  mid  tho  {laxpia-it,  which  monn.s  "^lower  ol 
distinpruiKliii'tr  between"  (.\lford),  i«  more  ftp|)lu'uble  to 
thi  in.  Uesidcs,  In  ver.  4  t'le  exhorliitinn  Comes  in  turn  to 
the  weak,  fce.  The  word  Sia Aoy t (r/x<->>'  meiun  //loi/r/i/x, 
peniTiilly  III  mnium  jturlrm.  In  tho  New  Tc'staraent.  It  is 
referred  by  the  nuthors  above  named  to  the  scnijuloua 
thouirhtB  clicnsheii  by  the  weak.  The  iika  of  doubt  enter* 
only  in  comiection  with  this  roforcnto.— Kl 


CHAPTER  XIV.   1-XV.   4. 


417 


The  E.  V.  assumes  a  strict  antithesis  here,  but  the 
Tov  ocfrOfvoT'vra  (ver.  1)  is  resumed  ;  hence  it  is 
jiot  necessary  to  find  any  other  special  reason  for  the 
anacoluthon,  tliough  another  may  be  allowable. — R.] 
Tlie  Apostle  does  not  continue  with  oi,-  de,  because 
he  will  first  take  the  weak  into  special  consideration. 
— Eateth  herbs.  Ad/ava.  The  expression  is 
pressed  by  Meyer,  but  something  symbolical  or  hy- 
perbolical will  nevertheless  have  to  be  allowed  to  his 
explanation ;  for  example,  the  joint  designation  of 
bread,  of  vegetable  food  in  general.*  And  it  would 
follow  from  his  view,  that  this  eating  of  vegetables 
is  an  essential  characteristic  of  the  weak  one,  which 
can  be  urged  with  as  little  literalaess  as  that  the 
strong  one  is  addicted  to  the  eating  of  all  kinds  of 
food.  His  characteristic  is  the  eating  of  meat,  free 
from  all  ordinances.  Therefore  Fritzsche,  Philippi, 
and  others,  would  not  regard  the  expression  as  an 
unconditional  preclusion  from  all  enjoyment  of  meat, 
as  Meyer  does.  Philippi :  "  Some  would  only  abso- 
lutely refrain  from  eating  meat  in  order  the  more 
easily  to  overcome  temptation  in  special  cases,  and 
others  only  in  those  special  cases,  particularly  in  the 
social  meals,  where  their  conduct  was  marked  in  the 
church  as  surprising  ;  and,  finally,  others  would  only 
do  so  at  the  social  meals,  where  they  were  certain 
that  the  meat  placed  before  them  was  meat  offered 
to  idols,  or,  at  any  rate,  were  uncertain  whether  or 
not  it  was  meat  offered  to  idols.  But  all  these  could 
be  very  well  designated  as  ^.a/arof/ciyoi-." 

Ver.  3.  Let  not  him  who  eateth  despise, 
&c.  The  i^ov&fvflv  is  the  specifically  improper  con- 
duct of  him  who,  occupying  a  more  liberal  point  of 
view,  in  his  own  wisdom  pleases  himself  (Tholuck  : 
"  The  conceit  of  illuminism,  which  was  found  even 
among  tlie  Gentile  Christians,  as  1  Cor.  viii."). — 
Judge.  On  the  other  hand,  the  z^mtr  is  the  spe- 
cifically improper  conduct  of  the  legal  believer,  and 
it  is  not  correct  to  suppose  that  (according  to  Tho- 
luck) the  tSot'Ofvnv  belongs  as  a  species  under  this 
KQivtiv.  That  the  Apostle,  in  the  present  section, 
has,  first  of  all,  to  do  with  the  one  judging,  the  one 
taking  offence,  is  plain,  as  well  from  the  construction 
of  the  foregoing  verse  as  from  the  succeeding  fourth 
ver.se.     It  is  also  clear  from  the  additional : 

For  God  hath  received  him  [6  Ofoi; 
yaQ  avTov  tt^ offf  Aa/5f to ].  He  has  been  re- 
ceived into  the  communion  of  God  and  Christ,  and 
thou  wilt  excommunicate  him  ?  This  should  always 
be  perceived  by  believers  relying  on  the  letter,  in 
relation  to  Christians  who  are  established  upon  the 
real  ground  of  faith.  [Stuart  and  Hodge  (following 
Calvin)  apply  this  clause  to  both  classes,  but  this  is 
t'orbidflen  both  by  the  context  and  by  the  fact  that 
the  strong  are  not  disposed  to  reject  but  to  despise 
the  weak  ;  while  the  weak  are  ever  for  excommuni- 
cating the  strong,  withdrawing  from  fellowship,  &c. 
Hence  the  pertinence  of  the  clause  to  this  class. 
So  Meyer,  De  Wette,  Philippi,  Alford,  and  most. — 
R.]  The  mark  of  this  reception  is  rather  the  peace 
and  light  of  fellowship  with  God,  than  reception  into 
the  Church.  Yet  this  also  comprises  the  fact,  that 
(iod  has  received  him  into  His  service  as  a  servant 
(Vatabl.),  but  only  indirectly. 


t  That  he  does  not  mention  bread,  but  vfigelabUs,  can  be 
of  service  in  the  exegesis.  Even  bread  first  passed  through 
the  hands  of  many  people;  he  could  more  easily  have 
vegetables  from  the  first  hand.  In  this  sense  it  was  the 
shibboleth  of  the  weak  one.  Tlierefore  his  motive  was  the 
careful  avoidance  of  contamination  from  fellowship  with 
the  heathen. 

27 


Ver.  4.  Who  art  thou  ?  &c.  {ah  r  iq  ft, 
x.T.X.  Comp.  chap.  ix.  20.]  Tholuck  is  here  quita 
beyond  the  connection  (in  consequence  of  the  sup- 
position that  iloiiQfvfTv  is  only  a  species  of  zoi- 
I'fir),  when  he  questions  whether  the  weak  one  here 
judging  is  addressed.  The  av  is  claimed  to  belong 
to  both  parts  (also  according  to  Reiche  and  Chry- 
sostom)  [Stuart,  Hodge]  ;  while  Meyer  and  Philippi, 
on  the  contrary,  properly  find  in  it  an  address  to  the 
weak  one  judging. 

Another  man's  servant  [aX).6rgi,ov  ot- 
xertjr.  Paul  uses  ol/.trtji;  only  here,  and  it  oc<;ur8 
in  the  New  Testament  but  rarely  (Luke  xvi.  13  ; 
Acts  X.  7  ;  1  Peter  ii.  18).  It  means  a  hmnc-sc^- 
vanl,  who  is  more  closely  connected  with  the  family 
than  the  other  slaves  (Meyer). — R.]  We  must  not 
pass  lightly  over  the  a/.  A  orator.  It  means  not 
merely  another,  but  a  atravge  one.  Meyer,  and  oth- 
ers :  "  He  who  is  not  in  thy  service,  but  in  tlie  ser- 
vice of  another.  But  the  one  who  judges  is  also  in 
the  service  of  this  other  one.  That  which  causes 
him  to  judge,  is  not  chiefly  the  notion  that  he  is  the 
master  of  this  servant,  but  that  the  servant  conducts 
himself  in  his  service  as  an  alioTQioi;,  who  has  in 
him  much  that  is  in  itself  surprising.  The  weak  one 
fails  to  find  in  him  the  manner  of  the  oi/.uoi;. 

To  his  own  master  \^tiJ)  idlo)  x i'()tw]. 
The  xiQiOi;  is  still  chiefly  figurative,  the  master  of 
the  strange  servant.  In  order  to  understand  the 
thought  to  its  fullest  extent,  we  must  first  consider 
the  figure.  It  is  the  figure  of  a  master  who  takes 
many  kinds  of  servants  in  his  service.  Now,  if  he 
has  one  from  a  foreign  country  who  makes  himself 
a  stn-prising  exception,  the  matter  belongs  to  the 
master  alone,  who  has  become  "  his  own  master  " — 
that  is,  the  exclusive  master. 

Standeth  or  falleth  \_{TT?';y.ft  tj  ninrfi,'\. 
The  standing  and  falling,  as  an  expression  of  God's 
judgment  (Ps.  i.  5  ;  Luke  xxi.  36,  &c.),  has  there- 
fore also  the  further  figurative  meaning  of  standing 
or  not  standing  in  the  household  judgment.  But 
this  figure  is  from  the  beginning  a  clear  designation 
of  the  relation  in  which  Jewish  and  Gentile  Cliris- 
tians  stand  to  Christ.  Christ  is  the  Master ;  see 
vers.  8,  9  ;  comp.  1  Cor.  vi.  20  ;  1  Peter  ii.  9.  The 
dative  may  be  regarded  as  clatip.  comm.,  even  if  the 
master  himself  is  the  judge,  because  it  is  his  loss  or 
gain  if  the  servant  falls  or  stands.     Explanations : 

1.  The  standing  or  falling  is  judicially  under- 
stood as  God's  judgment  (Calvin,  Grotius,  and  many 
others). 

2.  The  continuance  or  non-continuance  in  true 
Christian  life  is  meant  (Vatabl.,  Semler,  De  Wette, 
Maier,  Meyer). 

The  opposition  of  these  two  views  has  no  well- 
justified  meaning,  since,  in  a  religious  sense,  God's 
judgment  is  executed  through  the  life.*  Meyer,  in- 
deed, says,  in  favor  of  (2.) :  "  To  make  stand  in  the 
judgment  (to  absolve),  is  not  the  work  of  Divine 
power,  but  of  grace."  But  besides  the  fact  that 
power  and  grace  do  not  lie  so  far  asunder,  there 
comes  into  consideration  the  further  fact,  that  the 
question  here  is  not  concerning  a  making  to  stand 
chiefly  in  God's  judgment,  but  in  the  uninvited  judg- 
ment of  men  (Ebionitism,  hiorarchism,  &c.). 

He  sh2dl  be  made  to  stand  [araO  timrat 

*  [If,  however,  the  judgment  be  confined  to  the  final 
and  future  one,  there  is  an  opposition,  and  (].)  must  h* 
rejected.  Alford:  "Remains  in  the  place  and  estimation 
of  a  Christian,  from  which  those  would  eject  him."  This  M' 
simplest  and  best. — B.] 


418 


THE   EPISTLE    OF   PAUL   TO   THE   ROMANS. 


it].  Here  the  Apostle  completely  witlnlraws  the 
fi^iuMtive  veil  from  the  th()iit,'lit.  The  strong  man 
Till  niiiain  staudini;  in  his  f'recdoiii  of  faith.* 

For  the  Lord  is  able  to  make  him  stand 
[r5i  vrtTfi  ya('  6  x  r  (J  t  o  <,•  (t  r  7j  (T  a  i,  avrov. 
See  Textuii  Xotes  *  and  *.— R.]  Clirist  supports 
the  hjlievei.  If  the  reading  xr(Ji.o<;  were  regarded 
as  an  exegetical  correction,  we  would  have  to  eon- 
eider,  in  the  reading  fe>fo,-,  the  universal  historical, 
spiritual,  and  external  protection  which  (Jod  has  be- 
Btowed  upon  the  more  liberal  heatiien  Christianity, 
in  opposition  to  the  narrow  Jewish  Christianity,  and 
to  the  pure  religion  of  faith  in  opposition  to  legally 
■weakened  faith.  Meyer :  "  He  does  not  say  it  as 
one  who  gu'es  sccnrit;/,  but  who  hopes."  This  is 
against  Reiche,  who  says  that  Paul  could  not  go 
security  for  the  perseverance  for  the  strong  one  in 
faith,  wit;i  his  liberal  views,  and  hence  the  reference 
must  be  to  the  being  supported  in  the  judginent.f 
Grotius  says,  better :  esl  boie  omitiantis.  It  must 
be  observed,  that  the  Apostle  speaks  of  the  future 
of  the  strong  man  in  f/encre,  but  not  of  that  of  each 
individual,  for  he  had  early  experienced  that  indi- 
vidual men,  reputed  to  be  strong,  lapsed  into  anti- 
nomianism. 

Ver.  5.  One  man  esteemeth  one  day  above 
another  [  S s-  fi  iv  y.(tivn-  fj /tii^iav  net  <<  >) /( t - 
Qctv].  He  distinguishes  one  day  from  another,  and 
selects  it  as  a  holy-day.  K(ttvHv  =  probare.  The 
second  point  of  difference.  Selections  for  feast- 
days,  and  not  for  fast-days,  are  spoken  of  (Chrysos- 
tom,  Augustine,  Fritzsche).  In  harmony  with  the 
explanation  of  fast-day.'?,  t;/n<tnv  nao  ij/iti>nv  has 
also  been  explained  by  altertiU  dichus  (the  Vulgate  : 
judical  diem  inter  di  m  ;  Bcngel :  the  appointment 
of  days  for  distributing  alms).  [It  has  also  been 
referred  to  the  usage  in  regard  to  abstinence  from 
meat,  &c. — R.]  Tholuck  :  "  As  from  the  command- 
ments on  food,  so  also  from  the  Jewish  holy-days 
(Col.  ii.  10),  particularly  the  Sal)bath,  the  Jewish 
Christian  could  not  wean  himself,  for  we  find  the 
observance  of  the  Sabbath  even  in  the  fifth  century 
•of  the  Church,  al.-^o  in  (.'onst.  Ap.  25."  The  same 
author  correctly  observes,  that  the  holy-days,  among 
"the  Jews,  were  not  just  the  same  as  fast-days  (see 
also  Gal.  iv.  10).+ 

♦  [Dr.   Ilodare,   who  applies  ver.  3  to  both  weak  and 

i    atronjf,  nlthouu'li  admittii)^'  th:it  the  atlmonition  is  cliirlly 

*  addrei'scfl  to  tho  woak,   in  his   comments  on   this  verse, 

makes  a  upecial   nppliration  nh«it  treating  the  weak  in 

faith  with  forbearance.     This  is  altogether  contrary  to  tho 

context.— U.] 

t  [.-Mfonl  thinks  this  clause  is  inapplicah^e,  if  standinfi: 
and  fallin?  at  th^  threat  day  are  meant.  He  adds  :  "Notice, 
this  aruriimcnt  is  entirely  directed  lo  the  iv.iik,  who  un- 
charitably judc:es  the  .'•tronfi ;  not  »ic«-n<T.>(?.  The  we<il: 
■imairines  that  the  slrnnri  cannot  he  n  true  sei-vant  of  Ood, 
nor  retain  his  uteadfa-stnens  nra'dst  such  temptation.  To 
this  tho  .Vpostle  an^wei-s  :  (1  )  That  mirh  jiuli/mnit  bf.l«ngii 
only  !■>  (Virist,  whise,  S'in,ii,l  /»'•  is;  (2.)  That  the  L-mPs 
almijjh'j/  priwr  if  nhlf  to  hf.'p  him  up,  ntnl  wll  fl"  «>.''  That 
this  expression  is  not  to  he  tnken  as  absolutely  true  of  i'  di- 
Tiduiils,  is  evident ;  yet  it  must  not  be  made  too  general. 
-Rl 

$  [De:in  Alford  arpnes  from  this  verso  apunst  tho  rocop- 
nltion  of  the  Divine  ohlitiiti^m  of  one  day  in  seven  by  the 
Apostle.  "  Tin;  obvious  inf'rence  fiom  his  stiain  of  arifu- 
ing  is,  that  he  knew  of  no  such  obliu'ation,  b\it  bolieved  all 
times  and  days  to  be,  lo  the  Christian  ►trong  in  faith, 
ALIKE."  "It  must  be  carefully  remembered,  that  this 
infercnct  does  not  concern  the  ((ue-stion  of  tho  ohservanre 
of  flif.  Lnrr/'s  Day  as  an  iiislil  ilion  of  Ihr  Chrisliiin  Chiinli, 
aniilofin'in  (it  tho'onclcnt  Sabbnth,  bindiuK  on  us  from  con- 
siderations of  h  limit  nil;/  and  rflii/ioitx  <  Tp'ilinieij,  ond  by  Ihr. 
rithnnf  that  branrh  '•/ llir  Chiinh  in  which  Prnvi.hnce  h>xt 
p'tic'i)  II',  hut  not  in  any  way  inhcritinK  the  Dlvlnely- 
niipuiiitcd  obligatioa  of  the  other,  or  the  strict  prohibitions 


Let  every  man  be  fully  persuaded  in  hia 
own  mind  [  t'  /.  a  a  t  o  <;  t  v  t  iZ  1 1)  i  id  v  o  t  tt  /.  ly 
l>oi(  0  1^1  tin '>  i>>\.  The  Apostle  does  not  decide  in 
a  dogmatical  way,  although  he  has  sulKciently  indi- 
cated his  point  of  vicwi  But  he  lays  down  a  rule 
which  infallibly  leads  to  reconciliation.  We  cannot 
here  translate  vo7\; :  in  his  dlfpoadion  (De  Wctte), 
for  every  one  of  both  these  parties  would  be  thus 
assured  in  disposition.  Rather,  every  one  should 
.^eek  to  change  his  conviction  of  feeling — as  it  is 
connected  with  faith  in  authority,  party  infiuencc, 
iS:e^— into  his  inmost,  spiritually  ett'ectcd  conviction. 
We  could  therefore  here  translate  voTq :  in  his  ?<n- 
demfandinrj,  his  self-reflection,  his  practical  reason, 
his  mediated  self-consciousness ;  the  same  thought 
is  comprised  in  the  expression  :  self-understanding, 
regarded  as  the  conscious  and  reflecting  spiritual 
life,  by  which  the  roTs-  constitutes  an  antithesis  to 
the  immediateness  of  the  nvtviici  (see  1  Cor.  xiv. 
14,  15).  In  this  tendency  the  rationali-st  must  be- 
come free  from  the  dogma  of  deistical  or  pantheis- 
tical illuminism,  and  arrive  at  true  rationality  ;  in 
this  tendency,  the  one  who  is  bound  to  ordinances 
must  learn  to  distinguish  between  the  law  of  the 
S[)irit  and  the  law  of  the  letter ;  in  this  tendency, 
both  parties  must  become  free  from  prejudice,  fanati- 
cism, and  phraseology,  so  as  to  know  how  to  be  tol- 
erant, and  then  to  be  in  peace.* 

Ver.  6.  He  who  regardeth  the  day  [6 
(f  f>  (I  V i7t  V  Ttjv  tj  fl  i  1)  a  V  ].  This  verse  is  a  guiding- 
star,  according  to  which  every  one,  in  his  spiritual 
life,  should  become  certain  in  his  conviction.  The 
more  one  seeks  to  sanctify  his  opinion  religiously, 
to  bring  it  before  the  Lord,  and  to  change  it  to 
thanksgiving,  so  much  the  more  must  he  distinguiA 
the  true  and  the  false  in  the  light  of  God. 

Regardeth  it  unto  the  Lord  [zi^jtw  9)po- 
rfT.  The  dative  \i^  duf.  ommudi.]  The  xc^noc  is 
Christ  (Meyer,  Pliilippi,  and  others) ;  referred  by 
many  to  (Jod,  against  which  is  ver.  9  ;  Meyer:  unto 
the  Lord's  service.  Yet,  at  all  events,  a  service  in  a 
wider  sense  is  meant :  for  the  honor  of  his  Lord 
(see  1  Cor.  x.  31). — [And  he  that  regardeth  not, 
&c.     See  Text  no/  Xofe  •'.— H.] 

Proof:    For  he  giveth  thanks   unto  God 

by  which  its  sanctity  was  defended."  But  the  presence  o< 
tlie  fourth  commandment  in  the  D''calo(mc,  the  recofmition 
(and  explanation)  of  tho  oblipratlon  to  keep  the  Sabbath  by 
our  Lord,  as  well  as  n  true  conception  of  the  relation  of  the 
Daw  to  the  Christian  Dispensation,  is  auainst  this  sweeping 
view.  To  make  of  the  Lord's  Day  a  merely  e<'cleslastical  in- 
stil ution,  is  to  dri)rive  it  of  all  sanctity  under  a  free  povom- 
ment.  Alford,  too,  assumes  that  there  is  a  difference  ol 
opinion  implii-d  herf>,  respecting  tho  observance  of  the 
Ijord's  Day,  and  infers  then,  from  tho  laiipuape  of  ver.  6, 
that  the  .\postle  could  not  have  recognized  the  obli^tion. 
or  hi-  would  not  have  commended  the  man  who  did  not 
reffard  the  day.  But  there  is  no  hint  anywhere  of  a  differ- 
ence of  oiiinion  in  retard  to  the  observance  of  the  Lord's 
Day,  tlionph  we  mav  admit  that  such  observance  was  not 
yet  universal  ;  bcMdes,  the  text  of  ver.  fi  is  disputed. 
C'omp.  Lanire's  i'mnm.  .Mtii'hiw,  vii.  S,  p  217;  Otlnliant, 
iv.  10,  pp.  lOii,  100;  O'Inssuinx,  ii.  Ifi,  pp.  .W,  .')8  ;  Haldnr.e, 
llnmiins,  pp.  f)8S-72l.— Also  the  literature  of  tho  Sabbath 
qnestiou,  as  published  by  the  N.  Y.  Sabbath  Committee. 

•  (The  tise  of  vovf,  not  nvtuna,  shows  that  reflection, 
judinnint,  and  all  the  proper  exercises  of  the  pm'lic-il  rea- 
son, are  called  for  m  the  decision  of  questions  of  personal 
duty.  It  is  not  tlie  intuition  of  the  irvruMo  in  any  sense, 
but" the  full  conviction  of  nn  rdwilcd  conscience,  which  is 
hero  ref(<rred  t<i.— Wordsworth  has  n.  quaint  fancy  respoct- 
inif  the  verb  irA))po<f>opei<r9u>  :  "  Let  him  sail  on  iiuietlv,  aa 
it  were,  with  a  lair  wiiul  of  persuasion  fiUiiiR  tho  sails  of 
l:l;i  own  niinil."'  He  adds:  "There  may  be  a  irAi)po(^opia, 
a  stronp  wind  of  pcrstiasi.m,  which  will  not  waft  a  man  to 
the  harlior  of  Truth,  but  wreck  him  on  the  quicksands  oj 
Krror."-K.l 


CHAPTER  XIV.   1-XV.  4. 


419 


[^fv/aQHTtfi  ya^  tw  0?w].  The  thanksgiv- 
ing  at  the  Uible  (Matt.  xv.  36  ;  xxvi.  26,  &c.)  is  a 
proof  that,  with  pious  feeling  and  a  good  conscience, 
he  consecrates  his  food  and  his  enjoyment  to  God  as 
a  thanlv-otfering.  [Alford  :  "  Adduced  as  a  practice 
of  both  parties,  tliis  shows  the  universahty  among 
the  early  Christians  of  (haiikliu/  God  at  uteals." — R.] 
— And  he  who  eatelh  not.  He  who  abstains 
from  eating  meat.  Even  he  is  thankful  for  his  scan- 
ty meal. 

Ver.  1.  For  none  of  us  liveth  to  himself 
[ot'cVft^;  ya^  ijuHiv  tavro)  tij].  The  Apostle 
designates  the  universal  basis  of  the  thought,  that 
the  Christian  eats  or  does  not  eat  to  the  Lord.  This 
rests  upon  the  fact  that  we  exist  here,  that  we  live 
und  die,  to  the  Lord.  Meyer  says,  correctly :  Tlie 
dative  must  be  taken  in  the  ethico-:!e/«c  sense.  This 
telic  ftc  arror  is,  indeed,  always  connected  with  a 
d't'  avrov  and  f|  avroTi ;  although  the  objective  de- 
pendence on  Christ  (Riickert,  Reiche)  ia  not  directly 
meant,  and,  in  an  absolute  sense,  all  these  terms 
apply,  through  Christ,  to  God. 

Ver.  8.  We  die  unto  the  Lord  [rio  xvqIu) 
ciTTo  Or  t;  (Txofi  fv.  See  Textual  Note  '.]  Even 
the  Ciiristian's  dying  is  an  act  of  consecration  to  the 
glory  of  Christ  (Bengel :  eadem  ars  tnoriendi,  quce 
viveiidi). 

Whether  we  live,  therefore,  or  die,  &c. 
[f«f  Tf  ovv  t(T>/ifv  edv  n  ano  O-vi]  a  xo) - 
Hfv,  r..r.)..'\  This  proposition  does  not  merely 
serve  to  establish  the  foregoing  (we  eat  or  do  not 
eat),  but  to  explain  and  elucidate  it.  The  stronger 
form,  the  stronger  antithesis  of  living  and  dying, 
underlies  the  eating  and  not  eating.  But  both  coin- 
cide in  our  being  the  Lord's  (belonging  to  Him). 
[Alford :  "  "VVe  are,  under  all  circumstances,  living 
or  dying  (and  a  fortiori  eating  or  abstaining,  ob- 
serving days  or  not  observing  them),  Christ's  :  His 
property." — Meyer  :  "  In  the  thrice-repeated  and 
emphatic  rm  /.i^iim  (toT  xv()i-ov)  notice  tiie  d  vinn 
Clrristi  majtstas  d  potestas  (Bengel),  to  which  the 
Christian  knows  himself  to  be  entirely  devoted." 
-R.] 

Ver.  9.  For  to  this  end  Christ  died  and 
lived  again  [f('s  toTto  ya^  X^ktto?  ani- 
lO^ai'fr  xai  Stfjfffv.  See  Textual  JVote  ^.'\  The 
telic  definition  of  the  death  and  resurrection  of 
Christ  serves,  on  the  other  hand,  to  establish  our 
living  and  dying  to  the  Lord.  The  tu^/fff  here,  as 
in  Rev.  ii.  8,  designates  Christ's  return  to  eternal 
life,  hence  the  arirsrri  is  passed  over.  Olshausen 
M-ould  understand  the  itridf  to  be  the  earthly  life 
of  Jesus  (therefore  taken  as  a  Hmtrron  proteron). 
Thereby  a  uniformity  would,  at  all  events,  be  con- 
stituted by  the  statement :  we  live  or  we  die,  but  a 
dissimilarity  would  be  called  forth  in  relation  to  what 
follows.  Meyer  properly  brings  out  also  the  fact 
that  the  xiqiotiji;  of  the  Lord  is  established  on  His 
death  and  resurrection.  But  it  is  in  harmony  with 
the  telic  definition  of  Christ's  dominion  that  the  an- 
tithesis in  this  life — the  living  and  the  dead — re- 
cades  beldnd  the  antithesis  in  the  future  life,  the 
dead  (in  the  act  of  dying  and  in  Sheol)  and  t/ie  liv- 
ing, by  whom  it  is  conditionally  established. 

Both  of  the  dead  and  the  living.  Accord- 
ing to  Meyer's  suggestion,  the  purpose  is  not  to  re- 
fe."  the  effects  of  Christ's  death  and  return  to  life  (as 
sundered)  to  the  dead  and  to  the  living  respectively 
(see  his  note  on  p.  497). 

Ver.  111.  But  why  dost  thou  judge.  The 
TV  is  here  opposed  to  tiie  dominion  of  Christ  over 


the  dead  and  the  living,  as  above,  to  another  man'? 
servant ;  but  the  latter  is  now  denoted  brother. 

Or  why  dost  thou  set  at  nought  thy 
brother  ?  The  Apostle,  having  spoken  of  the 
weaker  one,  now  speaks  these  words  to  the  stronger, 
in  order  to  maintain  his  harmonizing  position.  Here, 
as  well  as  in  the  supporting  of  him  who  stands,  ver. 
4,  and  in  the  thanksgiving  in  ver.  6,  the  Apostle  goe« 
back  to  the  higiiest  causahty  (see  Textual  Note  "). 

For  w^e  shall  all  stand  before  the  judg- 
ment-seat of  God  l^ndvTfi;  ydq  na()  aarij 
ao/ifda.  rm  fti^fiatu  rov  6^*0?].  We  must 
appear  before  the  judgment-seat  of  God  himself, 
which  Christ  shall  administer  as  Lord  (chap.  ii.  16  ; 
-lets  xvii.  31  ;  comp.  Matt.  xxv.  33  ;  Acts  xxvi.  6). 
The  judging  of  one's  brother,  therefore,  first,  en- 
croaclies  upon  Christ's  office  as  ruler,  and,  second, 
anticipates  the  judgment-bar  of  God. 

Ver.  11.  For  it  is  written.  Isa.  xlv.  23.  On 
the  free  form  of  the  citation  from  memory,  and  from 
the  LXX.,  see  Philijjpi,  p.  571.  [See  also  Textual 
Note  '". — R.]  On  ISofio/.oyHffOni,,  with  the  dative, 
meaning  to  praise  (Rom.  xv.  9  ;  Matt.  xi.  25,  &c.), 
see  Thohick,  p.  719  ;  Meyer,  p.  498.  [Meyer  says 
the  verb  witli  the  dative  always  means:  to  praise; 
with  the  accusative  of  the  object :  to  cotifesx  (Matt, 
iii.  6,  &c.). — R.]  That  special  kind  of  praise,  how- 
ever, is  meant,  which  occurs  after  a  finished  act  of 
Divine  Providence  according  to  a  Divine  decision 
(see  Phil.  ii.  11).  Tholuck  says :  "  Isa.  xlv.  23  does 
not  speak  of  the  appearance  of  Christians  before  the 
judgment-seat  of  God,  but  fif  mankind's  universal 
and  humble  confession  of  dependence  upon  God." 
But  this  unwarrantably  removes  the  element  of  future 
time,  the  eschatological  element,  which  is,  at  all 
events,  also  comprised  in  the  passage  in  Isaiah. 
Meyer  saj's,  somewhat  better :  "  In  Isaiah  God 
makes  the  assurance  by  an  oath,  that  all  men  (even 
the  heathen)  shall  reverently  swear  allegiance  to 
Him.  Paul  here  regards  this  Divine  declaration 
which  promises  messianic  victory,  because  it  prom- 
ises the  universal  victory  of  the  theocracy,  accord- 
ing to  the  special  and  final  fulfilment  that  it  shall 
have  in  the  general  judgment."* — That  even  the 
prophetic  passage  itself  comprises,  with  Christ's  sav- 
ing advent,  also  the  eschatological  references,  follows 
from  the  definite  prospect  that  every  knee  shall  bow 
before  Jehovah,  &c.  (see  Phil.  ii.  10,  11). 

Ver.  12.  So  then  every  one,  &c.  [See  Text- 
ual Note  ".]  Meyer  puts  the  emphasis  on  txaa- 
To?,  Philippi  on  rip'  ('Jf'i,  Others  on  TTf^i.  faiTor. 
The  first  is  preferable. — R.]  In  this  lies  the  ground 
of  the  following  exhortation  (ver.  13):  Let  us  not 
therefore  judge  one  another  any  more  [  "  ^  - 
y.tTi,  ovv  d).).t]  Xovq  x{tiri'i  II  fv\  The  Apostle 
here  comprises  both  parts,  and  thereby  makes  his 
transition  to  the  following  admonition  to  the  strong. 

B.  Chap.  xiv.  13-xv.  1.  On  giving  offence  and 
despising.  "  Exhortation  to  the  strong  "  in  particu- 
lar. 

Ver.    13.    But    judge    this    rather    [ct).).a, 


*  ["'With  the  reading  row  Xpicrrov  (ver.  10),  Theo- 
dorct,  Luther,  Calvin,  and  many  others,  so  Philij-pi,  hav« 
found  in  tio  ©eui  a  proof  of  the  divinity  of  Chiist.  But 
the  funilamentai  idea  is  rather,  that  it  is'  Goil,  whose  judg- 
ment Christ  holds ;  which  thought  is  contained  in  the 
reading  toO  ©«oO  (ver.  10)  also  ;  "  Meyer.  It  is  quite  un- 
necessary to  found  arguments  on  disputed  readings,  when 
so  many  other  passaues  are  at  hand.  Most  of  those  wlio 
thus  do,  are  natiu-ally  influenced  in  their  critical  judgmentj 
by  their  doctrinal  positions. — E.] 


420 


THE    EPISTLE    OF   PAUL   TO   THE   ROMANS. 


toTto  tLQivaTt  ^«A/or].  The  x(<i»'«Tf.  The 
Apoiitle  uses  the  same  word  in  a  changed  meaning, 
in  order  to  em[)liat;ize  more  particularly,  by  this  aut- 
anaclasis,  the  antichesist  o  judging.  The  considera- 
*ioa  of  tlie  future  judgment  .should  move  believers 
.n  particular  to  so  coiiihiet  tlicmselves  as  to  give 
DtlVnce  to  no  one  (Matt,  xviii.  0  fi.).  Meyer:  "Let 
that  1)1'  your  ju(l;.'-ment." 

Not  to  put  a  stumbling-block  or  an  occa- 
'sion  of  falling  in  a  brother's  way  [to  /<  ^ 
r  t  &  ivat  rt  u  6  a  y.  u  II  II  a  no  «<)*/</  ij>  rj  ff  x  a  r  - 
dalov].  It  does  not  follow  that,  becau.se  the  ex- 
pressions 7H) 6 (T x  0 II  fi  a  and  axdv(1a/.ov  are,  in 
general,  used  met  iphorieally  as  .synonyms,  we  would 
here  have  to  accept  a  "  verbosity  in  tlie  interest  of 
the  case"  (Meyei).  In  ver.  21  we  find  even  three 
special  designations  :  noofrxoTTTn,  t;  rTxHi'iinU^trai. 
tj  aniytrtl.  There  also,  however,  Meyer,  with  oth- 
ers, regards  the  threefold  designation  as  only  the 
expression  of  the  urgency  of  tlie  matter.  But  in 
a  real  reference,  the  twofold  elfect  of  the  [/ifinf/ 
offeiia'  comes  into  consideration.  The  giving  offence 
is  either  an  occasion  for  the  punctilious  brother  to 
become  embittered  and  still  more  iiardened  in  his 
prejudice,  or  to  conduct  himself  frivolonsly,  without 
an  understanding  of  the  principle  of  freedom,  and 
thus,  according  to  the  present  passage,  eat  meat 
with  inward  scruples  of  conscience.*  The  Apostle 
indicates  the  first  case  in  ver.  15,  and  the  second  in 
ver.  23.  The  use  of  different  ex[)ressions,  in  them- 
selves .synonymous,  to  denote  this  atiti thesis,  was 
quite  natural,  and,  in  ver.  21,  the  Apostle  seems  to 
distinguish  even  three  cases  :  to  take  an  offence  for- 
ward, or  backward,  or  to  be  strengthened  in  weak- 
ness. Even  to  this  very  day,  the  offence  which  the 
Jews  take  at  Christianity  is  divided  into  the  two 
fractions  of  extreme  legality  and  of  wild  liberalism. 
The  nO-ivat,  causes  us  to  return  to  the  original 
sense  of  the  words  (see  the  Lexicons). 

Ver.  14.  I  know,  and  am  persuaded  in 
the  liOrd  Jesus  [otrirt  /.ai  nirrnaiiai,  tv 
XV Q ill)  'y»/(Tor].  He  knows  it  already  a.s  an  Old 
Testament  monotheist,  who  knows  that  God  is  the 
Creator  of  all  things  (1  Tim.  iv.  3,  4;  Gen.  i.  31). 
But  he  also  has  the  fi.xed  assurance  of  it  in  the  fel- 
lowship of  Christ,  by  virtue  of  Justifying  faitii  in 
His  Spirit.  Calovius :  iiliertafe  a  C/iriulo  parla. 
[.\lford  :  "  These  words  give  to  the  persuasion  the 
weight  not  merely  of  Paul's  own  loyi'^oncu,  but  of 
apostolic  authority.  He  is  persuaded,  in  his  capa- 
city as  connected  with  Christ  Jesus,  as-  haviwf  the 
mind  of  Vlirist."  So  Ilodge,  substantially,  but  with 
less  exactness,  since  he  retains  the  incorrect  bif  of 
the  E.  V.  It  is  doubtful  whether  ii'  ever  has  this 
force.  Jowett,  iiowever,  calls  these  words :  "  the 
form  in  whicli  St.  Paul  expresses  his  living  and 
doing  all  things  in  Christ,  as,  in  language  colder 
and  more  appropriate  to  our  time,  we  niight  say  ns 
'  a  Christian.'  "  But  this  is  a  dilution  of  the  force 
of  the  expression. — R.]     A  consciousness  of  Christ's 

♦  (Philippi,  Stuart,  IIocl(to,  Jowett,  and  most,  rocard 
the  two  <-xprcssion8  ns  Byuonymous,  the  latter  perhaps 
expl.'inatorv  of  the  former.  Alford  diJlinKiii^hes)  :  "iiti 
occaHion  of  stumlilinR,  in  net;  an  occasion  of  offence,  in 
Ihniight."  Webstci-  iind  Wilkinson:  "A  liir^er  ol)st(icle 
agninitt  whicli  we  may  strike  tlie  foot ;  a  siniiller  one  likely 
to  cateli  the  foot.  Tlie  former  licnotes  a  n  itnin,  the  latter 
a  prohabi',  cau.sc  of  falliiiK. — AV'ord.xworth  (rives  as  a  com- 
mentary on  thi.H  verse,  Home  extrurts  from  Hooker,  in  ref- 
oronco  to  the  non-cfjnf')rini8ts.  These  remiirks  are  emi- 
nently "ju'licioiis,"  but  have  a  flavor  of  remote  anti(iuity 
in  their  allusions  to  "  oboilicnoe  to  rites  and  ceromonioa 
0>^nstltuted  by  lawful  public  autliorilij."—R.'\ 


declaration  in  Matt.  xv.  11  is  here  more  probabla 
than  questionable  ;  but  then  that  declaration  is  not 
in  a  legal  sense  the  basis  of  his  freedom  (coinp.  also 
1  Cor.  viii.  8  ;  Co^.  ii.  14-16). 

Unclean:  xotror,  profane,  unclean  in  the 
religious  legal  sense  (see  the  ('mumttitari/  on  Mat- 
t/icw,  p.  277  ;  the  Commentary  on  Mark,  p.  64). 
Lcvitically  unclean  was,  indeed,  even  still  a  type  of 
what  was  common  or  unclean  in  the  real  spiritual 
sense  (Ileb.  x  29). 

Of  itself,  (Ji'  a'vrov,  not  according  to  Lach 
mann's  rcailing,  (Vi'  ulrov.  [See  Textual  Note  ".] 
Of  itself,  according  to  its  nature,  in  contrast  with 
the  economical  order,  the  moral  convenience,  or  the 
natural  feeling  or  conscience  of  th  ,■  one  partaking. 
[Theodoret,  reading  rti'ToT,  refers  it  to  Christ. — R.] 
"  The  Apostle  himself  belongs  to  the  strong  (eonip. 
t-/ifTi;  in  chap.  xv.  1,  and  1  Cor.  ix.  22);"  Tholuck. 
But  he  also  again  distinguishes  himself  from  the 
ordinarily  strong  one,  in  that  he  takes  into  the  ac- 
count, as  a  c(j-determining  factor,  con.science  and  re- 
gard to  fraternal  intercourse,  or  habitual  practice. — 
[But  to  him,  ft  fi  ij  riZ.  This  introduces  an  ex- 
ception to  nnclran,  not  to  vnrlenn  of  itsrif.  Hence 
not  =  «;.;.«,  but  =  nisi  (Meyer).— R.]-^To  him 
it  is  unclean.  With  emphasis.  [The  uncleanness 
is  accordingly  subjective  (Meyer). — R.'J 

Ver.  1.").  For  if  [tl  ycii).  See  Textual  Xote 
".]  The  less  authenticated  reading  f  i  i)i  seems  at 
the  first  glance  to  be  most  suitable  ;  but  the  reading 
ft  j'cio  seems  to  compel  us  to  accept,  that  even  the 
strong  one,  who  knows  that  a  certain  kind  of  food 
seems  unclean  to  his  weak  brother,  makes  himself 
unclean  by  eating  it  to  his  offence.* 

Because  of  thy  meat  thy  brother  is  grieved 
[  ()  ^  o  /-J  ii  iTi  II  a  0  a  i)  ;■  /.  <i  o  •■:  rs  n  i<  }.  i  tt  t  i  r  h  i . 
H(>o>!in,  that  food  which  he  holds  to  lie  unclean. 
Bengel  calls  this  vieiosis.  Conip.  Ileb.  ix.  10  ;  xii. 
16  ;  xiii.  9. — R.]  The  difficulty  occasioned  by  the 
expression  ).v7ifTrai,  is  due  to  a  neglect  to  dis- 
tinguish properly  the  two  kinds  of  offence.  First 
of  all,  the  question  here  is  concerning  that  offence 
which  consisted  in  the  weak  one's  being  made  to 
stumble  by  the  strong  one's  eating  of  meat.  Tho- 
luck :  ^^ /.rnHv,  according  to  the  Xew  Testament 
use  of  language:  to  afflict;"  therefore  hntlaDak 
is  taken  by  expositors  (Origen)  •=  axaviinVi'ZKjOat. 
But  would  he  who  too'-  offence  at  the  eating  be 
thereby  induced  to  imitate  the  example  ? — Accord- 
ing to  the  Apostle,  it  was,  at  all  events,  the  one  who 
ate,  notwithstamling  the  offence  he  had  taken,  but 
not  the  other,  who  was  irritated  and  felt  himself 
aggrii'ved  as  much  liy  the  supposed  pride  as  by  the 
inconsiilerateness  of  the  strong  one.  "  But  isuch  an 
affliction,"  says  Philippi,  "  would  be  the  beginning 
of  the  judging  forbidden  by  the  Apostle,  which  he 
therefore  would  not  recommend  to  special  regard." 

*  [If  8^  bo  read,  then  this  verse  introduces  «  limitation 
to  the  praetioal  aiJiilieation  of  the  principle  of  vr.  14 
(Hodire) ;  but  if  yap  be  road,  then  wo  must  take  the  pa.ssapro 
as  breviloqnent  or  elliptical.  Tholuck  and  Meyer  join  wiih 
ei  fi^,  ic.T.A.,  findinif  here  fho  statement  of  the  reason  why 
he  mast  atld  that  exception,  viz.,  to  oppose  the  unchnrifci- 
blcncss  which  is  involved  in  not  repirdinir  it.  Alford 
makes  it  depend  "on  the  suppressed  restatement  of  the 
i  precept  of  ver.  13  :  7.  </.,  'Hut  this  knowledge  is  not  to  bo 
I  your  rule  In  practice,  but  rather,'  &c.,  ns  in  ver.  13  :  *f'>r 
If,'  &c."  I'hilippi  objects  to  both  views,  and  urpcs  his  ob- 
jections nKaiust  the  better  sustained  readini;.  Ho  says 
Meyer's  interpretation  is  "manifestly  too  far-fet<'hed  ; " 
but  his  own  lay  so  near,  that  the  temptation  to  niter  the 
text  was  as  stronR  as  the  desire  to  sustain  the  clianpo 
aKainsl  overwhelminpr  evidence  seems  to  Vo  in  the  case  ol 
some  commcutatvra. — R.] 


CHAPTER  XIV.    1-XV.   4. 


42 


"Wliat !  a  prejudiced  man's  being  afflicted  itself  the 
beginning  of  judging  ?  Philippi,  in  liarmony  with 
Eisner,  ignores  the  subjective  justification  of  this 
affliction,  by  interpreting  the  }.i<7Tnv  according  to 
the  signification  frequently  occurring  in  the  classics : 
to  prejudice,  to  injure.  Meyer,  on  the  other  hand, 
urges  against  this  the  New  Testament  use  of  lan- 
guage, and  understands  the  expression  to  mean 
moral  mortification,  an  insult  to  the  conscience, 
with  reference  to  Eph.  iv.  30.*  Gi'otius,  and  oth- 
ers, have  referred  the  word  to  the  affliction  pro- 
duced by  the  charge  of  narrowness.  The  chai'ge 
of  narrowness  comprised  in  reckless  "  eating  "  does, 
indeed,  come  into  consideration  as  a  single  element, 
but  it  is  not  the  priticipal  thing. 

Thou  art  no  longer  walking  according  to 
love  [oi'z  iro  y.ara  ciyctTitjv  n  f  (j  i- tt ut  tlc^. 
For  the  one  giving  otfence  injures  love,  and  also 
makes  himself  unclean. 

Destroy  not  by  thy  meat,  &c.  [  /i  i;  r  w 
ft  Q  It')  II  a  T  I, .  x.T./..]  Comp.  1  Cor.  viii.  10,  11. 
But  it  does  not  follow  fi-om  this  analogy  (of  1  Cor.), 
that  the  brother  is,  in  all  cases,  led  only,  by  a  nar- 
row and  frivolous  eating  with  others,  to  infidelity  to 
his  conscience,  and  that  it  is  only  by  means  of  this 
that  he  incurs  the  danger  of  the  anio/.fia,  or  actu- 
ally relapses  into  a  state  leading  to  this.  The  ex- 
asperations of  the  one  falling  back  upon  ordinances 
lead  to  fanaticism  and  the  nnioi.ua,  just  as  surely 
as  laxities  lead  to  antinomianisni.  Meyer  says : 
"  The  occasion  to  fall  from  Christianity  (Theophy- 
lact,  Grotius,  &c.)  is  not  at  all  taken  into  considera- 
tion.! But  can  there  be,  in  the  case  of  Christians, 
a  relapse  into  the  ann'ihia  without  a  real  apostasy 
from  Christianity?  Bengel :  ^e  jiluris  feceris  tuum 
cibiim,  qnnm  Chrixhis  vi'am  suam.\ 

Ycr.  16.  Let  not  then  your  good  be  evil 
spoken  of  [ /t  /;  ft ).aa  n  tj ,«  t  ia  & ii>  o  v  v  v /<  w v 
TO  ayaOov.  See  Textual  Note  '*.  Be  Wette 
thus  explains  the  connection  of  ovv  with  what  pre- 
cedes :  "  If  this  does  not  take  place,  then  your  good 
will  not  be  evil  spoken  of" — R.]  What  is  the  good 
which  the  Apostle  speaks  of,  and  in  how  far  is  it 
exposed  to  slander  ?     Explanations : 


*  [Dr.  Latiorc's  view  appears  to  be  correct,  but  some  re- 
marks must  be  added  for  the  sake  of  clearness.  The  weak 
brother  is  evidently  the  one  who  is  "  grieved."  The  offence 
of  the  stions  brother  is  one  aar.iinst  chaiity  ;  hence  the 
objection  of  Philippi,  aliout  Paul's  paying  special  reg'ard  to 
the  ve'y  judging  he  bad  forbidden,  is  altoether  irrelevant ; 
since  charity  is  not  to  be  measured  by  the  ijropriety  of  the 
demands  made  upon  it  by  the  weak  brethren.  We  reject 
the  meaning  Jiy'ine,  and  (witii  Meyer)  take  Xvireirai  in 
a  subjective  sense.  It  mu-t  be  distinguished  from  an-dAAve, 
to  which  it  leads  as  a  possible  result  (Meyer,  iind  others;. 
It  docs  not  necessarily  imply  that  the  weak  brother  is  led  to 
imitate  and  thus  to  offend  against  his  own  conscience,  al- 
though this  is  a  probable  result.  Wordsworth  suggests,  as 
part  of  the  injury,  that  he  is  led  "to  make  a  schiom  in  the 
Church  by  separating  from  thee." — R.] 

t  [In  iiis  ith  edition,  Meyer  omits  all  reference  to  this 
point.  Phil'ppi,  however,  calls  this  verse  a  ilirliim  prribans 
for  the  possibility  of  apostasy.  But  as  Dr.  Ilodge  remarks : 
"  Saints  are  preserved,  not  in  despite  of  apostasy,  but  from 
apostasy.     If  they  apostasize,  they  perish." — R.l 

X  [It  is  evident  that  aTrwAeia  refers  to  eternal  destruc- 
tion, since  Christ  offered  His  life  to  redeem  from  this 
(Meyer);  yet,  as  this  destruction  (like  the  antithetical 
notion,  eternal  life)  begins  here,  according  to  the  sci-iptuial 
representatio'  s,  we  must  t.ake  it  in  its  widest  sense.— Al- 
ford  thus  parai  hrases  the  verse,  brineing  out  the  contrast 
implied  in  the  use  of  j3pw/aa  :  "The  more  kvirelv  your 
brothiT,  is  an  offence  agaim-t  love  ;  how  much  greater  an 
otfence,  thin,  if  this  Avireiv  end  in  aTroAAiieii/ — in  raising 
(causing  to  act  against  bis  conscience,  and  so  commit  sin, 
and  be  in  danger  of  quenching  God's  Spirit  within  him)  by 
a  MEAL  of  thine— a  brother,  for  whom  Christ  died ! "— R.] 


1.  TO   aya&ov  is  Christian  freedom  ("in  re 

lation  to  eating  meat "),  Origen,  Thoniasius,  Grotius. 
and  others ;  Tholuck,  with  reference  to  1  Cor.  x 
29,  30.  Then  the  reference  to  the  eating  of  mea( 
is  evidently  nothing  more  than  an  accidental  con- 
sistency of  Christian  freedom  in  its  general  nieaning.* 
De  Wette  and  Philippi,  on  the  contrary,  observe 
that  the  matter  in  question  here  is  the  possession 
not  of  a  single  party,  but  of  the  whole  Chuich. 
But  Tholuck  aptly  replies :  "  This  freedom  was  ob- 
jectively purchased  for  the  whole  Cliurch."  There 
fore  also  the  reading  tjnotv  does  not  pronounce! 
against  this  explanation. 

2.  Theodoret,  De  Wette,  Philippi :  faith.  [Lu- 
ther, Melanchthon,  Hodge,  &c. :  the  gospel.  In  fact, 
this  is  the  view  of  Philippi :  doctriha  evanqelixa. — ■ 
R.] 

3.  The  kingdom  of  God,  in  ver.  17.  [So  Ewald, 
Unibreit,  Meyer.  With  projjer  restrictions,  this  view 
seems  least  olijectionable.  (2.)  and  (3.)  iniply  that 
the  evil-speaking  is  from  without  the  Church. — R.] 

Unquestionably  ver.  1*7  is  an  explanation  of  ver. 
16,  but  the  kingdom  of  God  is  here  described  as  a 
treasure  and  enjoyment  of  faith,  and  there  it  is  the 
first  element:  righteousness  through  Chiist  =  free- 
dom from  human  ordinances;  see  Gal.  v.  1.  The 
explanations  harmonize,  in  maintaining  that  the  ques- 
tion is  concerning  the  Christian  good,  /.m^  iloyi]v. 
And  this  good  must  be  named  objectively  the  gos- 
pel, and  subjectively  faith  ;  or,  if  we  comprise  both 
these  elements,  the  kingdom  of  God.  It  obscures 
the  text  to  rend  these  things  asunder  by  ant,  aat. 
But  it  is  unmistakable  that  the  Apostle  spt  aks  rela-l 
tively  of  this  good,  as  it  is  represented  in  the  fioe-| 
dom  of  faith  enjoyed  by  renewed  mankind.  Kow, 
as  the  punctilious  Jewish  Christians,  and  particularly 
the  Jews,  saw  many  Christians  abusing  their  fiee- 
dom,  they  were  exposed  to  the  danger,  from  this 
abuse  of  freedom,  to  abuse  and  finally  to  slander 
freedom  itself,  and  even  the  gospel,  according  to  a 
confusion  of  fanaticism  similar  to  what  occurs  in 
our  day,  when  men  confound  the  Reformation  with 
revolution,  with  the  Miinster  fanaticism,  with  sec- 
tarianism, and  apostasy  from  Christianity.  Paul 
already  had  a  sufficientl)'  bitter  experience  in  the 
itnpossibility  of  avoiding  such  slanders,  even  when 
the  greatest  care  is  observed  ;  he  all  the  more  re- 
garded it  as  an  obligation  of  wisdom  and  love,  to 
admonish  those  who  were  free  to  make  a  proper  use 
of  their  freedom.  We  must  not,  however,  consider 
the  slander  of  Christian  freedom  in  itself  alone,  apart 
from  its  principle,  faith.  Be.«ides,  this  one  slander 
of  Christians  against  Christians  had,  as  its  result, 
another:  that  the  Gentiles  abused  Christianity  be- 
cause of  its  division,  and  perhaps  the  proudest  among 
them  made  it  a  subject  of  deri.sion,  that  Christians 
contended  about  eating  tind  drinking,  as  if  these 
things  were  tlie  real  blessings  of  the  kiiigdom  of 
heaven.  This  latter  feature  is  the  explanation  of 
Cocceius. 

Yer.  17.  For  the  kingdom  of  God.  [/'«(>. 
If  the  reference  in  ver.  16  be  to  freedom,  then  the 
connection  is  :  Preserve  your  liberty  from  such  evil- 


*  [Alford  :  "  Tour  stnngfh  nffaifh  is  a  gnnd  thivi/ ;  let 
it  nol  pus.'!  i)ilo  had  Tipufr."  This  is  more  exact,  and  avoids 
borrowing  an  interpretation  from  1  Cor.  x.  Yet  ii  is  still 
more  ope  n  to  the  objcctio'  ,  thai  the  matter  here  referred  to 
is  a  possession  of  the  whole  Church.  The  change  to  th« 
plural  (ii fiui/),  its  emphatic  position,  and  the  jihrabe  tc 
a.ya.96v  itself,  sufficiently  attest  the  correctne.'^s  of  ihf 
view,  which  refers  this  '^guoW'  to  the  whole  Church.— R.) 


422 


THE   EPISTLE   OF   PATTL   TO   THE   ROMANS. 


speaking,  since  notliing  spiritual  is  involved.  If, 
Lortovor,  Meyer's  view  be  adopted,  then  a  motive  is 
presented  liere,  with  a  reference  to  the  tenor  of  the 
evil-speaking — i.  ».,  the  blasphemy  would  consist  in 
such  a  wrong  estimate  of  Gliristianity,  or  the  king- 
dom of  God  iu  the  minds  of  tliose  without.  The 
advantage  of  taking  tlie  wider  view  of  ver.  IG  be- 
comes obvious  here.  For  if  it  be  restricted  to  the 
stroiKj,  then  this  verse  must  be  so  restricted  also, 
when  its  most  necessary  ai>plicalion  is  to  the  weak 
brethren. — K.]  Tiie  [iacr  t./.tia  rur  (-J  for,  typi- 
fied by  the  Old  Testament  theocracy,  is  God's  domin- 
ion over  the  heart,  instituted  and  administered  by 
Christ ;  it  is  the  heavenly  sphere  of  life,  in  which 
God's  word  and  Spirit  govern,  and  whose  organ  on 
eartli  is  the  Cliureli.  Here,  too,  Meyer  mixes  up 
tlie  seconil  advent :  there  is  "  also  here  nothing  else 
than  tlie  messianic  kingdom,  which  shall  be  set  up 
at  the  second  coming  i>(  Cln-ist." 

Is  not  eating  and  drinking  [fifjiTiaiq  xal 
TToait;.  Comp.  Col.  ii.  IG.  Tiie  act  of  eating  and 
of  drinking.  The  reference  is  obviously  to  the  prac- 
tice of  both  parties. — R.]  Its  nature  does  not  con- 
sist in  this.  [Not  as  the  Greek  fathers  interpret : 
it  is  not  W'>n  by  this. — R.]  Meyer :  "  The  moral 
condition  of  its  (future  !)  nature  does  not  depend 
upon  it." 

But  righteousness,  and  peace,  and  joy  in 
the  Holy  GllOSt  [  tt  /.  /.  a  <)  i  xaioa  {■  v  ;/  xal 
f  I  (J  t'j  V  ri  y.  n  i  •/ a  t>  a  iv  nvtv/iccTt  ocyiu)^. 
De  Wette  has  full  ground  for  contending  against 
the  sliallow  interpretations  of  these  words,  by  a 
series  of  commentators  from  Chrysostom  down  to 
Meyer  (Grotius  and  Fritzsche  among  the  number), 
to  the  etlect  that  the  ((uestion  here  is  only  one  of 
moral  virtues.  With  Meyer,  the  "rectitude"  natu- 
rally stands  at  the  head.  De  Wette  inter[)rets  these 
ideas  in  tlie  full  sen.se.  Therefore  ,he  connects  the 
doctrinal  view  (Calvin,  Caloviiis,  and  others)  with  the 
ethical.  [So  Ilodgo,  in  last  edition.  In  tlie  earlier, 
he  adoptcil  the  "ethical"  view.  Hut  as  he  now  says: 
"  Paul  does  not  mean  to  say  that  Christianity  con- 
sists in  moridity — that  the  man  wiio  is  just,  peace- 
ful, and  cheerful,  is  a  true  Christian.  Tliis  would 
be  to  contradict  the  whole  argument  of  this  Epis- 
tle."— R.]  Accordingly,  rii/hf.io>ixncss  is,  first  of 
all,  justification  ;  neare  is  chieHy  rest  of  spirit ;  and 
joy  in  the  Hoi  i  Ghost  is  the  joy  of  our  spirit,  which 
has  its  ground  in  the  Holy  Ghost.*  But  inasmuch 
as  the  (luestion  here  is  not  so  i«uch  concerning  the 
virtues  of  God's  kingdom  as  its  blessings,  the  doc- 
trinal view  must  be  regarde<l  as  the  principal  thing. 
It  might  be  said,  as  regards  the  concrete  occasion 
[/.  ''.,  the  circumstances  of  the  Roman  Church] :  <i. 
With  righteousness  in  Christ  there  is  joined  freedom 
from  legality;  b.  With  peace  and  the  spirit  of  peace 
there  are  joined  brotherly  moderation  and  forl)ear- 
ance  in  the  use  of  freedom  ;  c.  And  with  joy  in  the 
Hr)ly  Ghost  there  is  joined  the  impulse  to  cultivate 
social  joy  through  the  proper  tone  of  mind.  Tho- 
luck,  with  good  ground,  ha.s  cited  chap.  xv.  13  in 
favor  of  the  religious  construction  of  the  three  defi- 
nitions ;  also  1  Thess.  i.  6 ;  Phil.  iii.  1  ;  2  Cor.  vi. 

•  [Alforil  prefers:  "in  connootinn  w-ith,  under  tho  in- 
dwclhiK'  im<l  irfluonce  of,"  the  Holy  Ohoat,  to  Do  "Wette's 
view,  which  ho,  however,  miy.s  U  tnir,  thouK'i  not  expros-ed 
here — 'I'he  phra,so  "in  the  Holy  OIiomI  "  does  not  (lu.illfy 
the  whole  clau.'te,  liut  ''joy"  alone.  Dr.  Jloduo  defended 
the  wider  refuronce  in  lii-i  earlier  editions,  perhaps  fo  ^uard 
from  error  the  '-etliii-dl "  view  of  tlie  terms,  wliicli  he  then 
a<lopted.  In  tho  ladt  edition,  ho  Icavus  the  matter  doubt- 
ful.-  11.) 


10.  Grotius,  and  others,  have  interpreted  the  jo^ 
transitively,  to  establish  joy ;  and  this  effect  is,  in- 
deed, quite  peculiar  to  the  social  impulse  of  Chris- 
tian joy,  which  it  has  from  heaven  ("Behold,  I  bring 
you  good  tidings  ol'  great  joy  ") ;  but  this  element 
is  not  the  principal  and  fundamental  thought. 

Ver.  18.  For  he  who  herein  serveth  Christ. 
'£v  Toi'iTw,  according  to  Mifyer,  means:  a<cord- 
ing  to  this;  that  i.s,  according  to  the  relation  already 
given.  Tlioluck  more  fitly  says  :  herein.  The  per- 
ception of  the  opposition  between  the  inward  and 
real  and  the  unrciil  and  outward  in  God's  kingdom, 
and  the  cultivation  of  the  former,  is  meant.  So  far 
iv  TO  I' TO  is  much  stronger  than  fV  toi'Tok,'.  [The 
singular  is  so  strongly  supported,  that  we  must  adopt 
it ;  see  Textual  Note  ".  But  it  has  been  referred 
by  many  commentators  (from  Origen  to  Jowett)  to 
the  Holy  Ghost.  Dr.  Hodge  assumes  that  tliis  is 
the  necessary  view.  But  as  Alford  remarks :  "  It 
would  be  unnatural  that  a  subordinate  member  of 
the  former  sentence,  belonging  only  to  /f<o«,  should 
be  at  once  raised  to  be  the  emphatic  one  in  this,  and 
the  three  graces,  just  emphatically  mentioned,  lost 
sight  of."  This  difficulty  has  led  a  numiier  of  com- 
mentators to  retain  the  plural.  But  this  is  contrary 
to  the  received  canons  of  criticism,  and  an  unfair 
method  of  avoiding  the  diflieulty. — R.l 

Is  weU-pleasing  to  God,  &c.  \tvd.i>haio(i 
Tiji  O  nji ,  x.r./..]  He  who,  in  the  perception  of 
this  rule  of  the  New  Testament,  serves  Christ  with 
l)ure  motive,  has  the  twofold  blessing  of  being  well- 
pleasing  to  God  and  approved  of  men.  Among 
these  men,  the  best  among  those  wlio  dissent  ard 
undoubtedly  chiefly  meant,  for  the  really  (piarrel- 
some  partisans  are  most  embittered  by  the  peaceful 
conduct  of  faith.* 

Ver.  19.  Let  us  therefore  foUow  after  the 
things  of  peace  [  a  o  a  o  r  r  r  a  t  ;;  s  1 1  (<  >';  y  rj  i; 
(lidixoi  ft  tv.  The  inference  is  from  vers.  17,  18 
(De  Wette,  Phiiippi,  .Meyer),  not  from  the  whole 
preceding  context  (Hodge).  See  Tixlual  Note  "  on 
the  form  of  the  verb. — R.]  The  iiiu)xn,v  is  here  in 
contnust  with  the  iinimlse  of  party  excitements. 

The  things  -which  pertain  to  mutual  edifi- 
cation [  z  ft  i  T  ft  T  /;  .;  <)  I  /.  n  i)  o  n  T^  c  t  ^  s  '  '  S 
(i  A  / /;  A  o  I's' ].  K'lificiit'wn  always  comprises  two 
elements,  according  to  the  figU'Te  which  represents 
the  Church  tus  Christ's  tem|)le:  1.  Arrangement  into 
the  fellowship  of  Christ  by  the  awakening,  vivitica- 
tion,  and  prejiaration  of  the  stones ;  2.  Arrange- 
ment into  the  fellowsltip  of  the  Church  l>y  the  pro- 
motion of  what  is  es.sential,  and  by  modenition  in 
tlic  exercise  of  gr.ice  according  to  the  spirit  of  hu- 
mility and  self-denial  ;  .see  2  Cor.  x.  8;  xiii.  10,  and 
other  passages.  In  this  sense,  each  should  build  the 
other  up. 

Ver.  20.  Do  not  for  the  sake  of  meat  undo 
the  -work  of  God  [  h  »;  tv  t  xf  v  (i  (» ci  /i  n  t  o  ? 
x«rfi/rf  (I'ull  down)  to  t()yov  Tor  (•)toT''\. 
Instead  of  buildiiii/  u/i^  the  inconsiderate  one  tears 
down.  Tho  y.ara/.inf  and  /.I'fu'  are  a  speeifie  ex- 
pression of  this  fact.  The  work  (liuihling)  of  (Jod 
liius  lici-n  nnilerstood  as  Christian  faith,  the  ffi.iri;- 
(lirt,  the  extension  of  Christi.'inity  ;  Meyer,  and  otli. 
ers,  have  understood  the  Christian  as  such.  ["  //.* 
Christian  personality."]     But  the  otxo()o/t//  here  evi- 

•  [Cnlvin:  " Hunc  prnhalnm  hominifnn  tattnlur,  quia 
n'ln  piisunt  nim  ral-l^rr  tfstimmiinm  rirlnii,  qmiiti  neiillt 
cfruiiiil.  iVoii  qiiO'i  trmpfr  fitiif  D<i  p>irciiiil  impriibi. — S<d 
P'lului  hie  ill-  tincriii  juitici"  h-quUiir,  cui  niiUn  ttt  aJiHitUt 
miiroiitas,  nullum  odium,  nulii  .lupertlitio. — ICl 


CHAPTER  XIV.   1-XY.   4 


423 


dently  denotes  the  fellowship  of  faith.  [This  seems 
to  combine  the  two  favorite  views,  viz.,  that  the 
fellow-Christiiin  is  here  referred  to — that  the  "  king- 
dom of  God  "  in  its  extension  is  meant.  Alford,  re- 
ferring to  I  Cor.  iii.  9,  explains  :  "  Thj'  fellow-Cliris- 
tian,  as  a  plant  of  God's  planting,  a  building  of  God's 
raising." — R.] 

But  it  is  evil  [aA/.a  naxov.  Instead  of  de 
we  have  «/. /a  here.  See  Hartung,  ParlikeUehre, 
ii.  p.  403. — R.]  To  xaxov  we  must  simply  supply, 
from  what  precedes :  Eva'y  thing  which  is  clean  in 
itKelf  (Meyer).  [Alford  thinks  nothing  need  be  sup- 
plied, except,  as  in  E.  V.,  the  neuter  verb.  "  It  is 
evil — i.  c,  there  is  criminality  in  the  man."  On 
the  other  proposed  supplements,  see  Meyer,  Alford, 
i?i  loco. — R.]  Ka/.ov,  injurious  in  this  case,  be- 
cause it  is  not  only  a  sin  to  him,  but  also  leads  him 
to  ruinous  frivolity  ;  see  ver.  15. 

To  the  man  who  eateth  through  offence 
[  T  tji  a  V  0-  (J  0)  n  lit  r  ij)  d  i,  a  n  (>  o  a  x  u  ft  fi  a  t  o  (; 
ia&iovTt.Jl.  By  the  one  who  eats,  there  can  only 
be  meant  the  weak  one  (according  to  Chrysostom, 
Luther  [Meyer],  and  others),  and  not  the  strung  one, 
according  to  the  explanation  of  most  commentators 
(Calvin,  Grotius,  De  Wette  [Hodge,  Alford],  and 
others).  But  the  address  is  directed  to  the  stroiig. 
Do  not  destroy  for  the  sake  of  meat — that  is,  by 
thy  inconsiderate  and  free  enjoyriient — the  work  of 
God,  for,  by  the  n(i6(T/.o/(/ia  which  thou  givest  thy 
brother,  thou  leadest  him  to  eat  against  his  con- 
science. For  it  is  said,  first,  concessively :  all  things 
indeed  are  pure;  second,  the  one  eating  with  (taken, 
.not  given)  offence  to  his  conscience,  is,  as  an  injured 
one,  contrasted  with  the  one  who  destroys,  who  has 
given  him  offence ;  we  have,  besides,  in  the  third 
place,  the  whole  context. 

[Those  who  find  in  offence  a  reference  to  the 
offence  given  by  the  strong  one,  rather  than  to  the 
offence  taken  by  the  weak  one,  also  urge  the  con- 
text in  favor  of  their  view.  The  context,  however, 
only  proves  tliat  the  strong  are  addressed  here.  They 
incorrectly  infer  from  this,  that  the  xaxov  must 
be  predicated  of  the  action  of  the  party  addressed. 
But  is  it  not  like  Paul  to  urge,  as  a  motive,  the  evil 
effect  upon  the  brother  taking  offence  ?  Besides, 
as  Meyer  suggests,  the  other  view  has  no  special  con- 
nection with  the  former  part  of  the  verse,  but  gives 
us  only  the  vague  remark,  that  it  is  wrong  to  eat  so 
as  to  give  offence  to  others.  The  objection,  tliat 
offence  cannot  well  be  applied  to  offence  .against 
one's  own  conscience,  loses  its  force,  when  it  is  re- 
membered that  the  strong  are  cautioned  with  refer- 
ence to  the  effect  of  their  conduct  on  the  weak. — R.] 

Ver.  21.  It  is  not  good  to  eat  flesh,  &c. 
[xaXov  TO  ft  ij  (f  aye  IV  xfjea,  z.t.A.]  Luther, 
and  others,  incorrectly  take  xa^.ov  as  comparative 
in  relation  to  er  lo  ["  It  is  better  that  thou  eatest 
no  flesh  and  drinkest  no  wine,  or  (than)  that  thereon 
thy  brotlier,"  &c.].  Probably  to  tone  down  the  force 
of  the  expression,  which  seemed  all  too  strong.  But 
y.a).6v  itself  contains  the  necessary  mitigation,  since 
it  denotes  a  higher  and  freer  measure  of  self-deny- 
ing love.  [Dr.  Lange  renders  it :  edd,  noble.  Tlie 
case  is  not  hypothetical ;  the  scrupulous  demanded 
ibstinence  from  wine  also,  we  infer  from  the  whole 
passage. — R.] 

Not  to  do  any  thing  wherein  thy  brother, 
&c.  \^ntj(ih  IV  10  6  adf/. go?  aov.  See  T'ext- 
ual  Note  ".]  Tholuck,  and  others,  referrirjg  to  1 
Cor.  X.  31,  would  supply  nouZv  with  iv  o>,  which 
is  certainly  more  correct  than  to  supply  (faynv  i] 


ni,Hv.  [The  E.  V,  seems  to  imply  tlie  latter  view  , 
it  is  emended,  therefore.]  As  De  Wette  properly 
remarks  :  Paul  does  not  here  lay  down,  as  a  definite 
precept,  this  principle  of  self-denying  love  accoid 
ing  to  which  he  had  lived  (see  1  Cor.  viii.  13).*  Oa 
the  three  expressions  Tipoaxonrn,  &c.,  see  the 
explanation  of  ver.  13.  [It  is  not  necessary  to  find 
(with  Calvin)  a  climax  ad  infra  in  these  three  verbs, 
yet  they  are  not  precisely  synonymous.  The  figure 
of  ver.  13  is  retained,  but  the  third  verb  expresses 
the  mildest  form  of  offence.  De  Wette,  Philippi 
(and  E.  V.)  render :  is  made  (or  becomes)  weak  ; 
Meyer,  Alford,  and  others,  more  correctly :  is  weak. 
The  full  thought,  then,  is  :  It  is  noble  not  to  do  any 
tiling  wherein  thy  brother  is  weak  ;  even  to  avoid 
his  weak  point. — R.] 

Ver.  22.  Hast  thou  faith?  [ffi'i  niartv 
e/fi,i;;  See  Textual  JSfote  '^  The  briefer  read- 
ing is  adopted  there. — R.]  Meyer,  with  Calvin, 
Grotius,  and  others,  take  these  words  as  interroga- 
tive ;  Tholuck,  with  Luther,  Fritzsche,  and  others, 
as  concessive,  which  corresponds  better  with  tlie  con- 
text.f  [If  i'jv  be  rejected,  the  interrogative  form 
is  to  be  preferred,  as  better  suiting  the  lively  char- 
acter of  the  address  (so  Philippi,  Alford,  De  Wette, 
Hodge,  &c.).  The  question  implies,  on  the  part  of 
the  stroiig  brother,  an  assertion  :  I  have  faith.  The 
concessive  view:  you  have  faith,  J  grant,  may  imply 
the  same.  In  f;icC,  whatever  reading  or  construction 
be  adopted,  the  purport  of  the  verse  remains  un- 
changed.— R.]  Tholuck :  " The  stionger  will  depend 
upon  his  faith,  but  he  should  not  come  forward  with 
it."  That  is,  should  not  come  forward  with  it  in 
practical  uncharitable  conduct;  but,  on  the  other 
hand,  he  should  not  dissemble  the  conviction  of  his 
faitli. 

Have  it  to  thyself  [xara  aiavr'ov  e/f. 
Keen  it,  because  well  founded,  but  for  the  sake  of 
thy  brother,  keep  it  to  thyself. — R.]  This  comprises 
not  only  a  restriction  tor  the  strong,  but  also  a  limi- 
tation of  the  principle  previously  established  in  ver. 
21.  Or,  in  his  private  life,  where  he  gives  no  offence 
to  his  brother,  he  may  also  live  according  to  his  faith, 
yet  according  to  the  rule  that  he  should  regard  him- 
self as  present  to  God. — Before  God.  [As  God 
sees  it,  it  need  not  be  paraded  before  man  (Meyer, 
Hodge). — R.]  Tholuck  explains  the  evo'/niov  t. 
0fov   by  thanksgiving. 

Blessed  is  he,  &c.  [ft  axaQ^oc;,  x.t./.]  Lu- 
ther :  Blessed  is  he  whose  conscience  does  not  con- 
demn him  in  that  which  he  allows.  So  also  Meyer  ; 
Philippi,  with  reference  to  ver.  5  :  "  Let  every  one 
be  fully  persuaded  in  his  own  mind."  But  we  can- 
not expect  here  a  simple  declaration  of  the  strong 
man's  blessedness  in  opposition  to  the  weak  ;  and 
all  the  less  so,  because,  immediately  afterward,  there 
is  mention  made  of  the  weak  one's  sinful  eating  in 
doubt,  which  the  strong  man  has  occasioned  by  his 
offence.:]:     Thus  the  proposition  directs  attention  to 


*  [Hence,  while  a  Christian  m.ay  strive  to  reach  such  a 
principle  in  his  pr.acticc,  no  brother,  especinlly  no  "weak 
brother,"  has  a  right  to  demniid  it  of  him,  or  obtrude  Lis 
stumbling,  so  as  to  exact  self-denial  from  others.— B.l 

T  [Fritzsche  opposes  the  interrogative  form,  because  it 
would  imply  a  negative  answer.  But  there  is  little  watTant 
for  this.  If  the  better  correspondence  wdth  the  context 
mentioned  by  Dr.  Lanpc  is  based  on  this  view  of  the  force 
of  the  interrogative,  then  it  disappears  at  once. —I?.] 

t  [Philippi  and  Wordsworth  mal<e  the  clause  apply  to 
both  classes;  Meyer,  to  the  strong  alone  (prescntiufr  the 
advaiitafre  they  have,  as  a  motive  to  considerate  eondtiot 
toward  the  weak,  whose  danger  is  set  forth  in  the  next 
clause) ;  Alford,  and  most,  find  here  a  commei.datiou  of  th« 


424 


THE   EPISTLE   OF   PAUL   TO    TUE   ROMANS. 


the  difTcrencc  between  the  thcoreticiil  conviction  and 
an  iiicoiiriiderutu  conduct  according  to  it.  "  Blessed 
is  he  whose  conscience  must  not  practically  disap- 
prove of  what  he,  according  to  his  theoretical  con- 
viction, approves."  No  one  can  have  a  perfect  con- 
viction of  practical  good  conduct,  if  he  make  a  false 
application  of  the  theoretical  conviction  of  faith 
against  love  ;  see  2  Cor.  viii.  9-12  ;  1  Cor.  ix.  19  ; 
X.  2;5.  [This  view  of  Dr.  Lange,  which  seems  to 
be  peculi.iilv  his  own,  implies  a  distinction  so  subtle, 
that  it  seems  out  of  place  in  the  practical  part  of 
the  Epi.-<tle  of  this  earnest  Cln-istian  teacher.  He 
adduces  no  arguments  to  support  it,  e.\cept  the 
negative  one,  that  the  declaration  of  the  strong 
man's  blessedness  can  scarcely  be  expected  here, 
especially  when  the  danger  of  the  weak  one  from 
tUe  example  of  the  strong  one  follows  immediately. 
But  !is,  in  ver.  20,  Paul  refers  to  the  evil  done  to 
the  weak,  as  a  motive  to  the  strong  whom  he  is  ad- 
dressing, so  here  he  may  present  the  blessedness  of 
a  strong  conviction,  and  tlien  the  danger  of  a  weak 
one,  ;ls  a  double  motive  to  be  careful  of  the  weak 
brother.  As  the  whole  argument  tends  toward  chap. 
XV.  1,  tliis  seems  a  satisfactory  view. — R.] 

Who  judgeth  not  himself.  The  Apostle  says 
■/.  ()  i  v (ti  V ,  and  not  /.aTa/.(jii'ii)v  (as  most  commen- 
tators explain),  because  the  Cln-istian,  with  the  un- 
C(mscious  and  false  application  of  a  principle  which 
is  m  itself  righteous,  and  even  holy,  docs  not  sin  so 
ruinously  as  he  who  condemns  iiimsclf  by  acting 
against  Ids  religious  conviction.*  With  the  germi- 
nating [)riaciple  of  faith  in  the  weak  one,  the  law 
is  no  more  of  authority ;  but  so  long  as  it  applies 
to  him  in  connection  with  faith,  he  cannot  do  vio- 
lence to  it.  It  is  not  by  presumptuousness,  but 
by  mature  conviction,  that  we  become  free. — [Al- 
loweth,  <)  o /.  !■  fi  d^  1 1, .  Aqenduin  eliuit  (Estius). 
— R.] 

Ver.  23.  But  he  that  doubteth  [6  (Je  Sia- 
z(it  vo /<  f  voi,-].  With  the  act  of  eating,  he  is  at 
the  same  time  stricken  and  condemned,  /.ara- 
y.i/.i>iTut,\  comp.  John  iii.  18.  Meyer:  "It  was 
nece-isary  to  define  more  specifically  the  actual  silf- 
cowleiiiii'iii.ini  (Chrysostom,  Theodoret,  Grotins,  and 
most  commentators)."  But  tliei'c  is  a  great  differ- 
ence between  self-condemnation  and  actual  self-con- 
demnation. If  the  explanation,  "  to  be  subject  to 
Divine  condemnation,"  does  not  say:  lobe  already 
subject  to  the  final  judgment,  then  must  it  be  ex- 
plained to  mean,  that  a  Divine  sentence  on  his  con- 
demnal)le  (not  con<lenmed)  comlition  has  occurred 
in  his  act  itself,  wliich  sentence  he  must  himself 
best  experience  in  his  own  conscience,  because  the 
fact  of  Ills  doubting  is  better  known  to  himself  than 
to  any  one;  clse.-j- 

Becauso  it  is  not  of  faith  [on  orx  Ix 
ni(TT K» ^  |.  Xamely,  that  he  ate.  [ Alford  explains 
of  j'uilk  here :    "  from   a  persuasion   of   rectitude 


Stite  in  which  the  Btrone  in  faith  arf.  Tils  vinw  (which  is 
also  thnt  of  Mi-ycr  and  llodsi')  it  ti)  he  preferred  to  Dr. 
l.an:;i''s  iniji-nious  ;>nd  refined  distinction. — H.| 

•  (.Meyer  properly  rejects  the  coinmon  view,  which  takes 
Kfiivav  as  r^  Karaxptfuif,  tiiit  explains  it  thus  :  "  whit  iloi.i 
iiol  lio'fl  ju'ljjiiifiit  ot>4'r  liim^ilf'i  i.  r.,  who  is  so  assured  In 
hi-  omvieton,  tliiit  his  decision  to  do  this  or  that  incurs  no 
ic;f-jud,nuont."  Dr.  Ii:in'.;u's  cxplnnation  is  occasioned  by 
his  view  of  the  whole  sentence. — U.] 

f  (Mi-yr  finds  here  an  antithesis  to  "hlessod"  (ver. 
2J» ;  'i.it  t'li-  idea  of  J)ivinc  co  idemnation  must  lie  properly 
limited.  I'hilippi :  "The  act  of  ciitlni;  it-^elf  condemns 
him.  'f  c  lU'-^e  iiecordinR  to  the  Diviw  oideriiiR,  so  that  thi- 
Justice  of  tins  verdict  appears  not  only  before  God,  but 
Oufure  utun,  uud  himself  also." — U.l 


grounded  on  and  consonant  with  his  life  of  faith 
That  ''faith  in  the  Son  of  God '  by  which  the  Apos^ 
tie  describes  his  own  life  in  the  fles'.i  as  being  lived, 
informing  and  penetrating  the  motives  and  the  con- 
science, will  not  include,  will  not  sanction,  an  act 
done  against  the  testimony  of  tiie  conseiencc." 
This  is,  perhaps,  more  in  accordance  with  Dr.  Lange's 
view  of  niari.^  (see  below)  than  the  ordinary  inter- 
pretation, which  confines  it  to  mere  pirxuasioit, 
moral  conviction  (Hodge,  De  Wette,  and  most). — R.J 
And  \7hatsoever  is  not  of  faith  is  sin 
[n av  () «  o  0  V  x  i/.  ni  ar  1 1» <,•  a  u  a {i  r  i a,  ta- 
riv\  To  be  read  as  a  concluding  sentence,  and 
not  as  an  explanation  of  the  foregoing :  because 
every  thing  which  is  not  of  faith,  &c.  [The  E.  V. 
(for)  is  incorrect ;  and  should  be  substituted,  di  io- 
troilucing,  as  Alford  suggests,  au  axiom. — R.] — Con- 
flicting explanations : 

1.  Augustine,  and  many  other  commentators ; 
Calovius,  &c. ;  whicli  is  not  of  Christian  saving  faith. 
Then  the  conse<iuence  is  the  proposition  :  The  whole 
life  of  unbelievers  is  sin,  even  the  morality  and  vir- 
tues of  the  heathen,  &c.  {Formula  Cone.  700 : 
where  even  the  pcccata  sunt  are  moderated  by  the 
peecaiis  contamnaiu.)* 

2.  JJoral  faith,  "  the  moral  conviction  of  the  rec- 
titude of  a  mode  of  action"  (De  Wette,  Reiche, 
and  Mej-er,  after  Chrysostom,  and  others).  But  un- 
doul)tedly  Chrysostom's  ex[)lanation  shows  a  better 
knowledge  of  the  connection  between  the  require- 
ment of  saving  faith  and  subjective  conviction  than 
many  modern  explanation.*,  with  all  tlieir  fidelity  to 
conviction.  Even  Grotius  does  not  speak  of  convic- 
tion, but  of  conscience  :  Peccatum  e.si,  qui  /quid  sit, 
coNsciENTiA  Hon  addipulante.  There  can  be  no 
perverted  decision  of  conscience  which  conscvnce 
itself  did  not  have  to  contradict,  and  consequently 
also  no  abstract  and  subjective  certainty  of  convic- 
tion without  an  objective  ground.  But  conscience 
itself  harmonizes  with  God's  law,  just  lus  the  law 
harmonizes  with  the  gospel  and  its  faith.  Otherwise, 
the  world  would  be  irretrievably  lost  in  egotistic 
separation.  How  would  we  ever  get  at  the  way- 
ward, if  the  truth  did  not  testify  to  their  con- 
science V 

We  accordingly  have  to  distinguish  in  explana- 


*  [It  is  greatly  to  ho  doubted  whether  this  ctplnnntion 
necessarily  involves  this  conclusion.  It  is  easy  to  foroe 
upon  this,  or  any  other  pnssasre,  some  incorrect  inference. 
Kor  ex;imple,  as  Dr.  llodiie  well  remarks:  "It  is  wrou'^r  to 
do  any  thui'.;  which  we  think  to  be  wrong.  The  converse  of 
this  proposition,  however,  is  not  true.  It  is  not  alw.-iys 
rifrht  to  do  what  we  think  to  ho  ri?:lit.''  Alfoixl  aiys  : 
"  Here  the  Apostle  has  ii\  view  twn  Chn'sdnns.  liotli  living 
by  faith,  and  by  faith  doing  acts  pleasing  to  (rod:  and  ho 
reminds  them  th  it  whatever  they  do  mit  nf  hnrmnnii  with 
this  great  principle  of  their  spiritual  lives,  belongs  to  the 
category  of  sin.  The  question  touchi;g  the  'infldelis' 
must  be  settled  by  another  inquiry  :  Can  he  whom  we  thus 
name  Aoiv  /niVA  — such  :\  faith  as  may  enable  bim  to  do  act<4 
which  are  not  binful  ? — a  question  impossilde  for  us  10 
solve."  Certainly  the  Angusiinian  inference  mav  be  de- 
duced far  more  dlreetlv  from  other  pa^saires  ;  and  it  .should 
not  prejudice  any  ngtiinxt  the  view  whicli  claims  that  Chris- 
tian faith  must  underlie  the  "faith"  here  referred  to. 
IJengol  :  "  fmiuilur  rrgn  ipsa  fiilft,  qwi  fiililes  luiisriilur, 
amsrirnlinm  itifitrmnns  rl  cnnfirmnnsj  pirtim  fiindamrn- 
turn,  p'lrlim  norni'i  rtilm  acliniiis.''  Flodge,  Haldane,  and 
Wonlswortli,  however,  limit  the  meaning  to  somelbiuir  Ilk 
subjective  pirfwisinii,  which  seems  tame  and  nnpanline. 
The  author  lust  named  sliows  the  pernicloui,  effects  of  tho 
other  view,  esDecially  among  the  I'uritans.  Hut  the  tone 
is  so  well  lulaptod  to  the  days  of  the  Stuarts,  that  one  may 
bo  excused  for  sunmsiun  the  existence  of  a  prejudice  ngninsi 
the  A\iguslinian  view.  Dr.  Ijimge  tjikes  the  K;ime  middl* 
ground  with  Alford  (see  above),  combining  both  views  J 
"  confidence  proceeding  from  saving  faith." — it.] 


CHAPTER   XIV.    1-XV.   4. 


425 


tion  (2.)  between  conscience  and  subjective  convic- 
tion in  the  usual  sense ;  see  chap.  ii.  14,  15.  In  ex- 
planation (1.)  we  must  distinguish :  a.  Between 
faith  in  a  doctrinal  system  and  saving  faith  itself; 
b.  Between  developed  saving  faith  and  its  begin- 
nings under  gratia  pra'veniens,  the  doing  of  the 
truth  in  the  life  of  the  upright ;  John  iii.  21.  It 
follows  clearly  enough  from  chap,  ii.,  that  the  Apos- 
tle does  not  here  mean  to  characterize  such  a  con- 
duct as  sin.  Yet,  on  the  other  hand,  he  will  not 
designate  such  conduct  as  sinless ;  for,  until  the  con- 
scious reconciliation  or  perfection  of  conscience, 
even  the  better  man  is  in  an  inward  darkness  and 
vacillation  concerning  his  ways,  and  selfish  motives 
are  mixed  even  with  his  better  actions.  But  the 
Apostle  also  does  not  speak  here  solely  of  the  oppo- 
sition in  the  life  of  Christians.  Christians  niust  be 
conscious  of  their  opinion  as  well  as  of  their  action, 
in  the  light  of  truth  itself.  PhiMppi  has  brought  out 
prominently  the  connection  between  (1.)  and  (2.). 
But  he  returns  to  a  modified  Augustinian  view,  by 
deducing  from  the  claim  that  the  confidence  of  the 
acceptability  to  God  of  an  action  must  be  the  result 
of  saving  faith,  the  conclusion  that  all  conduct  is  sin 
which  has  not  this  saving  faith  as  its  ultimate  source 
and  origin  (p.  584).*  It  would  be  better  to  say : 
whose  origin  is  not  the  shining  of  the  Logos  into  the 
conscience.  It  is  hazardous  to  regard  believers  as 
complete,  but  still  more  hazardous  to  distinguish 
only  complete  unbelievers  from  them.  See  the 
Exeg.  Notes  on  ver.  1.  On  Augustine's  view,  see 
Reiche,  ii.  p.  489. 

On  the  doxology  following  here  in  some  Codd. 
(brought  over  from  the  conclusion),  see  the  Intro- 
duction, p.  35  [and  Textual  Notes  on  chap,  xvi.]  ; 
also  on  the  controversies  occasioneii  by  the  two  con- 
cluding chapters.  For  further  particulars,  see  Mey- 
er, p.  507.  f 


*  [Philippi's  view  will  not  be  understood  unless  more 
fully  cited.  He  says:  "ttiVtis  here  is  not  immediately 
justifying,  saving  faitli,  but  the  confidence  springing  there- 
from, that  all  the  action  proceeding  from  it,  and  consistent 
with  it,  is  acceptable  to  God.  The  proposition  of  Augus- 
tine, ominx  infide'.ium  viUi  prccatiivi  es!,  finds  here  not, 
indeed,  its  direct,  but  its  indirect  proof.  For,  if  eveiy 
action  which  di)es  not  proceed  from  the  confidence  of  its 
acceptableness  to  Ood  is  sin,  and  this  confidence  is  the 
result  of  evangelical,  saving  faith  alone,  then  it  follows, 
that  all  conduct  is  sin  which  has  not  this  saving  faith  as  its 
ultimate  source  .ind  origin." — R.] 

t  [On  chaps.  XV.  ami  xvi.  Baur  of  Tiibingen  has  doubt- 
ed the  genuineness  of  these  two  chapters,  but  on  such  in- 
sufficient grounds  that  it  is  not  necessary  to  enter  upon  the 
question.  See  Introd.,  p.  35.  Various  theories  have  been 
suggested  (by  Semler,  Paulus,  Eichbom,  Schulz,  Ewald, 
and  now  by  Renan),  which  admit  that  Paul  wrote  these 
two  chapters,  but  deny  them  a  place  in  this  Epistle.  For 
this,  a  plausible  gi-ound  is  found  in  the  insertion  of  the 
doxology  at  the  close  of  chap,  xiv.,  in  the  long  list  of  ac- 
quaintances (chaj).  xvi.)  at  Rome,  where  Paul  had  never 
been— none  of  whom  are  mentioned  in  the  Epistles  written 
from  Rome,  especially  in  tlie  salutation  to  Aquila  and 
Priscilla,  who  were  at  Ephesus  shortly  before  and  shortly 
after  the  date  of  this  Epistle.  But  Rome  was  the  capital 
of  the  world,  and  many  acquaintances  might  be  there,  and 
as  readily  depart.  Were  the  salutations  few,  no  doubt  the 
critics  would  have  urged  this  as  an  argument  against  its 
genuineness.  Meyer  says  :  "  Among  all  the  reasons  which 
are  adduced  in  support  of  these  different  opinions,  none 
hold  good,  not  even  those  which  seem  least  founded  upon 
mere  aibitrarine.=s."  The  St..  Paul  of  Renan  has  jnst  ap- 
peared. Ue  accepts  our  Epistle  as  genuine,  but  denies  the 
correctness  of  its  title,  and  also  its  intearity.  The  follow- 
in?  is  a  resume:  "The  oditoi-L  of  the  final  and  accepted 
text  of  Paul's  letters  had,  for  a  general  principle,  to  reject 
nothing  and  add  nothing— but  above  all,  to  reject  nothing. 
The  common  ImkIi/,  then,  of  the  so-called  Epistle  to  the 
Romans  was  a  circular  letter,  an  encyclical  letter  addi-essod 
to  the  chui'ches  of  Ephesus  and  Thcs=alonica  principally, 


Chap.  XV.,  ver.  1.  Now  we  that  are  strong 
ought  \^o(f>f  l?.onfV  de  /y/ffit;  ol  di'vuroi. 
The  di  does  not  stand  for  orr,  as  the  E.  V.  indi- 
cates  (so  Hodge),  aUhough  it  connects  with  what 
precedes  (Meyer,  Philippi,  &c.). — R.]  Tholuck  nndg 
in  de  continuative  a  proof  that  the  division  of  the 
chapter  has  been  improperly  made  at  this  verse.  As 
far  as  conviction  is  concerned,  the  Apostle  stands  on 
the  side  of  the  strong;  see  chap.  xiv.  14,  20;  1  Cor. 
viii.  4. 

[To  bear,  ^ctaT(x<ii,v'\.  After  the  Apostle 
has  shown  what  the  strong  have  to  avoid,  be  shows 
what  is  now  their  duty  toward  the  weak.  In  natu- 
ral life,  weakness  is  often  oppressed  iuid  made  to 
suffer  violence  by  power ;  in  the  kingdom  of  the 
Spirit,  on  the  contrary,  "  strong  "  expresses  both  the 
appointment  to,  and  the  duty  of  bearing,  the  infirm- 
ities of  the  weaker. 

Infirmities  of  the  weak  [ra  aa&  fvtjfia' 
T«  r(~iv  ad t'va,To)v.  Meyer,  Lange  :  GlaubenS' 
schwachheiien  ;  but,  with  Philippi,  Alford,  &c.,  it 
seems  best  to  regard  the  term  as  general,  including, 
of  course,  the  scruples  above  referred  to.  —  R.] 
These  are  undoubtedly  a  burden,  and  thus  an  im- 
pediment to  the  progress  of  the  strong ;  but  in 
order  to  take  the  weak  ones  along  with  them,  their 
weaknesses  must  be  taken  up — which  is  the  rule  in 
a  caravan.  But  the  bearing  does  not  consist  merely 
in  suffering,  but  rather  in  forbearance.  [Comp.  Gal. 
vi.  2,  Lange's  Comm.,  p.  149,  where  the  same  verb 
is  used. — R.] 

And  not  to  please  ourselves.  '^-tQiaxitv, 
see  Gal.  i.  10  [1  Cor.  x.  33]. 

C.  Reciprocal  edification,  in  self-denial,  accord- 
ing to  the  example  of  Christ,  chap.  xv.  2-4. 

Ver.  2.  Let  every  one  of  us  [txaaTo? 
tlftoiv.  See  Textual  Notes  -^  and  "].  Thus  the 
Apostle  here  comprehends  both  parties. — [For  his 
gocd  (with  a  view)  to  edification,  fit;  to  aya- 
&6v  TTfJoq  oiy.  o<)o /<  >jv .^  Bengel :  Bonimi  {ayu- 
06v)  ge?ius,  cedifcato  species.  There  is,  fir.st,  tic;, 
then,  TT^oi;.  In  order  that  one  may  aid  the  other 
in  what  is  good,  he  should  promote  his  edification, 
his  sense  for  the  fellowship  of  what  is  good.  The 
good  chiefly  meant  here  is  self-denying  love,  the 
constant  exercise  of  humility. 

Ver.  3.  For  even  Christ  pleased  not  him- 
self [  X  oc  t  yoiiJ  6  X Q  iCFT  Oi;  ov/  tavri'i  '/ {' f  • 
(jfv.  Dr.  Lange  rendeis:  Denn  (selbsi)  aneh  Chris- 
tus  lebte  nicht  sich  selber  zum  GefaRen.  The  E.  V. 
is  more  literal. — R.]  See  Phil.  ii.  6  ;  2  Cor.  viii.  9. 
Phashig  one's  self  denotes  the  inconsiderate  and 
unfriendly  pursuit  of  the  ideals  of  our  own  subjec- 
tivity in  the  selfish  isolation  of  our  personal  exist- 
ence. 

But,  as  it  is  •written,  &c.  [aX?.a  xaOox; 
yiy()anrai,,  y..r.)..  See  Textual  Note  ^'.]  Ps. 
Ixix.  9.  The  sentence  is  literally  cited.  On  the 
different   supplements   suggested   with   a// a,    see 

but  also  to  the  brethren  nt  Rome  and  one  or  more  other 
places  Local  and  individual  items  were  adjoii  cd,  accord- 
ing as  the  special  destination  of  the  general  circular.  These 
specialities  were  selected,  and  sewed  on,  so  to  speak,  to  the 
final  edition,  by  honest  editors,  more  desirous  of  saving  all 
St.  Paul's  authentic  words  than  of  nice  literary  fnrm.  Here 
is  tie  explanation  of  repetitions,  and  of  salutatory  phrase, 
in  the  midst  of  the  Epistle  to  the  Romans,  otherwise  inex- 
plicable in  the  text  of  a  so  clean,  straightforward,  inelegant, 
but  logical  writer  as  St.  Paul."  It  would  seem  tliat  his 
view  is  but  a  vivacious  and  characteristic  phase  of  tlio 
general  theory  advanced  by  the  Gennan  authors  named 
above.— R.] 


426 


THE   EPISTLE   OF   PAUL   TO   THE   ROMANS. 


Meyer,  who  would  not  supply  any  thing.*  Grotius 
Buggosts  the  most  natural  one  :  fecit.  The  citation 
is  Iroiu  the  LXX.  The  tlieoretical  sufferer,  who  was 
reproaclied  for  the  Lord's  salie,  was  a  type  of  Christ ; 
but  Christ's  suhji-cting  liiiuself  to  the  reproaehes  of 
the  world  jjrococded  from  His  steadfa^st  fellowship 
with  huuiauity  for  God's  sake.  I'or  himself,  He 
might  iiave  had  joy ;  Heb.  xii.  2,  3.  [Alford  :  "The 
words  in  the  Messianic  Psahn  are  addressed  to  the 
Father,  not  to  tiiose  for  whom  Clirist  sufl'ered  ;  but 
they  prove  all  that  is  here  required,  that  he  He  did 
not  please  himself;  His  sufferings  were  undertaken 
on  account  of  the  Father's  good  purpose — mere 
work  wiiicii  He  r/ave  JIhn  to  do." — K.] 

Ver.  4.  For  vrhatsoever  things  were  writ- 
ten aforetime  [dffa  ya()  7i(jufy()dii  tj.  Jus- 
tification of  the  previous  citation  (Philippi),  and  a 
preparation  for  the  subject  to  be  introduced  next, 
viz.,  tiie  duty  of  unanimity  (Alford).  In  n(io,  just 
before  the  emphatic  tj/itritjuv,  Meyer  correctly 
finds  the  thought :  All  before  our  time — /.  e.,  the 
wliole  Old  Testament. — K.]  This  does  not  apply 
merely  to  the  messianic  proplieeies  (Keiche).  Tlie 
immediate  design  of  the  entire  Old  Testament  Scrip- 
tures for  the  Jews  does  not  preclude  their  universal 
puri)ose  for  all  ages. 

That  we  through  the  patience  and  the 
comfort  of  the  Scriptures  [I'va  duo.  rTj<;  vno- 
fi  ovij^  xai  ()  (,a  T  7j  s'  n  ccftax  X  //  a  fox;  r  iTiv  y()a- 
q,u)i'.  See  Textual  Xote  ".  The  repetition  of  rfi.  a 
seems  to  favor  the  view  that  y()a(ft7)v  depends  on 
na(jax).r]  a  tox;  aloue  ;  yet  many  commentators, 
who  adopt  this  reading,  claim  (and  with  reason)  that 
such  a  construction  would  be  uiigrammatical.  Still, 
Dr.  Lange  seems  to  favor  it.  We  paraphrase :  "  the 
patience  aad  comfort  produced  by  a  study  of  the 
Scriptures." — H.]  Two  things  should  support  the 
believer,  particularly  in  looking  at  tiie  retarding,  ob- 
structing prejudice  of  the  weak  :  J^irst,  the  patience 
immanent  in  the  Christian  spirit  (patience  evidently 
suits  better  here  than  constancy,  which  Meyer  pre- 
fers). [So  Philippi,  Dc  Wette,  &c.]  Second,  the 
comfort  of  the  Holy  Scriptures,  which,  in  the  pres- 
ent connection,  consisted  in  the  fact  that,  in  spite 
of  all  the  impediments  to  spiritual  life  in  the  Old 
Testanieiit,  the  development  ty  the  New  Testament 
neverthcli'ss  iJiocceded  uninterruptedly. 

Might  have  our  hope  [ri/v  tXTiiSa  ix«)- 
ftfv.  Dr.  Lange:  mi'jht  hold  fatt  hope.  Others: 
might  have  more  and  more  of  the  Christian  hope. 
— R.]  And  then,  this  comfort  was  an  encomage- 
ment  to  hold  fast  hope  as  the  hope  of  better  times ; 
that  is,  of  the  ever  newer  and  more  glorious  devel- 
opments of  God's  kingdom,  in  Spener's  sense. 
Beza,  and  other.s,  properly  explain  :  tcncamus,  which 
ia  opposed  by  Meyer.  We  can,  indeed,  preserve 
liope  by  patience,  but  not  acquire  it.  According  to 
Meyer,  indeed,  patience  should  also  l)e  referred  to 
nnv  yonrfi.  (against  Grotius,  and  others),  and  this 
shoulil  thcrelbre  imbue  Christians.  Put  yet  tin;  i)a- 
tirnci'  and  comfort  of  the  SiTiptiires  could  not  niean, 
without  something  further:  the  patience  and  the 
comfort  with  which  the  Scriptures  imbue  us.  [The 
genitive  y(iu(ii7ti'  U  joini'd  with  I'no/iovTji;  also,  by 
ChrysostoMi,  and  by  most  modern  connnentators. 
In  fact,  this  ia  the  only  view  which  can  be  Justified 

•  [So  Do  Wotto,  Philippi,  and  others.  The  E.  V.,  by 
putting  a  comma  after  "  but,"  (rives  the  sarao  intorprotatioii 
— i.  «.,  but  the  repronohos,  as  it  is  written,  Ac.  The  nl)- 
tuiico  of  any  formula  uf  citation  tavota  this  construction. 


grammatically.  "  The  patience  and  comfort  pro 
duced  by,  arising  from,  a  study  of  the  Scriptures," 
is  the  simplest  and  best  sense.  So  Alford,  and 
most. — R.] — It  is  justifiably  urged  by  Meyer,  against 
Reiche,  and  others,  that  hope  must  here  be  taken 
subjectively.  Of  course,  he  who  lets  go  his  sulijec- 
tive  hope,  gives  up  thereby  its  object.  [The  hope  id 
undoubtedly  to  be  regarded  as  subjective,  but  tho 
article  (wliich  we  preserve  in  English  by  rendering  : 
our  hope)  points  to  a  definite  Christian  hope,  viz., 
of  future  glory.  It  would  then  seem  appropriate  to 
understand  "  we  might  liave  hope  "  as  referring  to 
the  obtaining  of  a  higher  degree  of  this  hope  through 
the  patieuce,  &c.     (So  Meyer,  Philippi,  l)e  Wette). 

DOCTRINAI.  AND   ETHICAL. 

1.  The  present  section  contains  a  confessional 
Eirenicon  oi  the  Apostle.  It  requires  :  (1.)  Recip- 
rocal recognition  of  the  common  ground  of  faith. 
(2.)  The  balancing  of  the  conviction  of  faith  with 
the  conduct  of  love.  (3.)  Above  all,  watchfulness 
against  particular  ethical  errors  on  both  sides.  [Tho 
profound  insight  into  human  nature  manifested  in 
this  chapter,  combines,  with  the  unparalleled  adap- 
tation  of  its  precepts  to  the  social  life  of  men  in  all 
ages,  to  prove  "  the  God  of  peace  "  its  author.  In 
America,  where  society  is  newest,  most  experimen- 
tal, and  yet  public  opinion  so  tyrannical,  where,  per- 
haps, tlie  extremes  of  the  weak  and  the  strong  are 
found,  it  deserves  especial  study. — R.] 

2.  As  the  name,  the  weak;  is  not  an  unconditional 
reproach,  so  the  strong  is  not  unconditional  praise. 
The  weak  one's  prejudice  is  a  certain  protection  so 
long  as  he  keeps  his  weakness  pure — that  i.s,  does 
not  make  it  a  rule  for  others  ;  the  strong  one's  jus- 
tifiable sense  of  freedom  leads  to  the  danger  of  self- 
boasting,  particularly  against  love,  which  can  draw 
in  its  train  the  loss  of  faith.  These  propositions  can 
be  proved  by  the  exanqile  of  pious  Catholics  and  of 
wicked  Protestants.  Yet  the  standpoint  of  the  strong 
man  is  in  itself  highei",  and  though  he  becomes  very 
guilty  by  the  abuse  of  his  freedom  of  faith,  tiie 
Apostle  yet  portrays,  with  very  strong  e.\pre.-N>ii(ms, 
the  ruin  of  those  who  eat  in  doubt.  Tlie  uidiherated 
ones,  who  would  not  be  free  in  a  positive,  but  in  a 
negative,  and  therefore  insufficient  way,  liecome  the 
most  unmitigated  anomists  and  nntiiiomians  both  in 
a  religious  and  mond  respect.  If,  in  the  time  of  the 
Reformation,  all  Protestants  had  Itecome  po.-itivdy 
free  by  Christ,  Protestantism  would  hardly  have  ex- 
perienced in  its  history  such  great  impediments  of 
reaction  as  that  of  unbelief. 

[Weak  and  strong,  old  and  new,  conservative 
and  radical — these  antitheses  arc  not  precisely  sy- 
nonymous, yet,  iu  their  leading  features,  the  sjime. 
He  does  what  Paul  has  not  done,  who  throws  him- 
self entirely  with  one  class  or  the  other.  The 
Church  has  ever  contained,  and  has  ever  needed, 
both  elements.  Yet  sometimes  tho.se  are  deemed 
radical  who  answer  to  the  description  here  given  of 
the  weak  bretliren  ;  and  tho.se  wlio  are  tridy  strong 
are  often  classed  with  the  old-fashioned. — The  cnu- 
tion  about  judging  is  firophetic  of  what  is  so  mani- 
fest in  the  lustory  of  Christ's  Church  in  her  imper- 
fection :  that  iiKire  divisions  and  discords  have  arisen 
from  the  (|ucstions,  about  which  the  ,\]>ostle  himself 
gives  no  delinite  decision,  tluui  from  the  discussion 
of  the  weightier  mutters  of  the  earlier  chapteri 
-R.] 


CHAPTER  XIV.    1-XV.  4. 


421 


3.  It  is  almost  impossible  to  emphasize  sufficient- 
ly the  two  distinctions  to  which  the  present  section 
leads  us.  Tlie  Apostle  shows,  first,  that  we  should 
not  deny  our  free  conviction,  but  should  deny  our- 
selves in  reference  to  the  inconsiderate  conduct  ac- 
cording to  conviction  in  practical  things,  that  do  not 
belong  to  the  testimony  of  faith.  How  often  is  this 
r>il3  exactly  reversed,  by  one's  asserting  a  narrow 
view  iu  order  to  please  the  weak  (for  example,  in 
tlie  condemning  art,  concerts,  innocent  relaxations, 
&c.),  while  he  himself  willingly  enjoys  occasionally 
the  forbidden  fruit.*  The  second  distinction  is 
brought  just  as  closely  home — namely,  between  do- 
ing and  leaving  undone.  What  one  cannot  do  with 
the  inward  assurance  of  bis  conscience,  must  not  be 
done  at  all. 

4.  The  opposite  tendencies  that  are  presented  to 
us  as  a  germ  in  the  Church  at  Rome,  extend  in  con- 
tinual gradations  through  the  books  of  the  New  Tes- 
tament, and  confront  each  other  in  the  second  cen- 
tury as  the  matured  opposites  of  Ebionitism  and  of 
Gnostic  antinomiauism. — On  the  relation  between 
Gentile  Christians  and  Jewish  Christians  at  the  time 
of  Justin  Martyr,  see  Tholuck,  p.  704. 

5.  On  the  idea  of  weakness  in  faith,  and  conduct 
which  is  not  of  faith,  see  the  Exeg.  Notes  on  vers. 
1  and  23  ;  comp.  Tholuck,  p.  706  ff. 

6.  "  For  God  is  able  to  make  him  stand  ;  "  ver. 
4.  How  gloriously  this  has  been  fulfilled  !  see  the 
Exeg.  Notes. 

7.  On  the  duty  of  striving  after  a  certain  convic- 
tion, and  tlie  means  for  attaining  it  (self-knowledge 
and  gratitude),  see  the  Exeg.  Notes  on  ver.  5. 

8.  On  ver.  6.  Thanksgiving  makes  every  pure 
Christian  enjoyment  a  real  peace-offering  (  C5!l3 ). 

9.  On  ver.  8.  On  the  Lordship  of  Christ,  see 
Tholuck,  p.  715  If.  Discussions  on  the  divinity  of 
Christ,  on  ver.  10,  see  Philijjpi,  p.  572. 

10.  Every  thing  is  pure.  According  to  Olsliau- 
(sen  (in  respect  to  the  laws  on  food),  creation  has 
again  become  pure  and  holy  through  Christ  and  His 
sanctifying  influence.  The  proposition  cannot  be 
opposed,  but  how  far  must  it  be  more  specifically 
defined  ?  As  the  creature  of  God,  it  has  again  been 
recognized  as  pure  and  holy.  As  a  means  of  enjoy- 
ment, it  has  again  been  freely  given  in  a  religious 
sense.  But  as  a  real  enjoyment,  it  is  only  pure  and 
holy  to  the  one  enjoying,  when  he  has  the  full  assur- 
ance of  his  conscience,  and  therefore  eats  with 
thanks;j:iving.  But  in  this  the  natural  repulsion, 
practice,  law,  and  a  regard  to  love,  limiting  the  circle 
of  the  means  of  enjoyment,  as  well  as  of  the  enjoy- 
ment itself,  come  into  consideration,  because  they 
also  limit  that  assurance. 

11.  The  understanding  of  the  present  section  has 
been  rendered  much  more  difficult  by  not  regarding 
the  manner  in  which  the  offence  is  divided  into  the 


*  [The  emphatic  deliverances  of  ecclesiastical  bodies  as 
matters  of  minor  morals  (even  making  doubtful  matters 
terms  of  cominunion)  must  often  be  regarded  by  the  care- 
ful re.ider  of  this  chapier  as  overpassing  the  limits  here  set 
to  bearing  the  ii  firmities  of  the  weak.  When  that  about 
which  the  Word  of  God  makes  no  distinct  utterance,  is 
nadc  a  term  of  cnmmuiiion,  those  who  ai-e  thus  wise  above 
^hat  is  written  are  not  acting  to  "edification."  It  is  mit 
Jin  attempt  to  make  holy  b\  an  ecclesiastical  law.  If  Gcd's 
law  cou!d  not  do  this  "in  that  it  was  weak  through  the 
flesh,"  man's  law  is  not  likely  to  accomplish  the  result 
arrived  at.  "Strange  as  it  miy  appear,  it  is  nevertheless 
true,  that  scruples  about  lesser  matters  almost  always  in- 
volve some  dei:eliction  of  duty  in  greater  and  more  obvious 
ones"  (.Towett).  Comp.  the  very  valuable  dissertation  of 
this  author  on  "Casuistry,"  Cumm.  ii.  pp.  322-357. — R.] 


two  fundamental  forms  of  irritation  and  presump* 
tion.     See  the  Exeg.  Notes  on  vers.  13  and  21.  - 

12.  Luther's  expression,  "the  Christian  is  a  mas« 
ter  of  all  masters,  a  servant  of  all  servants,"  come* 
into  consideration  here.  Gregory  the  Great  had  ex 
pressed  the  same  sentiment,  but  in  a  reverse  order 
and  apphcation :  "  Free  in  faith,  serving  in  love." 
The  parable  beginning  with  Matt,  xviii.  23  tells  us 
that  the  consistent  and  conscious  offence  against  love 
weakens  faith. 

13.  Bearing  with  the  weak  has:  (1.)  Its  founda- 
tion in  the  fact  that  the  Almighty  God  bears  in  love 
the  world,  which  in  itself  is  helpless  ;  (2.)  Its  power 
and  obligation  consist  in  the  fact  that  Christ  has 
borne  the  guilt  of  the  helpless  world  ;  (3.)  And  its 
dignity  lies  in  the  fact  that  the  strength  of  the  strong 
first  finds  in  this  function  its  whole  truth,  proof,  and 
satisfaction. 

14.  On  the  idea  of  edification,  see  the  Exe^ 
Notes  on  chap.  xiv.  19. 

15.  The  word  of  the  Old  Testament  Scriptures  is 
still  of  application;  how  much  more,  therefore,  is 
this  the  case  with  that  of  the  New  Testament !  Yet. 
in  this  relation,  we  dare  not  overlook  the  truth,  thai 
Christian  life  may  have  but  one  rule  of  faith,  but  yet 
two  fountains :  the  Holy  Scriptures,  and  the  imme- 
diate fellowship  of  the  lieart  with  Christ,  from  which 
the  patience  of  Christ  flows. 


HOMILETICAL  AND  PRACTICAL. 

Vers.  1-12. 

On  the  proper  reciprocal  conduct  of  the  strong 
and  weak  in  faith.  1.  What  form  should  it  take  ? 
a.  The  strong  should  receive  the  weak,  and  not  de- 
spise them ;  h.  The  weak  should  not  judge  the 
strong.      2.    On    wkat   should    it    be    established  ? 

a.  On  every  body's  remembering  that  God  has  re- 
ceived the  other  as  well  as  himself ;  b.  Therefore  he 
should  consider  that,  in  whatever  the  other  one  does 
or  leaves  undone,  he  does  it  or  leaves  it  undone  to 
the  Lord  ;  c.  Do  not  forget  that  the  decision  on  our 
course  of  action  belongs  to  the  Lord  alone,  to  whom 
we  all  belong,  and  before  whose  judgment-seat  we 
must  all  appear  (vers.  1-12). — Who  art  tliou  that 
judgest  another  man's  servant  ?  Two  things  are  im- 
plied in  this  question  of  the  Apostle :  1.  Directly, 
a  warning  to  guard  against  any  judgment  of  faith  on 
our  brethren  ;  2.  Indirectly,  an  admonition  rather 
to  judge  ourselves,  and  to  perceive  the  weakness  of 
our  own  faith  (ver.  4). — In  matters  of  conscience, 
each  one  standetVi  or  falleth  to  his  Lord  (ver.  4). — 
The  great  value  of  a  strong  religious  conviction. 
1.  To  ourselves,  a.  We  act  according  to  fixed  prin- 
ciples ;  b.  We  do  not  vacillate  ;  c.  We  preserve  our 
inward  peace.  2.  To  others,  a.  They  know  where 
they  are  with  us  ;  h.  They  therefore  entertain  confi- 
dence in  us  ;  c.  Their  own  life  is  improved  by  our 
example  (ver.  5). — The  possibility  of  thanksgiving 
to  God  as  a  test  of  enjoying  that  which  is  allowed 
(ver.  6). — As  Christians,  we  are  the  Lord's  posses- 
sion. 1.  What  is  this?  a.  No  one  liveth  to  him- 
self, and  no  one  dieth  to  himself;  that  is,  whether 
in  life  or  in  death  no  one  belongs  to  himself;  but, 

b.  Whether  we  live,  let  us  live  to  the  Lord,  or 
whether  we  die,  let  us  die  to  the  Lord  ;  that  is,  we 
belong,  in  life  and  death,  to  Him  ;  we  are  His.  2. 
By  what  means  have  we  become  the  Lord's  proper, 
ty  ?     a.  By  Christ's  death  ;    b.  By  His  resurrectioa 


428 


THE   EPISTLE   OF   PAUL   TO   THE   ROMANS. 


and  glorification  (vers.  7-9). — We  shall  all  appear 
before  the  judgiuuut-seat  of  Christ !  This  is  said  : 
1.  To  the  weak  in  faith,  that  he  may  not  judge  his 
brother ;  '2.  To  the  strong,  that  he  may  not  despise 
his  brother ;  3.  To  botli,  that  they  may  examine 
themselves  (vers.  10-12). — The  great  aecount  wliicii 
eveiT  one  of  us  shall  iiave  to  give  in  future.  1.  Of 
whom '?  Of  himself,  on  all  that  he  lias  done  and 
left  undone.  2.  Before  whom  ?  Before  God,  who 
kncweth  the  heart,  and  seeth  what  is  secret  (ver. 
12). 

LfTiiEU  :  There  are  two  kinds  of  Ciiristians:  the 
strong  in  faith,  and  the  weak.  The  former  arrogant- 
ly despise  tlie  weak,  and  tlie  latter  easily  get  offend- 
ed at  the  strong.  Both  siiould  conduct  themselves 
in  love,  that  neither  offend  or  judge  the  other,  but 
that  each  do  and  allow  the  other  to  do  what  is  use- 
ful and  neces.<ary  (ver.  1). 

Stakke  :  If  one  shoidd  be  certain  of  his  opinion 
in  the  use  of  things  indifferent,  how  much  more  ne- 
cessary is  it  in  matters  of  faith !  (ver.  5.) — IIed- 
INGER :  Stones  in  an  arch  support  each  other ;  so 
should  you  support  your  neighbor.  You  may  know 
niucli,  but  your  neiglibor  may  be  very  useful ;  you 
should  at  least  bear  him  witness  that  he  lias  a  tender 
conscience  (ver.  1). — Bkngkl  :  Gratitude  sanctifies 
all  acts,  however  different,  that  are  not  inconsistent 
with  gratitude  (ver.  6). — Tlie  art  of  dying  well  is 
nothing  else  than  the  art  of  living  well  (ver.  7). 

Gerlach  :  .\n  article  of  food  is  only  unclean 
when  eaten  without  thanksgiving;  but  everything 
is  holy  to  him  who  thankfully  acknowledges  that  the 
earth  is  the  Lord's,  and  the  fulness  thereof  (1  Cor. 
X.  2')-'Sl).  Let  him,  on  the  other  hand,  who, 
through  fear  of  breaking  a  Divine  commandment, 
eats  but  one  kind  of  meat,  be  thankful  even  for  that 
which  he  does  enjoy.  Every  thing  depends  on  our 
acting  in  full  olx'dience  to  the  Lord,  and  in  doing 
nothing  wilfully  and  independently. 

Hkiunku:  The  less  scrupulous  one  must  show 
tender  forbearance  ;  tlie  more  scrupulous  one  must 
guard  against  decrying  the  more  liberal  (ver.  3). — It 
is  not  becoming  in  us  to  pronounce  any  definitive 
opinion  on  the  inward  worth  of  a  man. — We  should 
not  condemn  even  the  fallen  (ver.  4). — Christianity, 
a.s  a  free  institution  for  the  training  of  mankind, 
allows  freedom  in  regard  to  services  and  in  the 
choice  of  holy-days  (ver.  5). — Every  !)eliever  re- 
nounces his  own  will,  lives  to  the  Lord,  who  has 
purchased  and  redeemed  him,  and  accordingly  dies 
in  harmony  with  the  Lord. — This  dependence  on  the 
Lord  is  something  quite  natural  to  the  Christian. 
lie,  therefore,  who  will  not  be  leil  by  love  to  place 
a  restraint  upon  himself  on  account  of  his  weaker 
brother,  but  is  obstinate,  acts  against  that  fundamen- 
tal principle  (vers.  7,  S). — He  wiio  judges,  arrogates 
to  himself  Christ's  office ;  he  who  bears  in  mind  that 
Christ  will  judge  us  all,  will  no  more  condemn. 

Bk>skk:  To  des[)ise  and  to  judge — each  is  as 
bad  (LS  the  other,  for  in  both  man  encroaches  upon 
God's  right,  and  arrogates  to  himself  a  judgment  on 
another's  state  of  faith  and  heart,  which  becomes  an 
injury  to  his  f)Wn  life  of  faith  (vc-r.  3). 

Sc'iiLKiKUMACiiKH  :  Xew-Year's  Sermon  on  vers. 
7  ind  8.  The  language  of  the  text  is  place4l  l)cfore 
U?  as  a  motto  on  entering  this  new  year  of  life  :  1. 
In  reflation  to  what  shall  hap|)en  to  us  ;  2.  In  rela- 
don  to  what  we  shiill  be  recpiired  to  do. 

[CiiAK\(MK  :  Christ,  by  His  death,  acrpiired  over 
•.19  a  rif.'lit  of  lordship,  and  hatii  laid  upon  us  the 
strongest  obligation  to  serve  Him.     He  made  him- 


self a  sacrifice,  that  we  might  perform  a  service  to 
Him.  By  His  reviving  to  a  new  state  and  condition 
of  life.  His  right  to  our  obedience  is  strengthened. 
There  is  no  creature  exempt  from  obedience  to  Him, 
Who  would  not  be  loyal  to  Hini,  who  hath  already 
received  :  1.  A  power  to  protect ;  2.  A  glory  to  re- 
ward ? 

[John  Howk  :  Receive  the  poor  weakling,  for 
God  is  able  to  make  him  stand.  Every  new-born 
child  is  weak,  and  we  must  renjcmbcr  that  this  is  tlie 
case  with  every  regenerate  soul. 

[Bishop  Hopkins:  On  ver.  12,  All  the  wicked- 
ness that  men  have  brooded  on  and  hatched  in  the 
darkest  vaults  of  their  own  hearts,  or  acted  in  the 
obscurest  secrecy,  shall  be  then  made  as  manifest 
as  if  they  were  every  one  of  them  written  on  their 
foreheads  with  the  point  of  a  sunbeam.  Here,  on 
earth,  none  know  so  much  of  us,  neither  would  we 
that  they  should,  as  our  own  consciences;  and  yet 
those  great  secretaries,  our  own  consciences,  through 
ignorance  or  searedness,  overlook  many  sins  which 
we  commit.  But  our  own  consciences  shall  not 
know  more  of  us  than  all  the  world  shall,  for  all 
that  has  been  done  shall  be  brought  into  publio 
notice. 

[Henry:  Though  some  Christians  are  weak  and 
others  strong,  though  of  different  sizes,  capacities, 
apprehensions,  and  practices,  in  lesser  things,  yet 
they  are  all  the  Lord's.  They  serve  Christ,  and  ap- 
lirove  themselves  to  Him,  and  accordingly  are  owned 
and  accepted  of  Him.  Is  it  for  us,  then,  to  judge  or 
despise  them,  as  if  we  were  their  masters,  and  they 
were  to  make  it  tiieir  business  to  please  us,  and  to 
stand  or  fall  by  our  sentence  ? 

[Wesley,  Sonnon  on  the  Great  Assize,  Rom. 
-xiv.  10 :  Consider :  1.  The  chief  eircnni stances 
which  will  precede  our  standing  before  the  judg- 
ment-seat of  Christ;  2.  The  judgment  itself;  3. 
Circumstances  which  will  follow  it ;  4.  Application 
to  the  hearer. 

[RoBKitr  Hall  :  The  proper  remedy  for  a  diver- 
sity of  sentiment  is  not  the  e.xercise  of  compulsory 
power,  much  less  a  separation  of  communion,  but 
the  ardent  pursuit  of  Christian  piety,  accompanied 
with  an  humble  dependence  on  Divine  teaching, 
which,  it  may  reasonably  l)e  expecteii,  will  in  due 
time  correct  the  errors  and  imperfections  of  sincere 
believei-s.  The  proper  conduct  to  be  maintained  is 
a  cordial  co()[)eration  in  every  branch  of  worship 
and  of  practice  witli  respect  to  which  we  agree,  with- 
out attempting  to  effect  a  unanimity  by  force. 

[HicuAKi)  Watson,  on  vers.  7,  8:  The  exten- 
sion of  the  work  of  Christ  in  every  age  goes  upon 
the  same  iirinciple.  The  principle  of  selfishness  and 
that  of  usefulness  are  distinct  and  contrary,  dne  is 
a  point,  hut  the  ct'iitre  is  notlung  ;  the  other  is  n 
])rogressive  radius,  which  runs  out  to  the  circumfer- 
ence. The  one  is  a  vortex,  which  swallows  up  all 
within  its  gorge  ;  the  other  is  the  current-stream, 
which  gushes  with  an  incessant  activity,  and  sjireads 
into  distant  fields,  refreshing  the  thirsty  earth,  and 
proilucing  rielmess  and  verdure.  The  piineiple  of 
one  is  conlraeiion  ;  of  the  other,  expansion.  Nor  is 
this  a  sluggish  or  inactive  principle.  Lively  desires 
for  the  acknowledgment  of  Christ  by  men,  strong 
and  restle.ss  jealousies  for  His  honor,  tender  sympa- 
thies with  the  moral  wretchedness  of  our  kind,  deep 
and  solemn  impressions  of  eternal  realities,  and  of 
the  danger  of  souls  ;  these  are  the  elements  which 
feed  it ;  and  they  cairy  Chi istian  love  beyond  evjo 
the  pliilanthrojiy  of  the  natural  law. 


CHAPTER  XIV.   1-XV.  4. 


42R) 


[BoDGK :  Owing  to  ignorance,  early  prejudice, 
Weakness  of  faith,  and  otiier  causes,  there  may  and 
must  exist  a  diversity  of  opinion  and  practice  on 
minor  points  of  duty.  But  this  diversity  is  no  sufB- 
cient  reason  for  rejecting  from  Christian  fellowship 
any  member  ot  the  family  of  Christ.  It  is,  how- 
ever, one  thing  to  recognize  a  man  as  a  Christian, 
and  another  to  recognize  him  as  a  suitable  minister 
of  a  eliurcli,  organized  on  a  particular  form  of  gov- 
ernment  and  system  of  doctrines. 

[F.  W.  Robertson  :  It  is  always  dangerous  to 
multiply  restrictions  and  requirements  beyond  what 
is  essential ;  because  men,  feeling  themselves  hemmed 
in,  break  the  artificial  barrier,  but,  breaking  it  with 
a  sense  of  guilt,  tiiereby  become  hardened  in  con- 
science, and  prepared  for  transgressions  against  com- 
mandments which  are  divine  .and  of  eternal  obliga- 
tion. Hence  it  is  tiiat  the  criminal  has  so  often,  in 
his  confessions,  traced  his  deterioration  in  crime  to 
the  first  step  of  breaking  the  Sabbath-day ;  and,  no 
doubt,  with  accurate  truth. — If  God  has  judgments 
in  store  for  England,  it  is  because  we  are  selfish  men 
— because  we  prefer  pleasure  to  duty,  party  to  our 
church,  and  ourselves  to  every  thing  else. — J.  F.  H.] 

Ters.  13-16. 

On  avoiding  oifence.  1.  Offence  cannot  be  avoid- 
ed at  the  expense  of  personal  freedom ;  2.  Just  as 
little  can  it  be  avoided  at  the  expense  of  love  toward 
a  brother  (vers.  13-16). — If  you  would  avoid  stum- 
bling or  offence,  then  preserve :  1.  Your  personal 
fi-eedom ;  2.  But  do  not  injure  love  toward  a 
brother,  for  whose  sake  Christ  died  (vers.  13-16). — 
Nothing  is  unclean  in  itself;  much  is  unclean  if  one 
so  regard  it  (ver.  14). — Take  care  that  your  treasure 
be  not  evil  spoken  of !  1.  What  is  this  treasure  ? 
Spiritual  freedom.  Comp.  ver.  6  ;  1  Cor.  x.  30 ; 
1  Tim.  iv.  4.  2.  How  can  it  be  protected  against 
slander  ?  When  the  strong  man  in  faith  rejoices  in 
its  possession,  but  at  the  same  time  walks  charitably 
(ver.  16). 

Luther  :  The  gospel  is  our  treasure,  and  it  is 
evil  spoken  of  when  Christian  freedom  is  so  boldly 
made  use  of  as  to  give  offence  to  the  weak. 

Starke,  Hkdinger:  Take  heed,  soul,  lest  you 
give  offence !  No  stumbling-stone,  no  sin,  however 
small  you  think  it  may  be,  is  really  small  if  it  can 
make  a  weak  one  fall.  Use  the  right  which  you 
have,  but  use  it  aright;  Matt.  xvii.  24  (ver.  13). 

Gerlach  :  It  is  not  our  office  to  judge  our 
brother,  and  to  decide  on  his  relation  to  God ;  but 
it  is  every  Christian's  office  to  pronounce  decidedly 
against  uncharitableness,  which  can  condemn  another 
to  his  fiill. 

Heubner  :  The  treasure  is  Christian  freedom, 
deliverance  from  outward  ordinances.  It  is  evil  spo- 
ken of  either  by  the  enemies  of  the  Church,  when 
they  see  the  dissension  of  Christians,  or  by  the 
weaker  brethren,  when  they  condemn  the  stronger, 
and  use  their  freedom  presumptuously,  or  by  the 
stronger,  when  they  give  offence  to  the  weaker,  and 
injure  their  conscience  (ver.  16). 

Bessek  :  It  is  a  true  proverb  :  "  Though  two  do 
the  same  thing,  it  is  not  really  the  same  thing,"  for 
not  the  form  of  the  deed,  but  the  sense  of  the  doer, 
decides  as  to  whether  any  thing  is  unclean  or  holy, 
or  contrary  to  faith  and  love  (ver.  14). 

[Jeremy  Taylor  :  In  a  ripe  conscience,  the 
practical  judgment — that  is,  the  last  determination 


of  an  action  —ought  to  be  sure  and  evident.  Tliis 
is  plain  in  all  the  great  lines  of  duty,  in  actions  de 
terminable  by  the  prime  principles  of  natural  rea« 
son,  or  Divine  revelation  ;  but  it  is  true  also  in  all 
actions  conducted  by  a  right  and  perfect  consciences 
There  is  always  a  reflex  act  of  judgment,  which, 
upon  consideration  that  it  is  certain  that  a  publio 
action  may  lawfully  be  done,  or  else  that  that  whicfc 
is  but  probable  in  the  nature  of  the  thing  (so  far  aa 
we  perceive  it)  may  yet,  by  the  superadding  of  some 
circumstances  and  confidential  considerations,  or  by 
equity  or  necessity,  become  more  than  public  in  the 
particular.  Although,  I  say,  the  conscience  be  un- 
certain in  the  direct  act,  yet  it  may  be  certain,  right, 
and  determined,  in  the  reflex  and  second  acl  of  judg- 
ment ;  and  if  it  be,  it  is  innocent  and  safe — it  is  that 
which  we  call  the  right  and  sure  conscience  {Tlie 
Rule  of  Conscience,  Works  [Bishop  Heber's  edi. 
tion],  vol.  xi.  pp.  369-522). 

Clarke  :  It  is  dangerous  to  trifle  with  conscience^ 
even  when  erroneous  ;  it  should  be  borne  with  and 
instructed ;  it  must  be  won  over,  not  taken  by  storm. 
Its  feelings  should  be  respected,  because  they  ever 
refer  to  God,  and  have  their  foundation  in  His  feaii 
He  who  sins  against  his  conscience  in  things  which 
every  one  else  knows  to  be  indifferent,  will  soon  do 
it  in  those  things  in  which  his  salvation  is  most  intL. 
mately  concerned.  It  is  a  great  blessing  to  have  a 
well-informed  conscience  ;  it  is  a  blessing  to  have  a 
tender  conscience,  and  even  a  sore  conscience  is  bet- 
ter than  none. 

[Barnes  :  Christ  laid  down  His  precious  life  for 
the  weak  brother  as  well  as  for  the  strong.  He 
loved  them  ;  and  shall  we,  to  gratify  our  appetites, 
pursue  a  course  which  will  tend  to  defeat  the  v/ork 
of  Christ,  and  ruin  the  souls  redeemed  by  His  blood  ? 
— Do  not  so  use  your  Christian  liberty  as  to  give 
occasion  for  railing  and  unkind  remarks  from  your 
brother,  so  as  to  produce  contention  and  strife,  and 
thus  to  give  rise  to  evil  reports  among  the  wicked 
about  the  tendency  of  the  Christian  religion,  as  if  it 
were  adapted  only  to  promote  controversy. — J.  F.  H.] 


Vers.  17-23. 

The  glory  of  God's  kingdom  as  a  kingdom  :  L 
Of  righteousness  ;  2.  Of  peace  ;  3.  And  of  joy  in 
the  Holy  Ghost  (ver.  lY). — God's  kingdom  is:  1. 
Not  a  kingdom  of  dead  ordinances,  by  which  the 
conscience  is  oppressed  ;  but,  2.  A  kingdom  of  liv- 
ing, evangelical  truth,  by  which  righteousness,  peace, 
and  joy  in  the  Holy  Ghost  are  planted  and  promoted 
(ver.  17).  —  God's  kingdom  is  a  kingdom  which: 
1.  Rests  on  righteousness ;  2.  In  whose  borders 
peace  reigns ;  3.  To  belong  to  which  brings  joy  to 
the  hearts  of  all  its  citizens  (ver.  1*7). — The  blissful 
service  of  Christ.  1.  The  service  is  in  righteous- 
ness, &c. ;  2.  The  blessing :  a.  That  we  are  accept- 
able to  God  ;  b.  That  we  are  approved  of  men  (vers. 
17,  18). 

For  what  should  members  of  the  Christian 
Church  strive,  if  in  most  important  matters  they 
are  one,  but  in  unessential  matters  they  have  differ- 
ent views  ?  1.  For  what  makes  for  peace  ;  2.  For 
what  contributes  to  edification  (ver.  19). — Even  the 
weaker  brother's  Christian  life  is  God's  work  ;  tlsere- 
fore  be  indulgent  toward  his  conscience  !  (ver,  20.) 
— Rather  deny  self  than  offend  a  brother  (ver.  21), 
— The  happiness  of  Christian  freedom  (ver.  22).— 
The  condemnation  of  the  doubting  conscience  (vep. 


430 


THE   EPISTLE   OF   PAUL   TO    THE   ROMANS. 


23). — What  is  not  of  faitli  is  sin,  1.  How  often  is 
thi.s  expression  misunderstood  !  a.  When  it  is  su[>- 
posed  that  all  the  virtues  of  the  lieatlien  are  glaring 
Bins  ;  h.  When  all  tlie  civic  righteousness  of  uncon- 
verted people  is  condemned  in  like  manner ;  c. 
When  the  whole  civilized  life  of  the  present  day  re- 
ceives the  same  judgment.  Therefore,  2.  There 
arises  the  serious  question,  How  should  it  be  under- 
stood ?  a.  As  a  declaration  which  has  no  applica- 
tion whatever  to  the  heathen,  or  to  unconverted 
people  in  Christendom,  but  strictly  to  awakened  pro- 
K'ssors  of  religion  ;  and,  in  consequence  thereof, 
b.  Contiiins  an  appeal  to  them  to  do  nothing  which 
cannot  be  done  with  the  full  joy  of  faith  (vcr.  23). 

LcTHER,  on  ver.  23  :  Observe,  that  all  this  is  a 
general  declaration  against  all  works  done  without 
filth ;  and  guard  against  the  false  interpretations 
here  devised  by  many  teachers. 

SrAiiKK :  A  reconciled  and  quiet  conscience  is 
the  workshop  of  spiritual  joy  (ver.  17). — Osia.ndek  : 
Tlie  most  certain  rule  of  conduct  for  using  Christian 
freedom,  is  to  contribute  to  our  neighbor's  edifica- 
tion and  improvement,  but  not  to  his  downfall  and 
ruin  (ver.  I'J). 

Spe.nkr  :  The  Apostle  would  say  (ver.  17),  that 
you  should  be  careful  of  nothing  but  God's  king- 
dom. Wlicre  this  is  promoted,  it  should  make  you 
rejoice,  and  it  should  grieve  you  when  it  suffers. 
That,  on  the  other  hand,  which  does  not  concern 
God's  kingdom,  should  be  regarded  by  you  as  a 
small  matter. 

Gerlacii  :  The  righteousness  which  avails  in 
God's  kingdom  is  not  an  outward  observance  of  the 
law,  but  inward  holiness ;  the  peace  with  God  which 
we  have  in  it  overflows  to  our  bretliren,  and  holy 
joy  destroys  both  all  anxiety  and  every  thing  wliicli 
can  offend  and  grieve  our  neigliljor  (ver.  17). 

Lisco :  To  attach  importance  to  eating  and 
drinking,  to  hold  that  there  should  henceforth  be  no 
^cruple  at  certain  kinds  of  food,  or  that,  on  the 
( thcr  hand,  this  or  that  shoidd  be  renounced,  is  no 
sign  of  true  Christianity  (ver.  17). 

Hecbskr  :  The  mistaking  of  what  is  essential  in 
Ciiristianity,  makes  us  petty  ;  while  laying  stress  on 
merely  secondary  matters  unfits  us  for  accomplish- 
ing the  principal  object  (ver.  17). — That  which  is 
allowed  may  be  sin  :  1.  When  we  do  it  apiinst  our 
con.sciencc ;  2.  When  we  thereby  offend  others 
(ver.  21). 

Bksser  :  Every  Christian  and  all  Christendom 
are  God's  work  and  building  (1  Cor.  iii.  9).  It  is 
blasphemy  against  God's  sanctuary  to  drstroii  this 
work  by  ruining  a  brother  sanctified  by  Christ's 
blood  (ver.  15),  and  iiy  sundeiing  the  bond  of  peace, 
which  keeps  the  lilocks  of  the  divine  building  in 
place  (ver.  2U). — Every  thing  which  is  of  Christian 
faith  is  truly  good,  because  the  doer  is  good  by 
faith,  and  his  deed  is  love,  the  fulness  of  all  good 
deeds  (ver.  23). 

[LKifiiiTos  :  There  is  no  truly  coniforf,able  life 
in  till'  world  but  that  of  religion.  Religion  is  joy. 
Woulil  VDU  think  it  a  pleasant  life,  thougti  you  had 
fine  clothes  and  good  diet,  never  to  see  the  sun,  but 
still  to  keep  in  a  dungeon  with  them  ?  Thus  are 
f.hey  who  live  in  worldly  honor  and  plenty,  who  are 
Btill  without  God  ;  they  are  in  continual  darknes*, 
wiih  all  their  enjoyments. — The  public  ministry  will 
profit  little  any  way,  whr're  a  people,  or  some  part 
Ot  them,  are  not  one,  anil  do  not  live  together  as  of 
one  inimi,  and  iis"  dlligi-ntly  all  due  mi'ans  of  eilifv- 
ing  one  another  in  their  holy  faith. — Burkitt:  Ob- 


serve :  1.  That  the  love  and  practice  of  religioua 
duties,  such  as  righteousness  and  peace,  is  a  clear 
and  strong  argument  of  a  person's  acce[itance  with 
God  ;  2.  That  such  as  are  for  those  things  accepted 
by  God,  ought  by  no  mwuis,  for  differing  from  ui  in 
lesser  things,  to  be  disowned  of  us,  and  cast  out  of 
communion  by  us. 

[Henky  :  Ways  by  which  we  may  edify  one  an- 
other ;  1  By  good  counsel ;  2.  Reproof ;  3.  In- 
struction ;  4.  Example ;  5.  Building  up  not  only 
ourselves,  but  one  another,  in  the  most  holy  faith. 
None  are  so  strong  but  they  may  be  edified ;  none 
so  weak  but  they  may  edify ;  and  while  we  edify 
others,  we  benefit  ourselves. — Clarke  :  If  a  man's 
passions  or  appetite  allow  or  instigate  him  to  a  par- 
ticular  thing,  let  him  take  good  heed  that  his  con- 
science ajipfovi'  what  his  passions  allow,  and  that  ha 
live  not  tlie  subject  of  continual  self-condemnation 
and  reproach.  Even  the  man  who  has  a  too  scrupu- 
lous conscience  had  better,  in  such  matters  as  are 
in  question,  obey  its  erroneous  dictates,  than  violate 
this  moral  feeling,  and  live  only  to  condemn  the 
actions  he  is  constantly  performing. 

[HonGE :  Conscience,  or  a  sense  of  duty,  is  not 
the  only,  and  perhaps  not  the  most  important,  princi- 
ple to  be  appealed  to  in  support  of  benevolent  en- 
terprises. It  comes  in  aid  of  and  gives  its  sanction 
to  all  other  right  motives ;  but  we  find  the  sacred 
writers  appealing  most  frequently  to  the  benevolent 
and  pious  feelings — to  the  example  of  Christ — to  a 
sense  of  our  obligations  to  Him — to  the  mutual  re- 
lations of  Christians,  and  their  common  connection 
with  the  Redeemer,  &c.,  as  motives  to  self-denial 
and  devotedness. — As  the  religion  of  the  gospel  con- 
sists in  the  inward  graces  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  all 
who  have  these  graces  sliould  be  recognized  as  genu- 
ine Christians  ;  being  acceptable  to  God,  they  should 
be  loved  and  cherished  by  His  people,  notwithstand- 
ing their  weakness  or  errors. — The  peace  and  edifi- 
cation of  the  Church  arc  to  be  sought  at  all  sacri- 
fices, except  those  of  tnith  and  duty  ;  and  the  work 
of  (ind  is  not  to  be  destroyed  or  injured  for  the  sake 
of  any  personal  or  party  interests. — An  enlightened 
conscience  is  a  great  bleasing  ;  it  secures  the  lil>erty 
of  the  soul  from  bondage  to  the  opinions  of  men, 
and  from  the  self-inflicted  pains  of  a  scruptilous  and 
morbid  state  of  moral  feeling ;  it  promotes  the  right 
exercise  of  all  the  virtuous  affections,  and  the  right 
discharge  of  all  our  duties. — H.  B.  Ripoeway,  on 
vers.  22,  23  :  The  reason  that  the  Church  is  so  cold 
in  her  devotions,  and  so  little  comparative  success 
attends  her  evangelizing  efforts,  is,  that  her  con- 
fidence in  God's  promises  and  methods  is  paralyzed 
by  a  nelt'-arrnxinff  conxcionxmss  of  deHuqncnc}/, 
There  cannot  be  an  overcoming  faith  in  the  pi'oplc 
of  God,  except  the  S|)irlt  of  llim  who  fidfilleth  all 
righteousness  breathes  and  works  in  their  hearts  and 
lives. 

[HoMJLKTiCAL  Literature  on  ver.  17. — A.  Bfb- 
Giss,  Spirit  lal  Jievii'liifis,  part  i.  123;  J.  Aher- 
NETirv,  Of  thf.  Kinrj  lorn  of  God,  Srrm.,  vol.  iv. 
l.')5  ;  S.  Ct.ARKK,  fn  ir/iat  the  Kimidnm  of  God  Gon- 
itn/x,  St'rm.,  vol.  vii.  233;  H.  WiiiSK.wv,  77/e  True 
Xafiire  of  the  Khuidoin  of  God,  Srnii.,  vol.  ii.  91  ; 
S.  BotTKN,  On  thr  Xiitiirc  of  t/u'  I'/iri^tian  Jietirjioit, 
D'lKc,  vol.  ii.  259  ;  Ij.  HoI-pen,  Ruthtromnrxx  EKsm- 
fidf  to  Tnif  Riliijioii,  Senn.,  314  ;  J.  Dnnso.v,  Joi/ 
ill  till'  ITolii  Glmni,  IHx,'.,  152;  .Tames  Foster,  llu 
h'hiff  'oin  of  God,  niid<r  the  Dixpnisa/ion  of  thi 
Go.tprI,  Srnn.,  vol.  ii.  313  ;  Bisiiop  Siiipt.ky,  Serm.. 
]Vorki>,   vol.   i.   265  ;    Joiis  Vk.nn,    The  Xature  oj 


CHAPTER  XIV.   l-XV.  4. 


431 


True  Religion,  Serm.,  vol.  ill  132;  I.  B.  S.  Car- 
wiTUiN,  7'/ie  Brahininical  Si/stem  in  its  Operations 
on  the  Intellectual  Facattie>i,  Hampton  Lectures,  213  ; 
T.  DwiuHT,  Joy  in  the  Holy  Ghost,  'llieology,  vol.  iii. 
208  ;  John  Gaknons,  True  Religion,  Senn.,  vol.  ii. 
15  ;  R.  P.  BuDDicoM,  The  Inward  and  ISpiritual 
Character  of  the  Kingdom  of  God,  Sei-m.,  vol.  ii. 
234 ;  Bishop  Jkbb,  Serm.,  71 ;  H.  Woodward, 
M-ssays,  &c.,  467 ;  R.  MoNTGOifKRY,  The  Church, 
Viewed  as  the  Kinadom  of  the  Spirit,  God  and 
Man,  118.— J.  F.  H.] 


Chap.  xv.  1-4. 

Let  us  bear  the  infirmity  of  the  weak  without 
pleasiug  oui-bclves ;  for  in  this :  1.  We  seek  to 
please  our  neighbor  for  his  good,  to  edification  ;  2. 
We  herein  choose  Christ  as  our  pattern,  who  did 
not  please  himself  (vers.  1-4). — For  what  purpose 
should  tlie  strong  use  the  infirmity  of  the  weak  ? 
1.  To  humhle  himself;  2.  To  please  his  neighbor; 
3.  To  imitate  Christ  (vers.  1-4). — On  pleasing  our- 
selves. 1.  In  what  is  its  ground  ?  a.  In  a  man's 
regarding  his  views  as  the  most  correct ;  b.  His 
efforts  as  the  best ;  c.  His  words  as  the  wisest ;  d. 
His  deeds  as  the  most  godly  ;  e.  And,  consequently, 
himself  as  insurpass;ible.  2.  How  is  it  shown?  a. 
In  the  seveie  condemnation  of  the  weak  ;  b.  In  im- 
moderate self-praise ;  c.  In  pretentious  manners  in 
society.  3.  How  is  it  to  be  overcome  ?  a.  By  dis- 
cipline in  bearing  the  infirmities  of  the  weak  breth- 
ren ;  b.  By  an  honest  effort  to  please  our  neighbor 
for  his  good,  to  edification  (comp.  1  Cor.  x.  33) ;  c. 
By  a  believing  look  at  Christ,  who  did  not  please 
himself,  but  bore  the  reproaches  of  His  enemies 
(vers.  1-4). — The  blessing  of  the  Holy  Scriptures 
for  our  inward  man  (ver.  4). — The  Holy  Scriptures 
a  fountain  of  hope  (ver.  4). — Examples  of  patience 
and  comfort,  which  the  Scriptures  present  to  us  for 
awakening  joyous  hope :  1.  From  the  Old  Testa- 
ment ;    2.  From  the  New  Testament  (ver.  4). 

Roos :  Bearing  the  infirmity  of  the  weak  is  an 
exercise  of  meek  love,  which  neither  lightly  esteems 
him  who  is  weak,  nor  would  seek  to  change  him  in 
a  rough,  vehement  manner.  To  please  ourselves, 
means  to  act  according  to  our  own  views,  whether 
another  can  be  offended  at  them  or  not ;  or  to  so 
conduct  ourselves  as  if  we  were  in  the  world  for 
our  own  sake  alone,  and  not  also  for  our  weak 
brother's  sake  (vers.  2  and  3). 

Gerlach  :  The  Apostle  here  sets  up  Christ  not 
merely  as  a  pattern,  but  as  a  motive,  and  the  living 
Author  and  Finisher  of  our  life  of  faith  (ver.  3). 

Hel'bner  :  The  reason  why  a  man  does  not  place 
himself  under  restraint,  is  pleasure  with  himself; 
and  this  hinders  all  peace,  destroys  the  germ  of  love 
in  the  heart,  and  is  a  proof  of  spiritual  weakness, 
prejudice,  and  a  corrupt  heart.  He  is  not  strong 
who  cannot  bear  with  others  near  him,  nor  tolerate 
their  opinions  (ver.  21). — The  Bible  is  the  only  real 
and  inexhaustible  book  of  comfort  ;  Paul  said  this 
even  when  there  was  nothing  more  than  the  Old 
Testament. — The  Bible  is  not  merely  a  book  to  be 
read,  but  to  be  lived  \jiicht  Lese-,  sondern  LebebuchJ], 
Luther,  vol.  v.,  pp.  1707  (ver.  4). 

[Jeremy  Taylor  :  There  is  comfort  scattered  up 
and  down  throughout  the  holy  book,  and  not  cn.st 
all  in  a  lump  to:.'-etlier.  By  searching  it  diligently, 
we  may  draw  our  consolation  out  of:  1.  Faith ;  2. 
Hope  ;   3.  The  indwelling  of  the  Spirit ;  4.  Prayer  ; 


5.  lae  Sacraments. — Burkitt  :  The  great  end  foi 
which  the  Holy  Scriptures  were  written,  was  the 
informing  of  our  judgments,  ai  d  the  directing  ol 
our  practice,  that,  by  the  examples  which  we  find 
there  of  the  patience  of  holy  men  under  sufferings, 
and  of  God's  relieving  and  comforting  them  in  their 
distresses,  we  might  have  hope,  confidence,  and  assur- 
ance, that  God  will  also  comfort  and  relieve  us  vmder 
the  like  pressures  and  burdens. 

[Henry  :  Christ  bore  the  guilt  of  sin,  and  the 
curse  for  it ;  we  are  only  called  to  bear  a  little  of 
the  trouble  of  it.  He  bore  the  presumptuous  sins 
of  the  wicked  ;  we  are  called  only  to  bear  the  in- 
firmities of  the  weak. — There  are  many  things  to  be 
learned  out  of  Scripture  ;  the  best  learning  is  that 
which  is  drawn  from  that  fountain.  Those  are  most 
learned  that  are  most  mighty  in  the  Scriptures.  As 
ministers,  we  need  help,  not  only  to  roll  away  the 
stone,  but  to  draw  out  the  water;  for  in  many  places 
the  well  is  deep.  Practical  observations  are  more 
necessary  than  critical  expositions. 

[ScoTT :  Many  venture  into  places  and  upon  ac- 
tions against  which  their  own  conscience  revolts ; 
because  they  are  induced  by  inclination,  or  embold- 
ened by  the  example  of  those  who,  on  some  account, 
have  obtained  the  reputation  of  pious  men.  But 
they  are  condemned  for  indulging  themselves  in  a 
doubtful  case.  In  order  to  enjoy  freedom  from  self- 
condemnation,  we  must  have  :  1.  A  sound  judg- 
ment ;  2.  A  simple  heart ;  3.  A  tender  conscience  ; 
4.  Habitual  self-denial. 

[Robert  Hall:  Paul  enjoins  the  practice  of  for- 
bearance, on  the  ground  of  the  conscientiousness  of 
the  parties  concerned,  on  the  assumption  not  only 
of  their  general  sincerity,  but  of  their  being  equally 
actuated,  in  the  very  particulars  in  which  they  dif- 
fered, by  an  unfeigned  respect  to  the  authority  of 
Christ ;  and  as  he  urges  the  same  consideration  on 
which  the  toleration  of  both  parties  rested,  it  must 
have  included  a  something  which  was  binding  on  the 
conscience,  whatever  was  his  private  judgment  on 
the  points  in  debate.  The  Jew  was  as  much  bound 
to  tolerate  the  Gentile,  as  the  Gentile  to  tolerate  the 
Jew. 

[Hodge  :  The  desire  to  please  others  should  be 
wisely  directed,  and  spring  from  riglit  motives.  We 
should  not  please  them  to  their  own  injury,  nor 
from  the  wish  to  secure  their  favor ;  but  for  their 
good,  that  they  may  be  edified. — Barnes  :  Christ 
willingly  threw  himself  between  the  sinner  and  God, 
to  intercept,  as  it  were,  our  sins,  and  to  bear  the 
effects  of  them  in  His  own  person.  He  stood  be- 
tween us  and  God ;  and  both  the  reproaches  and  the 
Divine  displeasure  due  to  them  met  on  His  sacred 
person,  and  produced  the  sorrows  of  the  atonement. 
— His  bitter  agony  in  the  garden  and  on  the  cross. 
.Jesus  thus  showed  His  love  of  God  in  being  willing 
to  bear  the  reproaches  aimed  at  Him,  and  His  love 
of  men  in  being  willing  to  endure  the  sufleringa 
necessary  to  atone  for  these  very  ones. 

[Homiletical  Literature  on  ver.  4 :  Bishop 
Latimer,  Sermons  of  the  Plough,  Works,  vol.  i.  59  ; 
Seven  Sermons,  Ibid.,  vol.  i.  85  ;  Bishop  PaYrick, 
The  Use  of  the  Holy  Scriptures  (London,  1678); 
W.  WoTTON,  /Siprm.  (1722) ;  John  Gutse,  Serrn, 
(1724) ;  Dispositions  for  Reading  the  Scriptures  ; 
Pitman  from  Osterwald,  1st  Course,  vol.  i.  15  ;  J. 
Brailsford,  Revelation  of  a  Fidure  State  in  th« 
Scripture",  an  Argument  for  Comfort  ami  Patience, 
Serm.,  247  ;  Thomas  Adam,  Works,  vol.  iii.  334 ; 
H.  Draper,  The  Authority,  Excellence,  and  Use  of 


433 


THE    EPISTLE   OF   PAUL   TO    THE   ROMANS. 


the  Jlohf  Scriptures.  On  the  Collects,  vol.  i.  24  ; 
John  IIkwi.ktt,  77ie  Thitigs  Wri'.len  Aforftime  for 
■j\ir  Lenrniiif/,  ,S<rin.,  vol.  iv.  209  ;  T/ie  Dnti/  of 
JSttidi/iitf/  t/ie  Ho/i/  Scrii)tur(S  icith  Patience,  Ibhl., 
vol.  iv.  227  ;  The  Patience,  the  Comfort,  and  Hope 
to  be  Derived  from  the  Holy  Scriptures,  Jbid.,  vol. 
iv.  24(5 ;  R.  L.  Cotton,  Studji  of  the  Sa~tp'ures, 
Serm.,  37ii;  W .  Maidonald,  The  Seripturea.  Plain 
Sermons,  24 ;  C.  (iiUDLKSToNE,  Hull/  Scripture.  Fare- 
vxll  Sermons,  165  ;  G.  R.  Glkig,  Sermons  for  Ad- 
vent, &c.,  39  ;  T.  BowDLKR,  The  Scriptures  Given 


for  Comfort.  Sermons  on  Privikf/es,  kc,  vol.  i. 
48  ;  ¥.  E.  TcsoN,  The  Blessings  and  Importance  of 
the  Written  Word  of  Uod,  Serm.,  110;  Aktiiur 
RoBKRTS,  The  Usis  of  God^s  Word.  Plain  Sermons, 
vol.  i.  12;  J.  W.  Donalhson,  The  Patience  and  Com- 
fort of  the  Holy  Scriptures,  A.  Watson,  2d  Series, 
vol.  i.  26  ;  J.  Gaubett,  Christ  Speaking  in  Holy 
Scripture.  Christ  on  Earth,  kc.,\o\.\.ZO;  Bishop 
Mkdl?;y,  The  Old  Testament  in  its  Relation  to  the 
New,  Serm.,  121 ;  Isaac  Williams,  The  Scripture* 
Bearing  Witness,  Serm.,  vol.  L  12. — J.  F.  H.] 


Sixth  Section. — Exhortation  to  unanimil;/  on  the  part  of  all  the  members  of  the  Church,  to  the  praiu 
of  God  and  on  the  ground  of  God^s  grace,  in  which  Christ  ha»  accepted  both  Jews  and  Gcutiks. 
Refertnce  to  the  destination  of  all  nations  to  glorify  God,  even  according  to  the  Old  T'cstammt,  and 
encouragement  of  the  Roman  Christians  to  an  immeasurable  hope  in  regard  to  this,  according  to  t/uir 
calling. 

Chap.   XV.   6-13. 

6  Now  the  God  of  patience  and  consolation  [comfort]  p^rant  you  to  be  like- 
minded  [of  the  same  mind]  one  toward  another  according  to  Christ  Jesus : 
'  6  That  ye  may  with  one  mind  and  one  mouth  [with  one  accord  ye  may  with  one 
mouth]  glorify  God,  even  the  Father  [or,  the  God  and  Father]  '  of  our  Lord 

1  Jesus  Clirist.      Wherefore  roceive  ye  one  another,  as  Clirist  also  received  us 

8  [you],^  to  the  glory  of  God.'  Now  [For]  *  I  say  that  Jesus  ["mu  Jesus] ' 
Christ  Avas  [liatli  been  made]  °  a  minister  of  the  circumcision  for  the  truth  [for 
the  sake  of  God's  truth]  of  God,  to  [in  order  to]  confirm  the  promises  made 

9  unto  the  fathers :  And  that  the  Gentiles  might  glorify  God  for  his  mercy ;  as 
it  is  written, 

For  this  cause  I  will  confess  [give  thanks]  to  thee  among  the  Gentiles, 
And  sing  unto  thy  name. 
10,  11     And  again  he  saith,'  Rejoice,  ye  Gentiles,  with  his  people.     And  again,' 
Praise  the  Lord,  all  ye  Gentiles  ; 
And  laud'  him,  all  ye  people. 

12  And  again,  Esaias  [Isaiah]  saith,'° 

There  shall  be  a  root  of  Jesse, 

And  he  that  shall  rise  [riseth]  to  reign  over  the  Gentiles ; 

In  him  shall  tlie  Gentiles  trust  [hopej. 

13  Now  [And  may]  the  God  of  hoj)e  fill  you  with  all  joy  and  peace  "  in  believing, 
that  ye  may  abound  in  hope,  through  [fV,  in]  the  power  of  the  Holy  Ghost. 


'  Ver.  (5. — [On  the  two  rondoriiiRs  Rivpn  nbove,  see  the  E.rfg.  Nntfs. 

»  Vcr.  7.— iThe  /?<<•.,  with  B.  P'.  •  Vj/nas ;  N-  A.  C.  I)'  ».  F.  L.,  most  versions  nnd  mnny  fnthcrs  :  viia^.  AH 
moflcrn  cditorH  iidopt  the  latter,  llesidcs  the  ovcrwholmlnR  MS.  mipport,  there  is  tho  additi'oniil  reason,  that  rtnat 
miuht  BO  readily  enter  as  a  coiTect  kIoss,  since  tho  reference  is  undoubtedly  to  both  •Jewish  and  Gentile  Christians.  Seo 
tho  Et  p.  Ni't'f. 

'  N  cr.  7.  — [The  Ri'r.,  on  very  in«ufl[lfient  authority,  omitfl  toO  before  ^tov;  inserted  in  N.  A.  B.  0.  T).  F.  G. 

*  V.-r.  8.— [Instead  of  yap,  wljich  is  found  in  N.  A.  H.  C.  D.  F.,  versions  and  fathers,  tho  R'C.  (with  L.,  a^d 
ppshito)  reada  ;  H.  Tho  latter  reading  jiroliably  arose  fVom  a  mlMunderstaiidinL'  of  the  connection  (.Vlford),  or  bcc>ius« 
A<y(o  t4  is  so  coiiitnon  with  I'aul  (Meyer).  The  former  is  now  generally  adopted  (from  Gricsbach  to  TroffcHen)- 
Phi  Ipri  tliinkn  a  decision  ^mprl8^it)lo! 

'  Ver.  8.-.-(l).  v.,  Syriac  versions.  Rrc,  insert  'I7|<ro0>'  before  \fiiar6v  \  some  authorities  (including  Vnlente), 
■tier  Xp.  ;  omitted  in  n.  A.  B.  C,  fathers;  rejected  by  Laehmnnn,  Tlschendorf,  V>'-  Wette,  Alford.  Tlio  variation  in 
position  U  decidedly  apainst  it,  making  an  intorpolntlon  extremely  probable.  Dr.  Lango  tlilnks  tho  connection  favor* 
the  omission. 

»  Vcr.  H  — IN.  A.  C  I)'.  L.,  many  Cithers  ;  ytytvjicBai ;  adopted  by  De  Wette,  Philippi,  Meyer,  Alford,  liinso. 
B.  C  D'.  F. :  ytviaOai.,  adopted  by  Laclinuinn  and  Tri  ircUes.  The  former  i*  to  be  preferred,  necnuab  the  y*-  was  likoly 
tc  be  omitted,  and  the  latter  might  have  been  substitntcd  as  a  corrvction. 


CHAPTER  XV.    5-13. 


433 


*  Ver  10.— [From  the  LXX.,  Deut.  xxxii.  43.  The  Hebrew  test  is  :  152?  Cia  '12''?':^  >  literally,  Rrjoice,  0  ye  va» 
Uons,  His  people.  It  is  not  necessary,  in  order  to  defend  the  rendering  of  the  LXX.,  to  suppose  that  they  read  'TZS  CS 
or  i'BV'-  or  ":33.'~rN  (although  the  last  has  been  found).  They  could  find  the  sense  they  have  adopted  in  the  Hebrew 
text  as  ft  stands,  by  simply  repeating  the  imperative  (in  thought]  before  1532  .  See  Philippi  in  loco,  and  Hcngstentors; 
on  Ps.  xviii.  50. 

8  Ver.  11. — [B.  D.  F.  read  \iyn ;  omitted  in  ■■■.  A.  C.  L.,  fathers.  It  was  easily  inserted  from  ver.  10.  Lachnwnn 
adopts  it,  but  it  is  generally  rejected. — The  order  of  the  liec. :  toi/  xvpiov  navra  ra  eOvj]  %  probably  axorrecl  ion 
toeonforiii  with  the  LXX.  N.  A.  £.  D.,  Vulgule,  Syriac,  &c.  :  ir.  t.  «9.  rbv  Kvpiov.  So  Lachmann,  Tiifteudorf, 
Alford,  TrcycUes. 

^  Ver.  11.— [N.  A.  B.  C.  :  e7raive<raTa><7-oi'.  So  Lachmann,  Tischendorf,  Meyer,  De  Wette,  Alford,  Trcpelles, 
Lange.  lice,  F.  h.,  versions  :  ewaiveo-aTe  (so  LXX.,  although  the  MSS.  vary).  Philipji  adopts  the  latter,  but  he  is  a 
0ODse4'vative  as  respects  the  Reopla. 

1"  Ver.  12.— [The  LXX.  (Isa.  xL  10)  is  followed  here.    It  differs  somewhat  from  the  Hebrew,  which,  reads  . 

tidin";  D";ii3  rbx  u^iz'j  0}h  np3>  ">irx  ^vy]  uj-iju  xnnn  Di*S  n^nn . 

Literally  :  "And  in  thai  day  shall  the.  root  of  Jesse  which  (is)  slandinff(fxe  •et  up)  be  for  a  signal  to  the  va'ions;  unto  ff,'^ 
shall  the  Gentiles  seek  *"  (J.  A.  Alexander).  Hut  the  LXX.  only  stre.  giheiis  this  into  a  lorm  well  suiteii  to  the  Apostle's 
purpose. 

''  Ver.  13.— [F.  Gr.  read  :  n-Ai)<f)op>)(rai  u/mas  TraoT)  x«P?  """^  ^i-PV"!!-  So  B.,  inserting  ey  before  the  datives.  M.  A.  C. 
D.  L.  :  irAijpcucrat   ir/ids  na<rrii  x'-P"-^  "<"■   «'P^>'')Si  accepted  by  most  editors. — K.l 


EXEGETICAL  AND   CRITICAL. 

The  positive  destination  of  tlie  Christian  Church 
at  Rome. 

Ver.  5.  Now  the  God  of  patience,  &c.  [6 
dk  C-Jfoi;  Ttjq  !ino/(  ovrj  i;,  y..r.)..  "God,  who 
is  the  author  of  patience,"  &c.  So  Hodge,  Meyer, 
and  most.  Luther :  "  Scriptura  qiddem  docct,  se  i 
rp-atia  donnf,  quod,  iUa  doceC  Comp.  Calvin  on 
the  patience  of  the  Chriijtian.  De  Wette,  Meyer, 
and  others,  understand  by.  I'nofiovi^,  constmicy. 
Hodge  takes  consofation  as  the  source  of  patience. 
— R.]  God  is  the  common,  inexhaustible  source  of 
all  the  matured  patience  of  the  New  Testament,  and 
of  all  the  preparatory  comfort  of  the  Old  Testa- 
ment ;  and  it  is  from  Him  that  believers  must  de- 
rive the  gift  of  being  of  the  same  mind  one 
toward  another  according  to  Christ  Jesus 
(not  according  to  His  example  and  will  merely,  but 
according  to  His  Spirit).* 

Ver.  6.  It  is  only  in  this  path  of  self-humiliation 
that  they  shall  and  can  attain  to  the  glorious  way 
of  glorifying  the  God  and  Father  of  our  Lord  Jestis 
Christ — Him  who  has  glorified  Jesus  as  Christ,  after 
Christ  passed  through  the  Jesns-way  of  humiliation, 
and  whom  they  glorify  in  the  anticipation  that  He 
will  glorify  them  with  Him,  as  He  has  already  glori- 
fied theni  in  Him.  The  terms  Christ  Jesus  and 
Jesus  Christ  are  here  reversed  with  remarkable 
acuteness  and  eifect. — With  one  accord,  hnoO  v- 
fia()6v,  is  not  explained  by  the  phrase:  with 
one  mouth  [t'r  kvi  aronari,^  but  the  former 
Is  the  source  of  the  latter,  as  Meyer  has  correctly 
observed,  against  Reiche.  ["  When  God  is  so 
praised  that  the  same  mood  impels  every  one  to 
the  same  utterance  of  praise,  then  party-feeling  is 
bani.shed,  and  unanimity  has  found  its  most  sacred 
expres.=ion  "  (Meyer). — R.] 

The  God  and  Father  of  our  Lord  Jesus 
Christ  [rbv  &  f  i)  v  y.ai  nariQo,  rov  xi'- 
Qioi'  tj/i(7)v  'Jt](ToTi  A'^JKTTor.]  He  is  not  only 
the  Father,  but  also  the  God,  of  Christ,  in  the  high- 
est specific  sense  (thus  Grotius  [Beng'el,  Reiche, 
Fritzsche,  Jowett],  and  others,  in  opposition  to  Mey- 
er).    Comp.  Eph.  i.  17. 

♦  [With  this  accords  the  view  of  Dr.  Hodge  :  "  The  ex- 
pression, to  he  like-minded,  does  not  here  refer  to  unanimity 
of  opinion,  but  to  harmony  of  feeling  ;  see  chaps,  viii.  5  ; 
xii.  3."  The  contest  favors  this  very  decidedly.— Meyer 
thinks  "the  esample  of  Christ  (ver.  3)  is  still  the  ruling 
thought  ;"  but  it  is  certainly  not  the  exclusive  one.  The 
Terb  ficJi)  is  the  latter  Hellenistic  form  for  fioi'r). — K.] 

28 


[God,  ev^  the  Father,  &c.  The  E.  V.  thus 
renders,  disconnecting  "  of  our  Lord  Je.sus  Christ  " 
from  "God."  So  De  Wette,  Philippi,  Meyer,  Stuart, 
Webster  and  Wilkinson.  Hodge,  Tholuck,  and  Al- 
ford, leave  the  questi(jn  undecided.  It  would  seem 
that  cither  view  is  admissible  grammatically  ;  y.ai 
is  often  used  epexegetically,  even,  and  tlie  article 
(standing  before  flfor  only)  may  merely  bind  the 
two  terms,  "God"  and  "Father  of  Christ"  (Meyer), 
At  the  same  time,  the  article  mifjit  be  looked  for 
before  nar  i(j  a,  were  xai  explicative.  Nor  is 
there  any  doctrinal  difficulty  occasioned  by  either 
view.  The  only  reason  in  my  own  mind  for  pre- 
ferring the  interpretation  of  the  E.  V.  is,  that  those 
exegetes,  who  are  most  delicate  in  their  perceptions 
of  grammatical  questions,  adopt  it.  See  Meyer  in 
locc—B.] 

Ver.  7.  Wherefore  receive  ye  one  another 
[fho  TTQoa  Ici/i  fidvfc&f  a  ). ).  t]  ).  o  V  (;^.  In  the 
intensive  sense.     An  exhortation  to  both  parties. 

As  Christ  also  received  you  [xaf)  o) s  /.ctl 
6  X  (J  laroi;  7T(to(Tfkdfiiro  v/i  at;.  See  Text- 
ual Note  ^]  This  is  more  definitely  explained  in 
vers.  8  and  9. 

To  the  glory  of  God  [fi<;  ^6^av  rov 
Qfov.  See  Textual  Kofe  I]  This  must  be  refeired 
to  Christ's  reception  of  them,  and  not  to  the  exhor- 
tation  :  receive  ye  one  another,  according  to  Chrysos- 
tom,  and  others.*  Tliat  God  might  be  (ilorifed. 
Not  immediately,  in  order  that  we  may  share  the 
Divine  glory  with  Christ  (Grotius,  Beza,  and  others), 
although  the  glorification  of  God  shall  consi,«t  in 
that.  As  the  self-humiliation  of  Christ,  which  waa 
proved  by  His  receiving  men  into  His  fellowsliip, 
led  to  the  glorification  of  God  (see  John  xvii.),  so 
also,  according  to  the  previous  verse,  shall  the  same 
conduct  of  self-humiliation  on  the  part  of  Christians- 
have  the  same  effect.  But  how  has  Christ  received 
us  into  His  fellowship  ?     Answer  : 

Ver.  8.  For  I  say  [Afj-w  ydq.  See  Text^ 
val  Kote  *.]  The  Apostle  now  explains  how  Christ 
received  the  Jewish  Christians  and  Gentile  Chris- 
tians into  felloM'ship  with  himself. — That   Christ 

*  [Dr.  Hodge  seems  to  prefer  the  other  reference,  whil« 
Dr.  Lange  really  adi  pts  both  in  his  further  remarks.  Dr. 
Hodge  does  .not  decide  which  reading  he  iidopts.  v/ud?  oi 
Tjnos  ;  but  s;iys  that,  if  the  former  be  the  true  rca.ling, 
P.aul  is  "exhorting  the  Gentile  converts  to  forbearance 
toward  their  Jewi.'-h  brethren."  This  view  is  rejected  by 
mo.st  of  the  later  comir.enfators,  for  both  parties  are  ad- 
dressed, as  the  context  shows,  l^ecause  Paul  often  mean* 
Gentiles  when  he  says  riM^'s-  we  need  not  hold  that  tt* 
always  uses  it  in  this  sense. — K.l 


434 


THE   EPISTLE    OF   PAUL   TO   THE   ROMANS. 


[ X (> I fTT dr.  See  Textual  Note  '.]  The  reading 
Christ,  as  a  ck'sipnation  of  God's  Son,  in  view  of 
the  iiicainaiion.  In  this  view  lie  hath  been  made 
a  minister  of  the  circumcision  [  (W  «  x  o  r  »  v 
yfyn-tlaOat  tt f(> iTuii  tjc;.  Sue  Textual  Note  *. 
Dr.  Laiige,  in  his  German  text  of  this  verse,  tlins 
explaiusuhis  i)hrase:  "from  a  higher,  Divine-lnnnan, 
idijal  point  of  view,  receiving  the  Jews  into  His  fel- 
lowship, liy  submitting  himself  to  circumcision." — 
K.]  Hi3  concrete  incarnation  as  a  Jew,  in  which 
He  became  subject  to  the  Jewisli  hiw  (see  Phil.  ii. 
7  ;  Gal.  iv.  4),  must  be  distinguished  from  His  in- 
Girnaiion  in  the  more  general  sense.  By  this  means, 
He,  as  the  heavenly  Strong  One,  through  voluntary 
love  entered  into  the  fellowship  of  the  infinitely 
wealc  in  both  a  liuman  and  legal  sense,  and  accord- 
ingly received  them  into  His  lellowsliip.  It  seems 
far-fetclied  to  regard  tlw  circiiiiicisioii  here  (with 
Meyer  [Philijipi,  Hodge],  and  olliers)  as  an  abstract 
idea  for  t'le  clrcumcisfd.'*  The  circumcision  de- 
notes the  law  ;  and  as  He  freely  became  a  minister 
of  the  law,  He  also  became  a  ministering  companion 
of  the  Jews  ;  Matt.  xx.  28.  Tlierefore  it  is  not  the 
theocratic  "  honor  of  the  Jews  "  which  is  empha- 
sized heri!  (Meyer)  [Philippi],  but  the  condescen- 
sion to  serve  them.  [So  Hcxtge.  //laxoror  is  in 
emphatic  position.  The  view  of  the  emphasis  taken 
by  Meyer  seems  confirmed  by  what  follows,  which 
Bets  forth  an  advantage  of  the  Jews. — R.] 

For  the  sake  of  God's  truth  [  r  ;t  t  (>  altj- 
■9- f  i Hi;  Htnr.  For  the  nuke  of  ilie  triit/ifulnrsx  of 
God,  in  order  to  justify  and  to  prove  it  by  means 
of  tiie  fulfilment  of  the  promises  of  the  Old  Testa- 
ment.— R.]  This  undoubtedly  seems  to  express  the 
advantage  of  the  Jews ;  but  it  also  indicates  their 
perilous  condition.  His  condescension  had  a  two- 
fold cause :  God's  mercy,  and  His  promises  resting 
upon  it.  Principially,  His  mercy  took  the  prece- 
dence ;  but  historically,  the  promise  preceded.  The 
truthfulness  of  God  had  to  be  sealed  ;  He  must  con- 
firm the  promises  given  to  the  fathers  by  fulfilling 
them,  however  unfortunate  the  condition  of  tiie  [)0.s- 
terity  ;  must  confirm  them  in  a  way  finally  valid,  for, 
as  such  sealed  promises,  they, still  continue  in  force, 
according  to  chap,  xi.,  especially  to  believers  (see  2 
Cor.  i.  20  ;  Rev.  iii.  14). 

Ver.  9.  And  that  the  Gentiles,  &c.  [ra  fii 
t  (y  V  tj  v  71  k  ()  i  A  t  o  I'  (;  ()  o  i.  d  (T  a  I,  r  o  v  H  f  <'i  v .] 
Christ  had  to  receive  the  Jews,  acting  as  a  minister 
to  them  through  His  whole  life;  and  He  had  to  con- 
fine himself  to  historical  labors  among  them,  not  so 
much  because  they  were  worthy  of  it,  as  to  fulfil 
the  promises  given  to  the  fathers.  But  the  Gentiles 
were  now  the  object  of  utterly  unmerited  mercy. 
The  thougiit  tliat  Christ  has  redeiMiied  the  Gentiles 
thronirh  pure  men-y,  wiiich  was  not  yet  historically 
pledged  to  them  (for  the  proiinses  in  the  Old  Tes- 
tuncnt  in  relation  to  the  Gentiles  were  not  ple<lges 
to  the  Gentiles  themselves),  now  passes  immediately 
over  into  the  rei)resentation  of  the  fact  that  the 
Gcntil(!S  have  already  come  to  glorify  God  as  believ- 
ers, in  which  they  hav(>  an  advantage  on  their  side 
also.  The  meaning  of  v  n't  it  r).tn\'<;  is,  that  mer- 
cy could  not  helj)  satisfying  itself  for  its  own  sake, 
by  redemption.  The  lioinffni  has  been  trans- 
latcl  by  Riickcrt  [De  Wette,  Hoilge,  Alford],  and 

•  [Tilts  view  can  scarcoly  bo  deemed  "  far-fotohed," 
when  It  ia  so  re;idily  siicucHtcd  by  the  aiitithesix,  iOvrf 
(ver.  9).  ai)il  when  I'muI  »o  ficqucntly  iise^i  thi-  tortn  in  thi.s 
Bcnw  (0  mp.  chap.  iii.  20:  OaL  ii.  7  ff. ;  Eph.  ii.  11  ;  Col. 
ill  U).-U.) 


Others:  have  glorified ;  by  Kollner  [Calvin,  Thoi 
luck],  and  Philippi :  should  glorify.  See  Meyer  on 
this  point,  p.  517.*  The  aorist  say.s,  at  all  events, 
that  they  have  dccidedlij  begun  to  glorify  God. 

For  this  cause  I  will  give  thanks  to  thee, 
&c.  [^/t«  TocTo  f  J  () /(  o  /  o  j'/j  tr  () // «  ('  (Toi.,  y.r.).. 
Verbatim  from  the  LXX.,  except  that  /.e^jtt  is  omit< 
ted  here.  On  the  verb,  see  clia[).  xiv.  11,  p. 
— R.]  Meyer  aptly  says  :  ''  The  historical  suli'ect 
of  the  passage,  David,  is  the  type  of  Christ,  and 
the  latter  (not  the  Gentile  Christian,  with  Fritzsche ; 
nor  the  collective  term  for  the  Gentile  apostles,  with 
Reiche ;  nor  any  messenger  of  salvation  to  the 
world,  with  Philippi)  is  therefore,  in  Paul's  sense, 
the  prophetical  subject;  Christ  promises  that  He 
will  gl;)rify  God  among  the  Gentiles  (surrounded  by 
believing  Gentiles)  for  His  mercy  {i)ui  toTto  = 
I'TTio  f/.t'oi's).  But  this  is  the  plastic  description  of 
glorifying  on  the  part  of  the  Gentiles  themselves, 
which  takes  place  in  the  name  of  the  Lord  Jesus, 
and  through  Him  (Col.  iii.  17)." 

Ver.  10.  Rejoice,  ye  Gentiles,  with  his 
people  [  E  V  (i(idv  (y  tjTf  iO  vr/  fi  iTc't  roe  }.ao  o 
nrTov.  See  T  xtiud  Note  ',  for  the  Hebrew  text. 
— R.]  Deut.  xxxii.  43.  From  the  LXX.,  which 
reads  //*Ta  rov  Xciov  avTov  for  IB? ,  "  probably 
following  another  reading :  1^~~ri< ;  "  Meyer.  On 
the  impossibility  of  tinderstanding,  by  Goini,  the 
single  tribes  of  Israel,  which  Ue  Wette  does,  eomp. 
Tlioluck,  p.  730.  [Also  Philippi,  whose  remarks  on 
this  citation  are  unusually  full  and  valuable. — R.] 
According  to  the  theocratic  idea,  the  definitions : 
rejoice  to  his  people,  or  rather,  make  hix  people 
rejoice  ( 'I3"'3"in  ),  i/e  Gentiles,  and  rejoice  with  hin 
peo/ile,  amount  to  the  same  thing. 

Ver.  11.  Praise  the  Lord;  Ps.  cxvii.  1.  [An 
exact  citation  from  the  LXX.  See  Tt.rtunl  Notes 
'  and  ',  however. — R.]  A  projjhecy  of  the  univer- 
sal spread  of  salvation. 

Ver.  12.  And  again,  Isaiah  saith.  [See 
Tirtual  Note  '".]  In  chap.  xi.  10  :  According  to  the 
LXX.,  which,  however,  has  translated  the  original 
text  so  freely  that  the  twofold  dominion  of  the  Messiah 
is  indicated,  on  the  one  hand,  over  the  Jews  (as  the 
root  of  Jesse),  and,  on  the  other,  over  the  (Jentiles. 

A  root  of  Jesse  [/}  oi'^k  toT  '7 fff «■««']. 
See  Isa.  xi.  1.  The  tree  of  the  royal  house  of  David 
being  cut  down,  the  Messiah  arose  from  the  root  of 
the  house,  which  is  symbolized  by  Jesse.  In  a  high, 
er  sense,  Christ  was  indeed  the  holy  root  of  Jesse, 
and  of  the  house  of  David  itself. 


•  [The  nnri»t  infinitive  Sofao-ai  has  occasioned  soma 
trouble  nmntiK  the  tcrnniinariiins. 

1.  It  tins  been  tiiken  :i.s  d(>i>cn(lent  on  Afyeu  (ver.  SV  So 
Winc'i,  p.  311,  Hoilito,  Alford,  Be  Wette,  Philippi;  but  In 
different  seimes  :  (n.)  I  say  that  the  Gentiles  hn>f  pni.sed 
God  (lit  their  conversion).  So  .\lford,  Tiod.'C,  Pi^  Wette. 
But  this  ix  both  e(>ntr:iry  to  the  usage  wit li  the  iiorist  infini- 
tive, Hnd  introduces  n  thon(rht  that  does  not.  seem  to  behmR 
here  naturally.  ('/.)  I  sav  tlint  the  Gentiles  o»(//ir /o  praise 
God  (Ciilvin,  rhilijipi,  Tlioluck).  Hut  there  is  no  idea  < it 
oblieafioii  iiifroduo^'d  in  ver.  8  which  is  pTrnllel  to  this, 
(i.)  I  s.ay  fhnt  the  Gentiles  praise  (indefli  ite  y).  So  Winer, 
Kritiixi-he.  Itnt  to  this  there  are  (rrnminatical  objectiims. 
Oeiiiles  this,  all  the-'o  involve  an  Incorrei  t  \new  of  th« 
depenilencc  of  the  infinitive. 

'.'.  The  "iinnlesf,  most  natural  view,  is  that  of  the  15.  V., 
Meyer,  &c.  'the  infinitive  stnnds  next  to  n  clnn^e  where 
there  is  also  nn  iiorist  infinitive  (fitfiaiiaaai)  j  it  is  therefore 
ooArdinate  with  tfiis,  di'p'ndintf  also  on  «iv  rii,  though 
cxpri'ss'ng  the  more  remote  purpose  :  Christ  w.i*  niailc  n 
minister,  &c.,  in  order  to  confirm  the  promi-es,  and  as  a 
re-ult  of  this,  that  the  Oonliles  might  praivu  God  for  IIi< 
mercy.— It  J 


CHAPTER  XV.   5-13. 


43S 


Ver.  13.    And  may  the  God  of  hope.     A 

grand  description  of  God  here,  where  the  object  is 
to  remind  the  Roman  Christians  to  lead  a  life  in  per- 
fect accordance  with  their  universal  calling.  To  this 
also  belongs  the  duty  of  looking  confidently  and 
prayerfully  to  the  God  of  hope,  the  God  of  that 
future  of  salvation  which  is  so  infinitely  rich,  both 
extensively  and  intensively. 

With  all  joy  and  peace.  From  that  hope, 
the  highest  possible  evaTigclical,  saving  joy,  shall 
spring ;  the  result  of  this  sliall  be  the  richest  meas- 
ure of  peace,  and  the  harmony  and  unanimity  of 
fiiith.  This  shall  take  place  in  believing  {mcr- 
TfiWn',  it  is  not  by  unbelief,  or  by  abridging  our 
faith,  that  the  unity  of  Christianity  should  be 
sought),  and  accordingly  these  two  spiritual  bless- 
ings shciU  ever  produce  a  richer  hope,  not  in  human 
power  and  according  to  a  human  measure,  but  in 
the  inward  measure  and  divine  pOTver  of  the 
Holy  Ghost.* 

Therefore  the  realization  of  hope  should  not  be 
striven  for  by  the  aid  of  earthly  and  even  infernal 
powers :  one  shepherd  and  one  fold  !  According  to 
Grotius,  the  end  of  this  hope  is  harmony  ;  according 
to  Tholuck,  the  immediate  end  is  the  gracious  gifts 
of  God's  kingdom  ;  while  the  ultimate  end  is  the 
rcffnuin  glorice.  However,  there  lies  just  between 
these  the  end  which  the  Apostle  here  has  in  view — 
that  by  the  aid  of  the  Church  at  Rome,  in  their  fel- 
lowsliip  with  Paul,  all  nations  shall  be  brought,  by 
the  spread  of  faith,  to  glorify  God ;  Eph.  i.  IS  S. 


DOCTRINAL  AND  ETHICAL. 

1.  The  great  grounds  of  the  profound  and  per- 
fect harmony  and  unanimity  of  Christians,  a.  God 
as  the  God  of  patience  and  comfort ;  that  is,  as  the 
God  of  the  infinite  power  of  passive  and  active  love  ; 
h.  The  pattern,  the  spirit,  the  power,  and  the  work 
of  Christ;  c.  The  design  that  Christians,  by  being 
like-minded,  and  by  aiming  at  snbutant'al  fellowship 
in  God  and  in  Christ  (as  created  and  redeemed), 
should  find  also  the  ethical  fellowship  of  harmony 
and  unanimity. 

2.  The  universal  fellowship  into  which  Christ 
has  entered  with  humanity,  and  the  special  fellow- 
ship in  which  He  has  pledged  himself  to  the  Jews, 
constitute  the  basis  for  the  most  special  and  real 
fellowship  into  which  He,  through  His  grace,  has 
entered  with  believers.  But  it  is  a  grievous  offence 
to  refuse  communion  with  him  whom  Christ,  by  the 
witness  of  faith  and  of  confession,  has  communion, 
or  to  abridge  and  prejudice  hearty  intercourse  with 
those  whom  God,  in  Christ,  deems  worthy  of  His 
fellowship.  [Ver.  7  seems  to  be  a  dictum  prolans 
for  what  is  termed  "open  communion." — R.J 

3.  On  the  antithesis :  Christ  Jesus  and  Jesis 
Christ,  see  the  £xeg.  JHotes. 

4.  It  is  also  clear  here  (see  ver.  8)  that  we  must 


"•  fM  ycr  renders  :  in  virtue  nf  th''  (inworking)  pmver  of 
<i  ;  Bnh,'  Ghoft.  Our  E.  V.,  usually  so  ay>U  is  peculinrly 
untbi'tUTiuto  in  its  treatment  of  the  preposition  ev,  which 
it  rendei-8  Ihrrmgh  in  this  case.  The  later  revisions  have 
bj/.  But  it  is  to  he  dou'  ited  whether  iv  ever  has  a  strictly 
inslTUT.iental  force.  The  peculiar  meaning,  ii>,  always  re- 
mains In  it.  So  here,  in  helirvirtg,  in  the  pmver  of  tliK  Boty 
Ghost ;  the  former  expressing  the  suhjrctivi',  and  the  latter, 
che  ohjrctnv  means,  yet  the  former  sets  forth  the  status,  in 
Which  (gfdiihigsriri)  they  are,  and  the  latter  an  iiiworkiiig 
power.    Conap.  Phihppi. — R.] 


distinguish  between  the  ideal  incarnation  of  Christ 
in  itself,  and  His  concrete  incarnation  in  Judaism, 
and,  generally,  in  the  form  of  a  servant. 

6.  God  is  free  in  His  grace,  and  yet  also  bound 
in  His  truth,  for  He  has  bound  himself  to  His  prom- 
ises. But  tins  obligation  is  the  highest  glory  of  His 
freedom.  His  truthfulness  had  to  satisfy  His  word, 
but  His  mercy  had  to  satisfy  itself. 

6.  The  riches  of  the  Old  Testament  in  promisea 
for  the  Jews,  and  the  high  aim  of  these  promises : 
a  world  of  nations  praising  the  Lord. 

7.  The  God  of  patience,  comfort,  hope.  All  such 
terms  define  God  to  be  infinite,  and  infinite  as  a 
fountain,  as  self-communicating  life,  and  archetype 
of  life.  So  also  is  the  Holy  Spirit  defined  as  the 
Spirit  of  truth,  &c.  See  the  beautiful  remark  of 
Gerlach,  below.  But  the  highest  thing  for  which  we 
can  praise  God,  according  to  ver.  6,  is  His  being  the 
God  and  Father  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ.  Not  only 
is  He  His  Father  in  the  specific  sense,  but  also  His 
God  ;  the  glorious  God  of  His  consciousness  and 
life  is  the  true  God  in  perfect  revelation,  and  conse- 
quently shall  become  our  God  through  Him. 

8.  On  the  development  of  hope,  within  the 
sphere  of  faith,  into  joy  and  peace,  and,'  by  means 
of  peace,  into  an  ever  richer  hope,  see  the  Exeg. 
Notes.  It  is  only  in  this  way  that  irenics  can  be 
conducted  in  the  power  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  and  not 
with  the  modern  artifice  of  attempting  them  outside 
the  sphere  of  faith,  beyond  all  creeds,  and  with  the 
theory  of  unconscious  Christianity,  or  even  with  the 
violent  measures  of  the  Middle  Ages.  The  Apostle 
says  :  In  the  power  of  the  Holy  Ghost. 


HOMILETICAL   AND   PRACTICAL. 

Jewish  and  Gentile  Christians  should  agree  for 
Christ's  sake,  who  has  received  them  both. — Chris- 
tian harmony.  1.  It  comes  from  the  God  of  pa- 
tience and  comfort ;  2.  It  is  shaped  according  to 
the  pattern  and  will  of  Jesus  Christ ;  3.  It  express- 
es itself  in  harmonious  praise  of  God,  the  Father  of 
our  Lord  Jesus  Christ  (vers.  5,  6). — A  harmonious 
and  fraternal  ('isposition  is  a  source  of  the  joyous 
praise  of  God,  which  is  not  disturbed  by  a  discord- 
ant note  (vers.  5,  6). — Jesus  Christ  a  minister  of  the 
circumcision.  1.  Why?  For  the  truth  of  God,  to 
confirm  the  promise.  2.  How  ?  In  obedience  to 
the  Divine  law,  for  freedom  from  the  law  (ver.  8). — 
Receive  one  another,  as  Christ  also  received  us,  to 
the  glory  of  God.  Every  thing  to  God's  glory,  and 
not  to  our  own  (ver.  7). — The  praise  of  God  out  of 
the  mouth  of  Gentiles :  1.  Estabhslied  in  God's 
mercy ;  2.  Resounding  in  miiny  tongues ;  3.  As- 
cending to  heaven  (ver.  9). — God's  mercy  toward 
the  Gentiles :  1.  Present  from  the  beginning ;  2. 
Declared  by  the  prophets ;  3.  Manifested  in  Christ 
(vers.  9-1.3).  Ver.  13  is  an  appropriate  text  and 
theme  for  addresses  on  occasions  of  confirmation  or 
marriage. 

Starke  :  In  Christ,  souls  are  worth  so  much  tha* 
God  receives  them,  just  as  men  hoard  gold  and  sil- 
ver, pearls  and  gems ;  Isa.  xliii.  4  (ver.  7). — Mt-i> 
LER :  Patience  does  not  increase  in  the  garden  of 
nature,  but  it  is  God's  gift  and  grace ;  God  is  the 
real  Master  who  creates  it  (ver.  5).— Because  Christ 
is  a  root.  He  must  vegetate,  bloom,  and  bring  forth 
fruit  in  us  (ver.  12). 

Gerlach  :  God  is  the  source  of  all  good  tbingi^ 


436 


THE   EPISTLE   OF   PAUL   TO   THE   ROMANS. 


and  since  He  not  merely  has  them,  but  they  are  His 
real  e^isence  ;  since  He  dues  not  have  love  and  oin- 
nipotenee,  but  is  actually  love  and  omnipotence 
themselves,  so  can  He  be  deuominaled  according  to 
every  glorious  attril)ute  and  gilt  which  He  possesses. 
The  advantage  which  the  Gentiles  thought  that  they 
po.-«e-ised  in  their  polytheism,  whun  they,  for  exam* 
pie,  worshipped  a  deity  of  truth,  of  hope,  &c.,  is 
possessed  in  a  nnich  more  certain  and  ettective  way 
by  the  believing  Cliristian,  wlien  he  perceives,  in  a 
vital  manner,  that  the  true  God  is  himself  personal 
faithfulness,  hope,  and  love,  and  thus  has  all  these 
attributes  just  as  if  He  had  nothing  else  but  them 
(ver.  5). 

Hkcbnkr  :  The  harmony  of  hearts  is  the  real 
Boul  and  power  of  worsiiip  (ver.  G). — Ciirist  is  the 
centre  of  the  Holy  Scriptures  (ver.  8). — Christ  is  the 
bond  of  all  nations  (ver.  12). — God  alone  is  the 
source  of  all  life  and  blessing  in  the  Church.  The 
means  is  faith,  as  the  ever  new  appropriation  of  sav- 
ing blessings;  from  this  arises  the  enjoyment  of 
peace  and  of  all  blessed  joye — an  overflow  of  hope. 
But  every  thing  is  brought  to  pass  by  the  Holy 
Spirit  (ver.  13). 

Bksskr*:  The  Scriptures  are  a  book  of  patience 
and  comfort  (ver.  5.) — Every  thing  which  is  true 
joi/  in  this  life,  is  a  foretaste  of  the  joy  of  eternal 
life — joy  in  the  Lord  and  His  word,  joy  in  all  His 
blessings,  which  make  body  and  soul  hapi)y,  &c. 
.  .  .  All  true  peace  in  this  world  of  contention  and 
anxiety,  is  a  preliminary  enjoyment  of  the  peace  in 
the  kingdom  of  glory. 

SiiiLKiKitMAciiKK :  The  limitation  in  the  labors 
of  our  Saviour  himself,  when  we  look  at  His  person, 
and  the  greater  freedom  and  expansion  in  the  labors 
of  His  disciples.  1.  Treatment ;  2.  Application 
(vers.  8,  9). 

Vers.  4-13.  Tiik  Pkricopk  for  the  Second  Sufi- 
dii/  in  Adrent. — SciiLLTz:  On  the  likeness  of  Christ 
and  His  redeemed  ones.  1.  In  what  respect  ha.>^ 
Christ  become  like  us?  2.  In  what  respect  should 
we  l)ecome  like  Christ  ?  a.  In  patience  and  luimii- 
ity ;  b.  In  the  respect  and  love  with  which  He 
treated  all  men  ;  c.  In  the  joyful  faitli  and  peaceful 
hope  with  which  He  overcame  the  world. — Rikmer: 
What  must  there  be  among  Christians,  in  order  that 
the  Church  of  Christ  may  stand?  1.  One  founda- 
tion ;  2.  A  harmonious  mouth ;  3.  A  common 
bond.^IJiiA.NDT  :  To  wiiat  does  the  season  of  Ad- 
vent exhort  us  ?  1.  To  the  industrious  examination 
of  what  h.'is  been  written  ;  2.  To  the  unanimous 
praise  of  Gnd,  the  Father  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ, 
for  all  that  has  been  already  fulfilled  ;  3.  To  an 
attentive  wailing  for  the  future  coining  of  God's 
kingdom. — Hkiuxkk  :  The  unity  of  the  Christian 
Church.  1.  In  what  does  it  consist?  2.  What 
binds  us  to  it? — The  I{il>le  the  bond  of  the  Chris- 
tian Church.  1.  Proof:  It  is  the  bond,  a.  In  faith, 
or  in  doctrine  ;  i.  In  the  holy  sense,  or  in  love  ;  c. 
In  worship  ;  d.  In  daily  life.  2,  Application,  a.  A 
warning  against  despising  the  Hiblc,  and  an  admo- 
nition to  maintain  its  autiiority  ;  b.  A  dissemination 
of  its  use  ;  c.  Our  own  proper  use  of  it. — The  Bible 
the  trea.sure  of  the  evangelical  Church. — The  in- 
ward unity  of  true  Christians  amid  outward  diversity. 

[BuKKiTT ;  The  Christian's  hope  :  1.  God  is  its 
object,  and  therefore  the  sin  of  despair  is  most  un- 
reiLsonable  ;  for  why  shouhl  any  despair  of  His  mer- 
cy who  is  the  God  of  hope,  who  comman<is  us  to 
hope  in  His  mercy,  and  takes  ple;usuro  in  them  that 
(!•  so  ?    2.  The  grace  of  hope,  together  with  joy  and 


peace  in  believing,  are  rooted  in  the  Chr.-tian'a 
heart,  through  the  power  of  the  Holy  Glm.-i — that 
is,  tlirough  the  sanctifying  intiuenccs  of  the  Holy 
Ghost — enlightening  the  understanding,  ii;c!;..i;)g  the 
will,  rectifying  the  att'eetions,  and  reducing  all  the 
rebellious  powera  and  faculties  of  the  soul  in  con- 
currence with  our  endeavors  under  the  government 
and  dominion  of  reason  and  religion. 

[IIe.sky:  The  method  of  faith  is:  1.  To  seek 
Christ  as  one  proposed  to  us  for  a  Saviour ;  2.  And, 
finding  Him  able  and  willing  to  save,  then  to  trust 
in  Him.  They  that  know  Him  will  trust  in  Him. 
Or,  this  seeking  Him  is  the  effect  of  a  trust  in  Him, 
seeking  Him  by  prayer  and  jmrsuant  endeavora. 
Trust,  is  the  mother ;  diligence  in  the  use  of  means, 
the  daughter. — Wiiat  is  laid  oul  upon  Christians  ia 
but  little  compared  with  what  is  laid  up  lor  then).— 
DoKDRiDGE  :  Nothing  can  furnish  so  calm  a  peace 
and  so  sublime  a  joy  as  Cliristian  hope. — That  is  the 
most  happy  and  glorious  circumstance  in  the  station 
which  Providence  may  have  assigned  us,  which  gives 
us  the  greatest  opportunity  of  spreading  the  honor 
of  so  dear  a  name,  and  of  presenting  praises  and 
services  to  God  through  Him. 

KoLLOCK,  SermoH  on  the  patience  of  God: 
I.  The  nature  of  this  patience,  or  slowness  to  anger: 
(1.)  It  is  a  modification  of  the  Divine  goodness; 
(2.)  It  is  not  the  result  of  ignorance  ;  (3.)  It  is  not 
the  result  of  impotence  ;  (4.)  It  is  not  the  result  of 
a  connivance  at  sin,  or  a  resolution  to  suffer  it  with 
inii)unity  ;  (5.)  But  it  is  grounded  04i  the  everhist- 
ing  covenant,  and  the  blood  of  Jesus.  II.  Some  of 
the  most  illustrious  manifestations  of  it.  III.  The 
reasons  why  God  exercises  it :  (1.)  He  is  patient 
because  of  His  benignity ;  (2.)  lu  order  that  this 
perfection  may  be  glorified ;  (3).  In  coTisequence 
of  the  prayers  of  pious  ancestors  ;  (4.)  Because  the 
wicked  are  often  mixed  with  the  pious,  and  nearly 
related  to  them ;  (5.)  The  number  of  His  elect  is 
not  yet  completed  ;  (0.)  The  measure  of  the  sins  of 
the  wicked  is  not  yet  filled  up  ;  (7.)  That  .sinners 
may  be  brought  to  reiientance  ;  (8.)  That  sinnei*3 
who  coMtiiuic  impenitent  may  at  last  be  without  ex- 
cuse ;  (9.)  That  His  power  may  be  displayed  ;  (10.) 
That  He  may  exercise  the  trust  of  His  servants  in 
Him.  IV.  the  effects  that  the  belief  and  knowl- 
edge of  it  should  produce  upon  our  hearts  ami  lives: 
(1.)  Because  of  God's  patienee  we  siiould  love  Him; 
(2.)  We  shoidd  repent ;  (3.)  We  should  imitate 
Him;  (4.)  His  patience  shtuild  be  our  comfort; 
(5.)  We  should  grieve  at  the  reproaches  and  insults 
cast  upon  God. 

[Ho.Mir.ETlCAL    LlTERAXrRE    071    VfT.    13  :     HroH 

BiXNixn,  II  o/X".?,  vol.  iii.  249;  R.  LrcAS,  Jo)/,  Pace, 
and  Hope,  the  C'lristlau^s  Portion  Jfrre,  Serm. 
(1709),  vol.  ii.  119;  Bishop  Moore,  Ercellfncii  of 
the  Christian  licHgion,  Serin.,  vol.  ii.  291  •  James 
Craio,  Serm.,  vol.  ii.  355  ;  J.  DonsoN,  ./off  in  Be- 
lieving, Dine,  184  ;  Daniel  dk  Supervii.i.e  (/c  ./?'■'), 
Les  Fruits  cotisalanf  de  la  Foi,  Semi.,  vol.  iii.  328 ; 
R.  Mos.><,  Nature  and  Qualifiration  of  Christian 
Ilopr,  Scnn.,  vol.  vi.  325  ;  Price,  Peace  of  Con- 
science, Hope,  and  Ilohi  Joy,  licrri/  St.  SS.,  vol.  1. 
419 ;  S.  OnnEX,  77ic  Bring  of  the  Iloh/  Ohost^ 
Senn.,  157  ;  W.  Masox,  The  Effects  of  the  Divine 
Spirit,  Works,  vol.  iv.  147;  H.  Hu.vter,  The  lielief 
of  the  Oospcl  a  Source  of  Joy  and  Peace,  Serm, 
(1795),  vol.  i.  227;  David  Savile,  Present  Happi. 
ness  of  Beli'vers,  Disc.,  401  ;  W.  (Jii.piN,  S^niont, 
ir.5;  C.  Simeon,  The  J/oli/  Ghost  the  Author  of 
Hope,  Works,  vol.  xv.  653  ;  G.  D'Oyly,  Joi/  and 


CHAPTER  XV.   14-83.  43'; 


Peace  in  Believing,  vol.  i.  885 ;  W.  Blacklet, 
Script.  I'eaching,  263  ;  W.  Gresley,  Joy  and  Peace 
in  Believiuff,  Fractical  Serm.,  41 ;   E.  Blencowe, 


Jlope,  Plain  Serm.,  vol.  ii.  80 ;  H.  Goodwin,  Thi 
Young  Man  in  Religioics  Difficulties,  Four  Serm . 
35.— J.  F.  H.] 


SECOND     DIVISION. 


THE  CALLING  OF  THE  APOSTLE  TO  A  UNIVERSAL  APOSTLESHIP,  AND  HIS  CONSEQUENT 
RELATION  TO  THE  ROMAN  CHURCH,  AS  THE  POINT  OF  DEPARTURE  FOR  HIR 
UNIVERSAL  APOSTLESHIP  IN  THE  WEST. 


Chap.  XV.  14-33. 

14  And  I  myselt  also  am  persuaded  of  you,  my  brethren,  [Now  I  am  persuaded, 
my  brethren,  even  I  myself,  concerning  you,]  that  ye  also  [yourselves]  are  full 
of  goodness,  filled   with  all  knowledge,   able  also  to  admonish    one  another.' 

15  Nevertheless,  brethren,  I  have  written  the  more  boldly  unto  you  [Howbeit,  I 
have  written  more  boldly''  unto  you,  brethren]'  in  some  sort  [measure],  as  put- 

16  ting  you  in  mind,  because  of  the  grace  that  is  gi'.en  to  me  of  God,  That  I 
should  be  the  [a]  minister  of  Jesus  Christ  [Christ  Jesus]  *  to  the  Gentiles,  min- 
istering the  gospel  of  God,  that  the  offering  up  [offering]  of  the  Gentiles  might 

IV  be  acceptable,  being  sanctified  by  [fV,  in]  the  Holy  Ghost.  I  have  therefore 
whereof  I  may  glory  [I  have  therefore  my  boasting]  *  through  Jesus  Christ  [in 

18  Christ  Jesus]  in  those  things  Avhich  pertain  to  God.°  For  I  will  not  dare  to 
speak  of  any  of  those  things  which  Christ  hath  not  %vrought  [did  not  work]  by 
[through]  me,  to  make  the  Gentiles  obedient  [in  order  to  the  obedience  of  the 

1'9  Gentiles],  by  Avord  and  deed.  Through  mighty  [In  the  power  of]  signs  and 
wonders,  by  [in]  the  power  of  the  Si)irit  of  God  [Holy  Spirit]  ; '  so  that  from 
Jerusalem,  and  round  about  unto  [as  far  as]  Illyricura,  I  have  fully  preached  the 

20  gosiH-'l  of  Christ.  [;]  Yea,  so  have  I  strived  [Yet  on  this  wise  making  it  my 
ambition]  *  to  preach  the  gospel,  not  where  Christ  was  [already]  named,  lest  I 

21  should  [that  I  might  not]  build  upon  another  man's  foundation  :  But  as  it  is 
written," 

To  whom  he  was  not  spoken  of,  they  [They  to  whom  no  tidings  of  him 

came]  shall  see : 
And  they  that  have  not  heard  shall  understand. 

22  For  which  cause  also  I  have  been  much  [for  the  most  part]  '*"  hindered  from  ■ 

23  coming  to  you.  But  now  having  no  more  [no  more  ha\ing]  place  in  these  parts, 
and  having  a  great  desire  these  many  years  [having  these  many  years  a  longing] 

24  to  come  unto  you ;  Whensoever  I  take  my  journey  into  Spain,  I  will  come  to 
you  [^'mit  I  Avill  come  to  you] : "  for  '*  I  trust  to  see  you  in  my  journey  [as  I 
pass  through],  and  to  be  brought  on  my  way  thitherward  [to  be  sent  forward 
thither]  by''  you,  if  first  I  be  somewhat  [in  some  measure]  filled  with  your 
company/. 

25  But  now  I  go   unto  Jerusalem  to   minister   [ministering]    unto  the  saints. 

26  For  it  hath  pleased  them  of  Macedonia  and  Achaia  [Macedonia  and  Achaia 
thought  it  good]  to  make  a  certain  contribution  for  the  poor  [among  the]  saints 

27  which  are  at  Jerusalem.  It  hath  pleased  them  verily  [P^'or  they  thought  it 
good]  ;  and  their  debtors  they  are.  For  if  the  Gentiles  have  been  made  par- 
takers of  [have  shared  in]  their  spiritual  things,  their  duty  is  [they  owe  it]  also 

£y  to  minister  unto  them  in  carnal  things.     When  therefore  1  have  performed  this, 

and  have  sealed  ['■.  e.,  secured]  to  them  this  fruit,  I  will  come  [retui-n]  '*  by  you 

29  [through  your  city]  mto  Spain.     And  I  am  sure  that,  when  I  come  unto  you,  I  sliall 


438  THE   EPISTLE   OF   PAUL   TO   THE   ROMANS. 

come  in  the  fulness  of  the  blesshig  of  tlie  gospel  [omit  of  the  gos}>el]  "  of 
30  Christ.     Now  I  beseech  you,  brethren,'*  for  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ's  sake  [by 

our  Lord  Jesus  Christ],  and  for  [by]  the  love  of  the  Spirit,  that  ye  [to]  stiivo 
81  together  with  me  in  your'''  prayers  to  God  for  roe;    That  I  may  be  delivered 

from  them  that  do  not  believe  [the  disobedient]  in  judea;  and  that  my  service 

[ministration] '*  which  J  have  [is]   for  Jerusalem  may  be  accepted  of   [prove 

32  acceptable  to]  the  sahits  ;    That  I  may  come  unto  you  with  [in]  joy  by  the  will 

33  of  God,'°  and  may  with  you  be  refreshed."      Now  the  God  of  peace  be  with 
you  all.    Amen.  ^' 

TEXTUAL. 

•  Ver.  14. — [Instead  of  aKXrjKovi  (X-  A.  B.  C.  D.  F.),  adopted  by  modern  editors  pencrally,  af\ovi  is  found  in  L., 
many  cursivi-s,  versions,  and  fathers.  As  an  alteratioQ  to  strengthen  the  sense,  or  an  error  of  tne  transcriber,  it  ii 
readily  accounted  for.    The  list  of  cursives  given  by  Dr.  Hodtre  adds  little  to  the  support  of  thi?  readinf?.  — The  xaC  ia 

ilso  omitted,  and  aAAijAovt  put  before  Swaitevoi,  in  some  authorities.  These  arc  evidently  corrections,  to  avoid 
repeal ig  xai  for  the  third  time. 

^  Ver   15. — [.\.  B.  :  ToAfijjpoTc'pa)?.    Evidently  a  gloss,  since  the  adjective  is  used  adverbially. 

'  Ver.  15— [S'.  A.  B.  C,  omit  aSe\(t>oi  ;  rejected  by  Lachiiianii,  Tischondorf,  Xregelles.  It  is  found  in  N'.  D.  F. 
L.,  Vulgate,  &c.  ;  ado|)ted  by  I'hilippi,  Do  Wette,  Meyer,  Lange  ;  bracketled  by  Allord.  The  omission  can  be  accounted 
for  by  the  iiiteriuptiou  the  word  made  in  the  connection,  while  there  is  no  good  reason  for  its  insci-«:ion,  save  it-a 
genuineness. 

•  Ver.  16.— [ifec,  D.  L.,  some  versions  and  fathers:  'iTjaoO  XpiaroO.  N.  A.  B.  C.  F. :  Xpio-ToC  '^rjo-oC;  so 
Ijachmann,  Tischendorf,  Alford,  Treprelles. — The  same  order  is  found  in  ver.  17,  on  the  authority  of  all  AlSS.,  but  the 
E.  V.  has  transposed,  as  it  too  fiequently  does. 

•  Ver.  17 — [B.  C.  1).  F.  G.,  and  some  cursives:  ttji'  Kavy^ritriv;  so  Iiachm:inn,  Tischendorf,  Dc  Wette.  Alford, 
Tregelles,  Lange.  Omitted  in  the  Xec.,  H.  A.  L.,  by  Philippi.  The  article  not  being  understood,  it  was  o.u>itted. — 
Hence  iiiy  huasliiig. 

'  Ver.  17. — [The  Rec.  omts  t6>'  ;  but  the  ilSS.  all  insert  it. 

'  Ver.  19.— (  (1  )  The  R'C.  (with  N.  D^.  L.)  inserts  0eoO  after  Tryev/iaros.  So  most  cursives,  some  versions,  and 
fathers.  But  it  is  defended  by  no  ciitieal  editor  of  the  present  day.  I'hilippi,  who  is  perhaps  the  most  conservative 
of  critics,  with  respect  to  the  lic'epta,  only  places  this  reading  beside  the  <me  m-nlioncd  next.  (2.)  A.  C.  I>'  *.  F., 
most  versions  and  lathers:  tti/cu/iotos  ayCov.  So  Griesl):ich,  Laebmann,  Scholz,  Tischendorf  (ed.  1,  not  siucc), 
llodse,  Philippi,  De  Wette,  Wordsworth,  Tregelles.  (.3.)  B.,  Pelagius,  have  nveviiaroi  only.  So  Tischendorf, 
Meyer,  and  L:inge.  The  reason  urged  in  favor  of  (:J.),  which  has  so  little  MS.  support,  is  the  difficulty  of  nccounfing 
for  it  otherwise,  and  the  stronft  tcuiptation  to  explain  it  by  ayt'ou  or  0eoO.  But  this  is  hardly  a  sufficient  reason. 
Tretrelles,  the  most  careful  of  English  editors,  especially  about  inserting  the  longer  of  two  readinj^s,  adopts  (2.),  and 
Alford  puts  it  in  brackets. 

"  Ver.  JO. — [JC.  A.  C.  D*  3- j,.  ;  (JuXorifxouuei'oi'.  B.  D'.  F.  (Inchmann,  Treu'ellcs)  :  (f>tXoTifioOM a i .  There  are 
other  variations,  all  of  which  indicate  that  the  original  reading  was  one  occasioning  grammatical  difficulty,  llenee  the 
fir^t  reading  is  generally  adopted,  and  the  other  considered  a  i-rammaticiil  correction.— The  E.  V.  requires  emendation, 
both  on  account  of  the  particip  al  form,  connecting  this  verse  with  the  precedinji  one,  and  in  order  to  bring  out  the  force 
of  <^iAoT.  The  revision  of  Five  Ang.  Clergymen  is  followed.  Emulous  (Amer.  Bible  tjnion)  is  objectiMnable  in  a  ))opular 
version.  Dr.  Lange  :  So  aher,  (hiss  ich  is  fur  Ehrensache  haltt;  Bui  so,  Ihal  J  held  it  for  a  matter  of  honor.  This  gives 
the  exact  force  of  the  verb.     See  the  Exeg.  JVoles. 

»  Ver.  21.— [An  exact  citation  from  the  LXX.,  Isa.  lii.  15.  The  Hebrew  reads:  !ixn  cnb  -ED"N^  trx  "'3 
I33i3rn  !|JB'i;~S3  "It'SI.  l"he  E.  V.  (Isa.  lii.  10)  gives  an  accurate  rendering.  The  LXX.  adds,  with  sufficieut 
ground  in  the  context  :  n-epl  avrov  ,  refcrrine  to  "my  servant  "  (ver.  IH). 

'°  Ver.  22.— [IJ.  D.  F.,  Lachmann  :  TroAAaxi?,  which  is  probably  a  gloss.  N.  A.  C.  L. :  ra  iroAAa.  So  Tischen- 
dorf, Philippi,  Meyer,  De  Wette,  Alford,  Treirelles. 

"  Ver.  24. — [R'l:.,  with  N'.  L.,  Inserts  eA«u(ro/iat  Trpbs  it^a?.  Omitted  in  N'.  A.  B.  C.  D.  F.,  many  versions  and 
fothero ;  rejected  by  Oriesbach,  Lachmann,  Meyer,  Philippi,  Alford,  Tregelles.  Tischeuuorf  has  adopted  this  reading 
in  ed.  2;  De  Wette  prefer*  if,  Lange  adopts  it.  It  is  better  to  reject,  since,  on  many  accounts,  it  is  tNe  less  difficult 
t<:adiuL',  and  likely  to  be  added. — The  real  critical  difficulty  lies  in  the  question  respecting  yap  (lee  imti-  '->. 

"  Ver.  24.— [N.  A.  B.  C.  D.  L.  insert  yap.  Omitted  in  F.,  versions  and  fathers.  The  mi  lor  authorities  for  the 
omis.sion  are  much  the  .same  as  in  the  case  of  the  precedi  ig  variation  (hence  Dr.  Ilodge  s.iys  most  of  these  anthorifios 
omit  yap) ;  but  the  MS.  authority  is  as  decidedly  in  favor  of  700  as  it  is  against  rAcvcrofxat  irpb?  i^os.  The  editors 
differ:  Oriesbach  and  his  follower.^,  Philippi,  Hodge  (apparently),  Meyer,  reject  it;  Lachmann,  Ti;:che dorf,  De  Wolto, 
Alford,  Wordsworth,  Tregelles,  Liinge,  retain  it.  Meyer  thinks  its  jjresence  in  the  early  uncial  shows,  not  that  the 
wliole  disputed  p:i8.sage  w:us  original,  hut  early  inserted,  and  then  partially  con-ccted,  thus  leaving  yap.  Th's  is  very 
improhable,  since  this  reading  is  so  difficult;  besiiles,  there  is  no  evidciiee  whatever  supporting  it.  M.iiiy,  for  conve- 
nience sake,  reject  yap.  L;ichmaiin  puts  from  eAiri'fw  to  inn\ji<T0'o  in  parenthesis,  connecting  closely  with  ver.  25;  but 
this  connection  is  unlikelv. — The  reader  can  consult  Meyer,  Philippi,  and  critical  editors,  on  the  whole  (tuesti<m.  A 
(areful  conr-ideratioM  of  the  case  impels  me  to  retain  y  op,  putting  a  period  or  colon  (is  in  E.  V.)  after  Ziraviaf  ;  to 
accept  an  anacolutlion.  or  aposiope.sis,  and  to  take  the  participles  of  ver.  23  as  verbs.  This  is  the  most  dtfensiblo  positlou, 
but  further  reasons  cannot  be  added  lierc.     See  the  paraphrase  in  the  Er'fi.  \ntes, 

"  Ver.  24.— [/?'■<-.,  with  N".  A.  C.  L.  :  «<<>'  iiiiiov;  B.  (ajrb)  1).  F.  :  a^'  iinutv.  The  former  is  adopted  by  Philippi, 
Tregelles  ;  llie  latter  by  Ljiehraajin,  'I'iscUendorf,  Meyer,  De  Wette.  Alforil,  Linge. 

'*  Ver.  28.— ['ATTtAe  t><ron,ai.,  I  loill  pninfil,  with  a  primary  reference  to  the  point  of  departure  (otto),  l)Ut  followed 
by  ei?,  it  points  to  the  lirmniiis  a,l  qtum.  Neither  cone  (K.  V.)  nor  j7'i  (Amer.  Bible  Union)  exactly  mei'ts  the  case. 
Rfliiin,  in  this  case,  is  peculiarly  ai)piopriate  ;  return  from  Jerusalem  and  go  to  Spain.  So  Five  Anp.  ClcrgjTnen. — Tho 
Labors  of  the  learned  authors  have  l)eeii  fr'oly  used  in  this  section. 

">  Ver.  29.— [Tho  words  toO  tvayyeMov  rov  (inserted  before  Xpio-roD,  in  N'.  L.  Rec,  versions  and  fathers)  are  now 
considered  a  gloss.  They  are  not  found  in  N'.  A.  H.  C.  D.  F.,  are  rejected  by  tho  Latin  fathers,  and  by  all  modern 
critical  editors,  also  Philippi  and  Ilodge,  who  are  least  disposed  to  vary  from  the  Ruepta. 

■*  Ver.  30. — [II.  omits  aitK^toi,  and  the  variations  in  position  are  numerous.  Alford  accordingly  bracketa  it; 
but  it  is  received  by  most  editors  without  question. 

"  Ver.  30.— [D.  F.  G.  insert  vfLiav  (similarly  some  editions  of  tho  Vulgate).  A  correct  gloss,  hence  tho  mors 
■ospir-iouH. 

'•  Ver.  31.— [B.  D'.  F.  G.  read  iutpo^opia.  But  N.  A.  0.  D'  •.  L.,  most  versions  favor  2 1  ax  o  ft  a,  which  i-  adopte»l 
by  most  later  editors.  So  Tischendorf,  Meyer,  Philippi,  Tregelles.  Lnchinann  profei-s  the  fonuer,  whi'h,  however,  se-nn 
to  have  b"en  substituted  as  an  explanation.— On  the  same  outhority,  t)  «i«  *I«p.  is  to  be  preferred  to  q  iv 'h 
(Lachmann). 

'•  Ver.  32.— [Instead  of  the  well-sustained  and  generally  received  «»oii  (Rrc.  N*.  A.  C.  I)'.  L.,  most  versions  nn<' 
bthers),  wo  find  xvpiov  'Iricrou  (II.),  Xpiarou  "Itjo-oi;  (D'.  F.),  'IijaoD  \pt<TTou  (N'.).  The  unuiol  authority  is  decisive 
Besides,  Paul  always  says :  0(A))/i.a  ©coO,  never  XpicTov  (so  Meyer,  and  others). 


CHAPTER   XV,   14-33, 


43S 


"  Ver.  32. — [Lacbmann  and  Tischendorf  omit  ical  a-vvavanavauixai.  v/xiv,  on  the  authority  of  B.  The 
words  aie  found  (with  variations)  in  (N.)  A..  C.  (D.  F.)  L.,  and  arc  adopted  by  Meyer,  De  "W'ette,  Philipjii,  TreijeUes 
Alford  brackets.  Kotwithstandiug  the  variations,  thero  is  no  motive  lor  insertion  which  would  justify  us  in  rtjecting 
the  clause. 

"  Ver.  33.— [A.  F.  Q.  omit  'A/u.^f  ;  found  in  M.  B.  C.  D.  L.,  versions  and  fathers.  Brackcttod  by  Tregellcs,  bul 
generally  received.    The  word  is  always  open  to  some  suspicion,  as  a  liturgical  addition,  at  the  close  of  a  benodictipn. 


~R.] 


EXEGETICAL  AND  CRITICAL. 

The  following  section  is  termed  an  EpHocfue  by 
Tholuck  and  Meyer.  But  this  view  does  not  corre- 
spond with  the  purpose  and  construction  of  the 
Epistle.  The  Apostle  now  conies  to  the  last  design 
of  his  Epistle,  which  is,  to  make  Rome  the  piiuci- 
pal  station  for  his  missionary  labors  in  the  West. 
See  Schott,  Der  Jioinerbrief,  p.  314,  and  elsewhere. 

Summary. — A.  The  Apostle  explains,  almost 
apologetically,  that  his  addressing  the  Romans  was 
the  result  of  his  call  to  make  the  Gentiles,  in  piiestly 
labor,  an  acceptable  offering  to  God ;  and  he  gives 
information  respecting  the  general  completion  of  his 
work  in  the  East  (to  lUyricum),  and  the  results  of 
the  same  ;  vers.  14-19, 

B,  ■  His  prinnple,  not  to  invade  the  sphere  of 
the  labor  of  others  (conduct  the  very  opposite  of 
that  of  all  sectaries).  The  consequent  impediments 
to  his  coming  to  Rome,  where  Christian  congrega- 
tions already  exist.  The  desire,  that  nevertlieless 
arose  in  harmony  with  his  calling,  to  take  this  step. 
His  hesitation  not  being  fully  removed,  he  describes 
his  intended  visit  to  Rome  as  a  sojourn  to  gain 
strength  for  his  further  journey  to  Spain — that  is, 
to  the  limits  of  the  West ;  douljtless  in  the  expec- 
tation that  the  Church  will  welcome  him,  and  com- 
mit itself  to  his  direction  ;  vers,  20-24. 

C.  The  last  hindrance  from  his  journey  to  Rome. 
The  mention  of  the  collections  a  proof  of  his  love 
for  believing  Israelites,  an  expression  of  the  proper 
conduct  of  Gentile  Christians  toward  Jewish  Chris- 
tians. A  further  announcement  of  his  journey 
through  Rome,  and  of  his  visit,  in  the  spirit  of 
apostolical  refinement.  A  /(.rcboding  reference  to 
the  obstructing  hostility  of  the  unbelievers  in  Judea, 
and  a  request  that  the  Roman  Christians  should 
pray  for  the  fulfilment  of  his  purpose  of  coming  to 
tliem ;  vers.  25-33, 

A.  Vers.  14-19. — Ver.  14.  Even  I  myself; 
ttvToi;  iyo),  chap.  vii.  25.  He  himself,  the  same, 
who  has  admonished  them,  has  also  this  conviction. 
Thus  he  is  not  in  antithesis  to  others  (Tholuck),* 
but  he,  as  the  one  persuaded,  is  m  antithesis  to  his 
admonition.  This  is  favored  by  the  following  verse. 
Fritzsche,  De  Wette,  Philippi  [Stuart,  Alford],  ex- 
plain similaily. 

[Ye  also  yourselves,  /.a I  airoi.  "With- 
out any  exliortation  of  mine  "  (Alford). — R.] — Are 
full  of  goodness  [fifarol  iari  ayaf^o)- 
avvtji;^  In  the  foregoing  section  the  ayaOov 
was  to  be  undersjiood  particularly  of  humility  and 
self-denying  love,  as  the  key-note  of  Christ's  feel- 
ing ;  accordingly,  it  must  also  here  be  construed  as 
a  substantive.     (Mever :  "  That  ye  are  also  of  your- 

*  [Meyer  (followed  by  Hodse  in  last  edition)  under- 
stands it  to  mean  :  "  I  of  myself,  without  the  testimony  of 
others."  He  urees  the  em|ihasis  which  he  thinks  rests  on 
Ka\  avTo?.  Were  the  meaning  that  BUPKCsted  by  Dr. 
Iiange,  the  form  would  be  Kayto  aurd?.  But  the  view  of 
Dr.  Lanpe  corresponds  best  with  that  taken  of  the  same 
expression,  jip.  213,  'Ml.  llcnoe  we  alter  "I  myself  also" 
into  ercw  t  in t/self  (so  Five  Ans.  Clergymin;.  Lajige:  Jch 
— auch  alt  einer  und  derselbe. — R.] 


selves  very  excellent  people.")  [Hodge  :  "  Full  of 
kind  and  conciliatory  feelings;  or,  taking  ayaOot' 
avvrj  in  its  wider  sense,  full  of  virtue,  or  excellence." 
This  last  is  adopted,  apparently,  from  Meyer  ;  it  is 
so  wide  as  to  seem  ahnost  too  complimentary. — R.] 

With  all  knowledge  [ /Vol  (t  {(;)(,•.  We  re- 
ject the  article,  which  is  found  only  in  x.  B. — R.] 
The  Apostle  very  willingly  refers  the  yvi'iai,^  par- 
ticularly to  the  universal  destination  of  Christianity  ; 
comp.  Eph.  i. — Admonish,  vovO^fnlv.  Strictly, 
to  direct  with  brotherly  feeling.  To  set  the  heart 
right  is  not  a  human  affair ;  but  when  the  heart  ia 
properly  disposed,  the  volii  (or  even  the  head)  ciui 
be  placed  right. 

Ver,  15.  [Howbeit  I  have  written  more 
boldly  unto  you,  ro^./u  tj^ot f^)ov  di  lyija^fct 
r/tir].  The  adjective  is  used  adverbially.  Meyer 
insists  upon  the  comparative  sense.  [The  verb 
tyijaxi'a  is  the  epistolary  aorist,  /  have  written/ 
hence  tlie  Amer.  Bible  Union,  /  y;rote,  is  a  slavish 
following  of  the  rule  which  makes  the  Greek  aorist 
equivalent  to  the  English  past  tense.  The  authore 
of  that  version  unfortunately  ignore  all  exce[itions. 
— Brethren,  adt/.qioi.  See  Tej^^tual  Kate  ^ — In 
some  measure,  a  no  fiioon:.  This  qualifies 
h/ouii'a  :  /  have  written  boldly  in  places  (so  De 
Wette,  Meyer,  Lange) ;  not  the  adverb :  J  have 
written  somewh  t  too  boldly  (Peshito,  Grotius,  Hodge). 
Hence  the  E.  V.  does  not  convey  tiie  meaning  cor- 
rectly.— R.]  The  boldness  consists  in  his  having 
spoken  to  tliem  as  to  his  own  church,  although  he 
is  not,  strictly  speaking,  its  founder,  and  refers,  for 
the  most  part,  to  chap.  xiv.  fiP.  Meyer  enumerates.^ 
in  preference,  a  number  of  other  passages :  chap, 
vi.  12  ff.,  &c.  [viii.  9  ;  xi.  17  fF. ;  xii.  3  ;  xiii.  3  ff. ; 
xiv.  3  f  10,  13,  15,  20;  xv.  1.— R.] 

As  putting  you  in  mind.  He  can  say  this  in 
a  general  sense  of  the  Christian  state  of  develop- 
ment, which  he  presupposes  in  them,  and,  in  a 
special  sense,  with  reference  to  his  many  friends  in 
Rome,  who  were  not  only  his  disciples,  but  also  his 
helpers. 

Because  of  the  grace,  &c.  [()ta  riiv  -/a- 
^tr,  z.T./.]  The  following  verse  explains  the  sense 
in  which  he  ijieans  this.  Because  his  great  and 
gracious  call  impels  him  to  go  far  beyond  Rome,  he 
must  first  of  all  arrange  matters  perfectly  with  them. 
[The  common  interpretation :  "  My  apostolic  office 
was  the  ground  and  reason  of  my  boldness,"  doee 
not  exclude  the  special  reference  suggested  by  Dr, 
Lange. — R.] 

Ver.  16.  That  I  should  be  a  minister  [tli, 
TO  ilvai  ft  f  ).n.rov^y6v.  The  purpose  of  the 
grace  given  to  him. — R.]  The  AnTor^j-dc;  denotes, 
not  only  according  to  the  immediate  connection,  but 
also  according  to  the  character  of  the  whole  Epistle, 
the  minister  in  public  worship  ;  Meyer ;  the  sacri 
fieing  pjriest ;  Heb.  viii.  2;  Phil.  ii.  17. 

Christ  Jesus  [  A' (>  kt t o  T  1  tja o'< .  This 
reading  seems  most  accordant  with  the  context, 
since  the  priestly  service  under  Christ,  the  Kinci,  n 
referred  to. — R.]  Reiche :  Christ  is  the  offering 
brought;  Riickert,  very  properly,  says:  Christ  ii 
the   High-Frlest ;    against    which    Meyer   strangelj 


440 


THE   EPISTLE    OF   PAUL   TO    THE   EOMANS. 


ai-gcs,  that  this  is  not  an  idea  of  Paul,  but  of 
the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews.  [De  Wette,  Meyer, 
Fritzsehe,  and  Philippi,  tliiiik  tliat  Chiist  is  lepre- 
Bented  here  as  Heail  and  King  of  the  Church,  which 
is  peiliaps  preferable. — ]{,] 

Ministering  (as  a  priest  in)  the  gospel  of 
God  \_i  t  (J  I)  r  n  yi)Ti  VT  ci  To  t  r  ay  y  t /.  to  v  rov 
Utov.  Performing  a  i)riestly  oflice  with  reference 
to  the  gospel. — R.]  Explanations :  1.  Tlie  gospel 
is  the  ottering  (Luther).  2.  The  office  of  the  gos- 
pel is  his  piiestly  otHce  (Erasmus,  Tholuck,  &e.). 
As  the  law  was  the  basis  of  the  Old  Test;inient  cul- 
Uix,  80  the  gospel  is  the  biusis  of  the  New  Testament 
eultus.  Hence  tiie  meaning  is  :  Explaining,  as  min- 
istrant  to  the  High-Priest,  Christ,  the  gospel  in  its 
liturgical  character,  and  transforming  the  knowledge 
of  God  contained  in  the  gospel  into  evangelical  praise 
oi'  (lod  (thank-oH'ering) ;  see  chap.  i.  21.  [A  slight 
moditication  is  necessary,  if  Christ  be  represented 
hjere  as  King.  Estius  :  '■'■  Admiuistruns  ev  .iigelimn 
a  Dto  tidssiun  hoiuinibns^  eoque  mitiisterio  velut 
Sact'n/ofio  /im  ,e?is." — K.] 

The  oflfering  of  the  Gentiles  [fj  TtQoa- 
(f  o  (J  a  TiTtv  iO-vmv.  (icuitive  of  a[)[)osition.] 
Not  the  otfering  which  the  (ientiies  bring,  but  which 
the  (ientiles  themselves  are  (burnt-oirerings). 

Being  sanctified  in  the  Holy  Ghost  [t'lyi- 
aautfij  tv  71 V f  r  II  a  T  u  uyiiii.  'Ev  seems  to 
be  instrumental,  and  yet  may  well  indicate  the  ele- 
ment iji  which  they  were  sanctiiied,  purified. — R.] 
In  the  real  New  Testament  mode,  not  in  the  merely 
typical  sense  of  the  consecration  in  the  temple.* 

Ver.  IT.  I  have  therefore  my  boasting  in 
Christ  Jesus  [t/o  oi'f  rijv  xar/ijmv  i  v 
A' (<  KT T 01  'J  ij  (T o  r .  See  Tixtual  Nole  ^.]  We  take 
t/u)  as  enjphutic,  and  in  coiniection  witli  the  words 
Cliri>.t  Jenas.  His  glorying  (the  act  itself)  in  his 
great  calling,  he,  as  the  niinister  of  Ciirist,  holds 
within  tlie  bounds  of  the  fellow.sliip  and  Spirit  of 
Cln-ist.  [He  itu-idcntaliy  opposes  any  suspicion  of 
his  glorying  himself,  but  the  main  emphasis  does 
not  rest  oTi  tliis.  Dc  Wette,  Alfoni :  "  1  venture  to 
biiast."      //<,  not  ihvouiik  Christ  (E.  V.,  Stuart).— R.] 

In  those  things  which  pertjiin  to  God  [  t  (t 
n(i6i;  Tov  ^-^^^oj'].  According  to  the  context, 
the  restoration  of  the  real  worshij)  of  (lod  in  the 
world  is  meant.  [Philippi,  De  Wette,  Alford:  ".My 
above-named  sacerdotal  otiiee  and  ministry." — R.] 
Meyer  says,  however:  ".My  boa.sting  is  something 
which  Ixdongs  to  m(!  in  virtue  of  my  connection 
•with  Christ,  in  relation  to  (Jod's  cau.se."  Reiche  : 
My  glorying  consists  in  my  glorying  of  Cliri.st.  [Dr. 
Hixige  mentions  another:  "  I  have  offerings  for  Cod 
— ^'.  <■.,  Gentile  convert.s."     Too  l'ar-1'etched. — R.] 

Ver.  18.  For  I  wiU  not  dare,  &c.  [or  ya(i 
rn ).  11  tj <T  10 ,  x.T.^..].  The  yc'n)  explains  how  lie 
meant  the  foregoing  expres.sion  in  ver.  17.  Hut 
vtT.  17  refers  to  ver.  Kl,  in  i»roof  that  he  knows 
that  he  is  [jiaced,  as  a  minister,  c^omplctely  under 
tiie  direction  and  operation  of  the  Spirit  of  Chri.st, 
the  High-Prie.st.  Thus  Paul  spenk.s,  aiul  thus  John 
speaks  ;  but  modern  criticism,  on  the  other  hand, 
boldly  maintains  the  contrary— that  Paul  corrected 

•  [This  vcrHc,  tnwtcnd  of  cu'-portiiiif  tho  idon  that  thn 
Clinsti  I  I  ministry  in  ii  jjricxthood,  virtu;illy  opposes  it. 
ll:iil  tho  Aiiostlo  laid  ohilm  to  iictiiul  and  Npoci.il  siiccrdotal 
fun('ii)Pn,  It  \*  vorv  uiiliki-ly  that  he  would  have  knpt  tho 
olaiL.  HO  roDstantly  out  of  slight  In  his  ICpistlos.  In  this 
passiiifc,  tho  ollorini;  is  h  fi?iirntlvo  one  .  tho  priestly  fuiio 
llon  i^  also  (iKnirative.  Tho  ^il(■n(■p  of  the  rest  of  his  writ- 
intfs  of  if-i'lf  proves  that  ties  must  lie  ret'ardcd  in  another 
tUuu  a  llturul  auuse.    Sou  Dovtr.  Salt  «.— H.J 


the  Ebionitic  form  of  Christ,  and  that  then  ("  pseit 
do  ")  John  again  corrected  Paulinism. — The  constant 
pmpose  was  to  call  the  Gentiles  to  the  obedience  of 
faith.  Tholuck,  luid  others,  here  accept  a  reference 
to  the  experiences  which  Paul  had  suffered  in  Cor- 
intii  from  the  Judaists.  But  his  jiurpose  is,  to  show 
to  the  Romans  that  ho  comes  to  them, simply  as  au 
instrmnent  of  Chri.st. 

[Tlie  em[)hasis  rests  on  o  i<  x  a  t  f  i (< ;' ct  u  a  t  o  , 
did  not  work.  Hodge,  following  Theodoret,  and 
others,  places  it  on  C/irisf,  so  tiiat  tlie  antithesis  ia 
wliat  he  did,  or  could  do,  of  himself.  But  the  view 
taken  of  the  verse  by  most  conunentators  will  ap- 
pear from  Alford's  paraphrase  :  "  I  have  real  ground 
for  glorying  (in  a  legitimate  and  Christian  manner)  ; 
for  I  will  not  (as  some  false  apostles  do)  allow  my- 
self to  speak  of  any  of  thote  tilings  which  [wv  for 
iy.tivuiv,  a.)  Christ  did  NOT  work  by  mc  (but  by  somo 
other)  in  order  to  the  ob«  lience  (subjection  to  the 
gospel)  of  the  Gentiles  (then,  as  if  the  sentence  wero 
in  the  affirmative  form,  '  I  will  oidy  boast  of  what 
Christ  has  veritably  done  by  me  toward  tlie  obedience 
of  the  Gentiles,'  he  proceeds)  by  word  and  deed." 
This  last  phrase  is  to  be  joinecl  witii  ver.  !".•. — R.] 

Ver.  19.  In  the  power  of  signs  and  won- 
ders [ev  fivvciiin,  (jr^fiiiii)v  y.ai  Tfitunov^. 
Tims  the  toyov  of  Paul  is  explained.  Comp.  the 
Acts  of  the  Apostles. — But  he  refers  every  thing, 
word  and  work,  signs  and  wonders,  in  a  more  spe- 
cial sense  (in  signs  the  miracle  refers  to  tlie  coming 
renewed  world,  and  in  ji^iai;  to  the  astonishment  of 
the  old  woi'ld)  to  the  power  of  the  Sjiirit,  the  spirit- 
ual life  in  which  the  Holy  Spirit  has  become  cue 
with  his  spirit.*  These  "  wonders"  are  incidentally 
a  confirmation  of  the  accounts  of  similar  import  in 
the  Acts  of  the  Apostles,  and  are  therefore  very  uu- 
cmufortable  to  Baur,  and  others ;  comp.  2  Cor.  xiL 
12. 

From  Jei-usalem.  After  the  intensiveness  of 
his  labors,  he  comes  to  their  extensiveness.  Three 
points  mu.st  be  here  observed:  (1.)  From  Jeru.sa- 
lem  ;  (2.)  y.vxho  ;  (3.)  To  Ijlyricum.  As  for  (1.), 
the  Apostle  has  reckoned  his  stay  in  Arabia  and 
Damascus  among  his  years  of  instruetion,  and  not 
among  his  years  ius  teacher.  Likewise  Jerusalem, 
where  he  first  entered  ui)on  his  apostolical  labors, 
was  not  only  the  starting-point  of  the  mi.ssion  of  all 
the  apostles,  but  especially  of  his  (see  Acts  ix.  28, 
29;  xxii.  18.) 

Round  about  [xnl  xrxylw].  This  does  not 
mean  in  an  arc  (fi-om  Jerusalem  by  way  of  Asia 
Minor,  Macedonia,  and  Greece,  to  lllyricum  ;  Theo- 
doret, Flaciu.s,  and  others),  but  round  about ;  f  in 
which,  indeed,  jioints  forming  a  circle  come  into 
consi<ierati(ui,  though  the  expression  must  not  be 
pres.sed  geographically. 

As  ifar  as  lUyricum  [/ii/{>i  rnr  VAAipi.- 
xor].  The  later  expositoi-s  generally  regard  lllyri- 
cum IUS  the  terminus  (sec  Tholuck) ;  but  Meyer,  on 
the  contrary,  is  of  the  o|)inion  that  this  view  sub- 
jects  the  Afiostle  to  the  suspicion  of  lioasting;  and 

•  [Should  irvtvftaTof  he  accepted  n.s  the  correct  rend- 
inp,  tlien,  of  course,  irftvfia  may  he  taken  in  the  Rt  cond 
sense  (see  p.  "Ji'))  ;  yet  tliis  is  not  nhsolutely  neeessnry, 
since  Meyer  rejeits  the  lonuor  rendinir  ii'  d  at  the  same 
time  refers  irf<u/xaro(  to  the  Holy  Spirit.  Itiit  the  rending 
iTvtviJLaTof  ayiov  is  more  prohahlv  correct ;  ifcc  Ttxlual 

t  [De  W.  tto.  Philippi,  .Mfortl,  and  others,  join  this  with 
".Terusalem,"  takintr  it  as  =  and  the  ueighhinhnml.  It  doo* 
seem  to  he  nonnecfed  with  thi"  stariinir-point,  and  yet  l)r, 
T^niro  ri|;;htly  includes  the  intcrmudiuto  joumoyings,  Sta, 


CHAPTER  XV.    14-33. 


441 


probably,  tlierefore,  that  he  made  an  excursion  into 
lUyricuni,  "  possibly  to  the  journey  narrated  in 
Acts  XX.  1-3."  But  iii/('i'  Oa/.d/Taijii  meaiTS  to 
the  sea,  not  into  the  sea.  In  Acts  xx.  1-3  there  is 
no  trace  of  a  journey  by  way  of  Macedonia  and 
Greece  to  the  West. 

I  have  fully  preached,  nin).riQMy.ivai,. 
[Literally:  have  fulfilled ;  but  the  E.  V.  conveys 
the  menning  quite  accurately. — R.]  Kot  complete- 
ly discharged  the  office  of  the  gospel  (Beza,  Bengel, 
and  others),  but  compkHely  ipread  the  gospel.  The 
expression,  therefore,  does  not  mean  :  accomplished 
every  thing  with  the  gospel  (Luther),  or,  perfectly 
declared  the  gospel  (Olshausen).  See  Meyer  [p. 
527]  for  other  explanations.  The  difficulty  disap- 
pears if  we  appreciate  the  circumstances  and  method 
of  the  apostles.  They  had  neither  time  nor  calling 
to  perform  missionary  labor  in  every  village ;  they 
understood  their  calling  in  a  universally  historic  and 
dynamic  sense,  and,  consequently,  when  they  had 
once  conquered  the  fortresses,  they  had  also  con- 
quered the  surrounding  country. 

B.  Vers.  20-24. — Ver.  20.  Yet  on  this  wise 
making  it  my  ambition  [o v ri»  ^ «  (ftloTo- 
u  0  V  1.1  fvov.  See  Textual  Note  "*.  The  verb  means : 
to  make  it  a  point  of  honor.  Alford  thinks,  how- 
ever, that  it  loses  its  primary  meaning  here,  which 
is  doubtful. — R.]  See  the  Lexicons.  The  q^uXo- 
Tufi  ov/i  fvov,  as  an  accusative  dependent  on  fif, 
see  2  Cor.  x.  15. 

Was  already  named  [ottoi'  oivo/i  da O^tj]. 
Has  been  named  according  to  His  name. — This  prin- 
ciple [which  must  not  be  deemed  an  attempt  to 
avoid  opposition  (Reiche,  and  others). — R.]  was  in 
harmony  with  the  labors  of  the  apostles  everywhere, 
because  they  had  to  lay  the  foundation.  But  it  had 
a  special  meaning  for  Paul — that  he  had  to  establish 
the  gospel  in  its  full  and  most  universal  diffusion, 
and  therein  would  not  collide  with  the  often  nation- 
ally qualified,  though  evangelically  free,  missionary 
methods  of  the  other  apostles  (see  Gal.  ii.).  The 
subsequent  settlement  of  John  in  Ephesus  was  the 
result  of  a  call  to  lay  an  ideal  and  unifying  founda- 
tion, by  means  of  which  even  the  work  of  Paul 
could  be  carried  further  forward  ;  besides,  the  labors 
of  John  embraced  many  churches  which  had  arisen 
after  Paul's  labors  in  that  region. 

Ver.  21.  But  as  it  is  written.  [See  Textual 
Note^.  ^yi).).d  introduces  the  positive  explanation 
of  oi'Tfo,  on  this  wise ;  not  where  others  had 
preached,  but  according  to  this  rule  of  Scripture. 
— R.]  Isa.  lii.  15,  according  to  the  LXX.  Meyer 
says  that  the  sulyect  is  the  (there  mentioned)  kinns^ 
not  the  nations.  Not  at  all,  even  if  the  subject  be 
violently  rent  asunder  into  two  parts.  The  univer- 
sal injpulse  of  the  gospel  to  go  farther  and  farther 
into  every  land,  was  already  expressed  in  prophecy. 

Ver.  22.  For  which  cause  edso  I  have  been 
for  the  most  part  hindered  [<)i.6  y.al  ivf- 
X o 71  r 6 ^ifjv  rd  noUdl.  Because  he  had  to 
carry  on  his  missionary  labors  now  here  and  now 
there  in  the  East.  According  to  Meyer,  Paul  would 
Bay :  By  this  means  I  have  been  hindered  in  most 
cases  (rci  nn).).d\  besides  other  instances.  Un- 
doubtedly the  Apostle  knows  also  other  instances  of 
Bindrance  ;  see  1  Thess.  ii   18.* 

*  [Philippi,  Hodtrc,  and  others,  adopt  this  view  of  ra 
noAAa  as  =  plrrnmque,  for  the  most  pdrt — /.  «.,  this  was 
the.  principal  rea  on.  Alford  follows  Schott  and  Dc  Wcfte, 
\rho  understand  it  to  mean  :  thcae  niany  times— i.  e.,  so  often. 


Ver.  23.  No  more  having  place  [fitjxir 
Tonov  t}r(i)v^.  Meyer,  following  Luther:  .spic^ 
scope.  [Philippi,  De  Wette,  Alford  :  vpjjortunity 
occaaion. — R.]  But  the  Apostle's  scope  was  condi. 
tioned  by  a  standing  place,  a  central  point ;  and  here 
it  is  most  natural  to  think  of  such  a  place.  Tho' 
luck  :  "  The  apostles  were  accustomed  to  cany  on 
missionary  labor  in  the  metropolitan  cities,  leavuig 
the  further  extension  of  the  gospel  to  the  churches 
established  there,  and  therefore,  after  all,  to  let  the 
par/ani  remain  heathen." 

Ver.  24.  Whensoever.  The  ox;  dv  [instead 
of  idv  {Jiec). — R.]:  quandocnnque. — Spain  \^^na- 
viav].  Usually  called  Iberia  by  the  Greeks.  The 
Roman  Hispania.  According  to  Meyer,  this  plan 
for  his  journey  was  not  fulfilled  ;  according  to  Tho- 
luck,  the  question  depends  on  whether  we  accept  a 
second  Roman  captivity,  and  this  again  on  the  evi- 
dence  of  Clemens  Romanius.  See  the  Introduction 
to  this  Epistle  [especially  Dr.  Schaff's  note  on  p, 
11],  as  well  as  the  Introduction  to  the  Pastoral  Epis- 
tles. Neander,  i.,  p.  525 ;  Wieseler,  Chron.  dei 
a  post.  Zeitalters,  1.  Excursus.  As  a  church  already 
exists  in  Rome,  although  not  established  by  an  apos- 
tle, the  Apostle  cannot  designate  Rome  as  his  prin- 
cipal  object  before  Rome  had  met  him  in  this  re- 
spect ;  but  as  ancient  Spain  embraced  the  whole 
Pyrenean  peninsula,  it  undoubtedly  has  for  the 
Apostle  the  still  further  significance  of  a  symbol  of 
the  whole  West  extending  beyond  Rome.  To  him, 
Spain  meant  the  Western  world.  But  Spain  itself 
was  a  proper  object,  because  there  the  two  prelimi- 
nary conditions  of  missionary  labor  already  existed : 
Jews  and  Jewish  synagogues,  and  Grecian  and  Ro- 
man civilization.  It  does  not  follow,  as  Meyer  sup- 
poses, that  Paul  gave  up  his  plan  of  going  to  Spain 
after  receiving  the  news,  in  his  first  captivity,  on  the 
state  of  things  in  the  East,  and  thought  chiefly  of  a 
return  ;  Phil.  ii.  24. 

[I  will  come  to  you.  This  clause  is  retained 
by  Dr.  Lange.  See  Textual  Notes  "  and  '".  Reject- 
ing it,  we  paraphrase  :  But  now  I  have  no  longer  a 
central  point  for  labor  in  these  parts,  and  (as  I  am 
seeking  to  begin  labor  in  the  extreme  West)  I  have 
had  a  desire  to  see  yoii  for  many  years  while  on  my 
way  to  Spain.  For  (now  that  there  is  some  hope  of 
my  starting  for  Spain,  and  as  you  are  the  Christian 
church  nearest  that  region)  I  trust,  &c. — R.] 

An'd  to  be  sent  forward  (on  my  journey) 
thither  by  you  [xa«  d(i'  vftHiv  7T(ionf/iqi- 
OTjvai,  The  dno  denotes  not  merely  bji  t/iem, 
but  from  them,  as  a  new  point  of  departure. — R.] 
The  expression  nQon(a<f<.  not  only  expresses  a 
real  attendance,  such  as  Paul  generally  received 
from  the  churches  for  his  further  journey,  but  also 
the  friendly  furtherance  of  his  journey,  or  even  the 
friendly  dismission  ;  Acts  xxi.  8. — In  some  meas- 
ure [mtto  /(i(>ov(;.  Grotius :  ^^  Non  quantum 
VELLEM,  sed  quantum  licebit. — R.]  An  expression 
of  the  high  regard  in  which  he  held  their  fellowship. 
— Filled,  t iA.n k t] a Q- u) ,  by  spiritual  satiation. 

C.  Vers.  25-33.— Ver.  25.'  But  now  I  go. 
He  regards  this  new  official  hindrance  as  the  last.— 
[Mimstering,  fi i,ay.o%' iltv.  Present  participle, 
not  the  future  ;  the  journey  is  part  of  the  ministry, 
the  whole  action  is  already  begun.  This  is  lost  siglit 
of  in  the  E.  V. ;  Amer.  Bible  Union  :  "  I  am  going 


Smart  calls  attention  to  Kai  as  indicating  the  impossihilitj 
of  his  comii  g  hitherto.— B.] 


442 


THE   EPISTLE   OF  PAUL   TO   THE   ROMANS. 


to  Jcnisaleiii  to  minister,"  is  even  more  objection- 
able.— K.]  On  the  collection  mentioned,  see  2  Cor. 
ix.  1,  2  ;  Acts  xxiv.  17.  Origen  is  of  the  opinion 
that  he  wished  to  bring  this  collection  home  to  the 
hearts  of  the  Romans  too.*  He  had  time  enough 
still  fur  this. 

Ver.  26.  For  Maoedonia  and  Achaia  thought 
it  good  [f  rdox  tj  aav  yaf>  M  cty.fi)ovia  xal 
'yt/aia.  Dr.  Lunge:  wtre  joi/Julli/  willing.  The 
above  rendering  is  perhaps  scarcely  strong  enough, 
but  is  taken  from  later  revisions.  It  seoms  best  to 
preserve  the  personification  of  the  orginal. — R.] 
The  translation  :  they  have  wished,  does  not  at  all  do 
justice  to  the  iido/.. 

A  certain  contribution  [y.oi.vi,)viav  r(,vd. 
Literally,  a  certain  communion  ov  participation.  As 
used  here  of  a  contribution,  ^^ hoiustii  et  leiju'tatin 
plena  a  pellatio"  (Beugel). — R.]  As  tlie  symbol 
and  expression  of  the  y.oivtot'ia,  it  is  itself  zoivojctct. 
The  later  giving  of  alms,  and  particularly  that  of 
the  Middle  Ages,  has  not  kept  tliis  meaning  in  view. 
Ti^vd  softens  the  force.  Meyer  says  :  "  There  is  no 
further  trace  in  the  Epistles  of  Paul  of  the  commu- 
nity of  goods."  We  might  add  :  Tkere  is  no  trace 
from  the  outset  of  a  legally  carried  out  community 
of  goods ! 

Ver.  27.  [For  they  thought  it  good,  f  vdn- 
Ktjaav  ycc^.  The  yet;*  introduces  an  explana- 
tion of  irdo/.tjfTav  (ver.  20).  The  clause  is  =  for 
f/iey  tliought  it  good  being  tlieir  debtors. — 11.] — 
In  spiritual  things.  A  statement  of  the  cause  of 
the  propriety  of  this  relief  in  temporal  matters. — 
[To  minister,  ).n,Tovi>yTi(rat,.  Tlie  figurative 
priestly  service  is  still  in  mind,  and  to  it  belongs  the 
privilege  and  duty  of  providing  for  the  poor  saints. 
Who,  then,  cannot  be  Christ's  priest,  so  long  as 
we  have  Clirist's  poor  witli  us  ? — R.] — In  carnal 
things.  Tlie  aait/.t,/.d  denote,  in  a  general  idea, 
external  tilings;  actoi  is  tiie  external,  material,  and 
finite  side  of  human  life,  of  life  in  general.  Con- 
clusion a  mnjori  ad  i/duux. 

Ver.  28.  And  have  secured  to  them. 
SiK>ayltKT {yai.  Luther  [marginal  reading]: 
"  Truly  and  faithfully  preserved  to  deliver  up."  To 
this  belongs  also  here  the  full  spiritual  meaning  and 
effect.  Strange  view  :  When  I  have  brought  over  to 
them  the  money,  sealed  (Erasmus,  and  others).  Still 
more  strange  :  When  I  have  safely  effected,  leith  let- 
ter and  seal,  the  proper  delivery  of  their  collection. 
It  may  be  that,  by  sealing,  the  Apostle  alludes  to 
the  usual  mc'thod  of  tiie  world  in  the  management 
of  inoney  aS'airs,  as,  for  examjile,  in  Phil.  iv.  15. 
Meyer :  Vouched  for ;  that  is,  corroborated  as  the 
fruit  ripened  for  them.  —  [This  fruit,  ritv  xa()- 
nov  rovTov;  i.  e.,  the  amount  of  the  collection. 
Tiiere  seems  to  be  no  reference  to  the  fruit  of  love 
or  faith,  still  loss  of  Paul's  activity.— -R.] 

Ver.  29.  And  I  know,  &c.  [oida  di,  x.t.A. 
See  Textual  Nide  ".]  A  text  applicable  in  many 
ways  for  installation  sermons. 

Ver.  80.  No^JT  I  beseech  you.  The  Apos- 
tle's wonderful  prosentiinent  of  what  he  has  to  ex- 
perieiicf  in  Jerusalem  ;  se(!  Acts  xx.  22  ;  xxi.  10  ff. 

By  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  .tin,  see  chap. 
xii.  1. — By  the  love  of  the  Spirit.  Meyer: 
The  love  effected  by  tlic  Holy  Sjiiiit.  As  tliLs  is 
Belf-evident,  Paul  means  a  love  extending  itself  witli 

♦  [A  moKt  prmtuitous  assumption  is  thnt  of  ."ohutt,  Ihnt 
these  collectionii  were  to  win  favor,  and  protoot  lilm  dm  uif; 
bis  abtiuiice  iu  the  cstrciiie  West.  Decidcdlv'  uiip:tultne  I 
~B.1 


the  Christian  spirit,  so  as  to  embrace  in  it£  univer 
sality  the  entire  kingdom  of  God,  which  can  pray 
for  all  affairs  of  the  kingdom  and  its  administrator;?, 
and  overflows  the  whole  earth. 

In  your  prayers.  Codd.  D.  E.  [F.  G.]  add  the 
proper  glo.-^s  Ihmv;  Col.  iv.  12.  [See  Ti-xlunl 
Note  ".     It  is  not  genuine,  though  correct. — R.] 

Ver.  31.  [The  disobedient,  ann,0  uvvimv. 
Either  unbelieving  (E.  V.,  Hodge,  De  Wcite,  and 
others)  or  disobedient  (Philippi,  and  others).  The 
two  ideas  are  intimately  related  in  the  New  Testa- 
ment, but  the  latter  seems  the  prominent  one  here. 
— R.]  The  Apostle  describes  the  unbelieving  Jews 
as  disobedient.  Those  were,  in  a  special  sense, 
rebels  against  the  Messiah,  who  refused  the  obe- 
dience of  faitii. — My  ministration  [ij  i>i,(t.y.o- 
via  /<oi'].  Meyer:  My  rendering  of  service  de- 
signed for  Jerusalem. — [May  prove  acceptable. 
Of  this  he  had  doubts,  and  with  good  reason.*  Yet 
he  adds  :  to  the  saints. — R.] 

Ver.  32.  That  I  may  come  unto  you  in 
joy  [i'ra  iv  /a()u  t/iC^o)  77<J0i,'  r /<«(,■.  In 
the  element  of  joy ;  the  emphasis  rests  on  this 
phrase. — R.]  As  if  he  had,  to  a  certain  extent, 
forebodings  that  he  might  come  to  them  iu  sad  cir- 
cumstances,'as  a  captive. 

And  may  vrith  you  be  refreshed.  By 
spiritual  interchange.  [Alford  :  "  Tiiat  we  may  mu- 
tually refresh  ourselves  ;  I  after  my  dangers  and  de- 
liverances, you  after  your  anxieties  for  me."  See 
'Textual  Note  -°.— R.] 

A^er.  .S3.  Novr  the  God  of  peace.  It  is  very 
natural  for  him  here  to  call  God  the  God  of  peace, 
in  consequence  of  hix  conflicts  and  their  ditlerences. 
Grotius  accepts  ilie  latter  alone  ;  Meyer,  tiie  for- 
mer alone  ;  Philippi,  the  peace  of  reconciliation  ; 
Fritzsche,  salvation  in  a  general  sense ;  Tholuck, 
"  different  occasions ;  "  see  chap.  xvi.  20  ;  Phil.  iv. 
9  ;  1  Thess.  v.  23  ;  Heb.  xiii.  20. 


DOCTllINAL  AND   ETHICAL. 

1.  On  the  great  importance  of  this  section,  see 
the  Introduction,  the  Arrangement,  and  the  Sum- 
mary. 

2.  On  ver.  14.  Tlie  chiu"ch  of  that  day  at 
Rome,  compared  with  that  of  the  i)rcsent  day. 

3.  On  ver.  15.  Tlie  sense  of  the  calling  and  the 
duty  of  tlie  calling  embolden.  The  Apostle's  sense 
of  liis  great  calling. 

4.  Grand  view  of  the  conversion  of  the  whole 
world.  An  offering  in  whieh  the  nations  are  offered 
to  (Joil.  Christ,  as  the  High-Priest,  has  brought  a 
propitiatory  sacrifice  ;  now  the  ministers,  a.-^  subor- 
dinate priests,  must  present  the  thank-offering  and 
burnt-olfering.  Hut  what  a  source  of  worsh.ip,  and 
of  the  elevation  and  purification  of  worship,  lias 
proceciled  from  the  ministerial  service  of  Paul  in 
botli  an  extensive  and  intensive  respect :  chnrehes, 
clmrch-toW(j-s,  hymns,  prayers,  fe.<;tivals  without 
number,  and  praising  (ieiitiles  (ver.s.  10,  11).  The 
antiphony  of  praising  Gentiles  (ver.  11)  responds  to 
the  extolling  intonation  of  the  AposUe  (ver.   10). 

•  [Tho  existence  of  n  coolnce"  between  Paul  and  the 
Chri.-:tintis  lit  J('ni.-Mil<'ni,  per)iiii)s  the  (rr<'iit  btidy  of  them. 
Is  evident  from  tlie  lOpisHe  to  the  Onliiliiins  and  the  Acta 
of  the  Apostles'.  Hut  thi.s  liy  no  means  im)>1ies  eitlier  a 
w;int  of  unity  Mmoiij;  the  nposth'8  pcr^ona!ly,  or  dilfcrent 
Sro.spcls.  See  I.iinL'o*H  Cumm.  O'lladotis,  pn.  4(1,  61 ;  I,i(rht- 
foot,  Oitldtinns,  Dixscrtatiou  iii.  pp.  283  11'.,  St.  riiiU  and  lh« 
Threc.-R] 


CHAPTER  XV.    14-83. 


443 


[Hodge  :  "  In  this  beautiful  passage  we  see  the  na- 
ture of  the  only  priesthood  which  belongs  to  the 
Cliristian  ministry.  It  is  not  their  office  to  make 
atonement  for  sin,  or  to  offer  a  propitiatory  sacrifice 
to  God,  but,  by  the  preaching  of  the  gospel,  to  bring 
men,  by  the  influence  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  to  ofler 
themselves  as  a  living  sacrifice,  holy  and  acceptable 
to  God."     Comp.  Calvin.— R.J 

5  Paul's  missionary  sphere.  See  his  Life  in  the 
Intr'jduction. 

6.  Paul's  principle  in  ver.  20 ;  a  principle  of 
genuine  churchliness  in  contrast  with  hierarchical 
and  sectarian  propagandism.  [The  term  used  by 
the  Apostle  belongs  to  the  sphere  of  minor  morals, 
to  "  a  point  of  honor,"  indeed.  Yet  the  principle  is 
not  unimportant.  Men  may  be  Christians,  and  dis- 
regard it,  but  not  Christian  gentlemen,  not  men  pos- 
sessed of  that  delicate  sense  of  propriety  which  no 
rules  can  impart.  Besides,  such  efforts  at  proselyt- 
ing generally  ignore  the  essential  graces  of  Chris- 
tianity :  humility,  self-abnegation,  cliarity.  He  who 
insists  on  missionary  efforts  among  Christian  people, 
is  necessarily  uncharitable.  Sects  whose  main  eflbrts 
are  in  this  channel,  will  not  be  celebrated  for  the 
graces  of  Christianity.  Moreover,  Christian  ethics 
have  so  far  informed  the  world,  that  ungodly  men 
recognize  the  necessity  of  "  honorable  "  conduct  in 
Christial  workers,  and  can  sneer  at  the  unseemly 
"  competitions  "  of  much  that  is  called  pious  zeal. 
This  does  not  prove  that  the  world's  sense  of  honor 
is  higher  than  that  of  the  Chui'ch,  but  that  the 
standard  of  sectarian  proselytists  is  far  too  low. 
That  a  man  can  be  a  zealous  missionary  and  not  be 
a  meddlesome  propagandist,  is  evident  from  the  case 
of  this  Apostle. — R.2 

7.  Ou  ver.  28.  The  thoroughly  dynamical  view 
which  the  apostles  had  of  the  world,  is  reflected 
even  in  their  thoroughly  dynamical  missionary 
method,  according  to  which  they  conquered  the 
capital  and  central  points  of  the  ancient  world. 

8.  Vers.  26  ff.  The  idea  of  fellowship  in  its  full 
universality.  The  sacred  method  in  the  matter  of 
collections:  (1.)  An  assignment  of  reasons  (debt- 
ors) ;  (2.)  Voluntariness  ;  (3.)  Authentication  ;  (4.) 
Connection  with  the  purposes  of  God's  kingdom. 

9.  Spain,  as  the  representative  of  France,  Britain, 
Germany,  and  Scandinavia.  [And  of  America,  too  ! 
For  from  the  neighborhood  of  the  pillars  of  Hercu- 
les, toward  which  Paul's  missionary  zeal  led  him,  the 
voyager  sailed  wlio  discovered  the  new  world. — R.] 
How  does  the  matter  stand  now?  Paul  through 
Rome  to  Spain — this  has  again  become  a  prospect 
of  the  present  day,  or  a  pkim  de.-.ideriu7n.  [From 
Spain  to  Rome  seems  the  likelier  course  ;  yet,  where 
Spain  has  long  held  her  hand,  how  strong  is  the  rule 
of  Rome !— R.] 

10.  On  the  Apostle's  great  anticipation,  see  the 
Exeg.  Notes. 

11.  Prayer  a  wrestling  and  striving.  See  the 
history  of  Jacob  at  Jabbok.  The  Israelites  =  God's 
warriocs.  Christians  at  Rome  must  now  help  the 
Apostle  to  fight  against  the  schemes  of  degenerate 
warriors  of  God. 

12.  2'lie  God  of  peace.  As  an  infinite  source 
)f  peace,  as  if  peace  itself  constituted  His  divinity. 
So  the  love  of  the  Spirit ;  the  whole  Spirit  which  in 
Christianity  is  poured  out  over  the  eartli,  must  be 
regarded  as  a  breath  of  Love  and  of  Spring  exliaUng 
over  the  earth. 

13.  Amen.  See  the  Lexicons,  the  Concordance, 
•ud  the  Catechisms.    Also  the  conclusion  of  chap.  xvi. 


HOMILETICAIi   AND    PRACTICAX. 
Chap.  xv.  14-33. 

The  good  testimony  which  Paul  gives  to  ths 
Christians  at  Rome  (ver.  14"). — The  Apostle's  call  as 
the  Apostle  to  the  Gentiles.  1.  From  whom  did  he 
receive  it  ?  From  God,  who  gave  him  this  grace 
(comp.  chap.  i.  5  ;  xii.  3  ;  Gal.  i.  1).  2.  How  did 
he  regard  it?  As  a  priestly  employment  in  the 
sanctuary  of  the  New  Testament.  3.  What  bless- 
iug  did  he  derive  from  it  ?  He  brought  the  Gentilea 
to  obedience  to  the  gospel.  4.  By  what  rule  did  he 
administer  it  ?  To  preach  the  gospel  only  wliere  it 
was  not  yet  known  (vers.  14-21). — The  proclama- 
tion of  the  gospel  regarded  as  a  priestly  service 
(ver.  16). — The  task  of  the  missionary  to  the  hea- 
then.  1.  What  is  it  ?  To  administer  the  gospel 
among  the  heathen ;  that  is,  to  declare  it  with 
priestly  consecration,  devotion,  and  patience.  2. 
What  should  be  its  constant  end  ?  To  labor  that 
the  heathen  may  be  an  offering,  a.  acceptable  to 
God  ;  h.  sanctified  by  the  Holy  Ghost  (vers.  15,  16). 
— The  most  beautiful  and  best  glory  is,  when  we 
can  glory  of  serving  God  (ver.  17). — The  right 
means  for  conversion  (vers.  18,  19). — Paul's  great 
field  of  labor  (ver.  19). — The  first  missionary  sphere 
among  the  Gentiles  (ver.  19). — From  East  to  West ! 
That  was  the  course  of  the  gospel  in  the  fiist  period 
of  the  Christian  Church.  But  it  has  subsequently 
come  to  be  from  West  to  East !  (ver.  19.) — To 
build  on  another  man's  foundation,  a  mark  of  secta- 
rianism (ver.  20).     Common  nowadays. 

The  Apostle  Paul's  plans  for  his  last  journeys. 

1.  They  bear  witness  to  his  enterprising  spirit,  which 
continued  fresh  in  Christian  joy  even  to  his  old  age ; 

2.  But  they  are  accompanied  by  anxious  fbrebod 
ings,  that  lead  him  to  request  the  intercession  of 
otheus  (vers.  22-33). — Christian  collections.  1.  How 
must  we  regard  them  ?  As  a  service  rendered  to 
the  saints ;  either,  because,  a.  spiritual  gifts  have 
been  received  from  a  certain  quarter,  for  which  ser- 
vice in  temporal  goods  is  willingly  shown  ;  or,  h. 
because  brotherly  love  always  requires  us  to  do  good 
to  every  man,  but  especially  to  those  Aiho  are  of  the 
household  of  faith  (Gal.  vi.  10).  2.  How  must  they 
be  taken  up  ?  a.  In  such  a  way  that  no  njoral  com- 
pulsion be  exercised  ;  h.  But  so  that  all  givers  can 
bring  their  gifts  willingly  (vers.  25-28). —  Only  he 
who  can  say,  with  Paul,  "  I  am  sure  that,  wiien  I 
come  unto  you,  I  shall  come  in  the  fulness  of  the 
blessing  of  the  gospel  of  Christ,"  can  cheerfully  re- 
spond to  a  call  to  preach  to  another  congregation 
(ver.  29). — The  fulness  of  the  blessing  of  the  gospel 
of  Christ.  It  consists :  1.  In  unconverted  people 
being  won  to  the  kingdom  of  God  ;  2.  In  converted 
people  being  furthered  in  knowledge,  fiiith,  and 
holiness  (ver.  29). — The  Apostle's  request  for  the 
intercession  of  the  Cliurch  at  Rome  in  his  behalf. 
1.  Motives:  The  Church  should  intercede  for  him : 
a.  For  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ's  sake — that  is,  for  the 
sake  of  the  Lord's  honor ;  h.  For  the  love  of  the 
Spirit — that  is,  on  account  of  the  fraternal  fellow- 
ship effected  by  the  Holy  Ghost  between  the  Apos- 
tle and  the  Church.  "2.  Tlie  object  of  the  interccS' 
sion :  a.  On  the  one  hand,  the  deliverance  of  the 
Apostle  from  the  unbelievers  in  Judea ;  b.  The 
friendly  reception  of  his  service  of  love  (the  collec- 
tion) by  the  saints  there.  5?.  The  desired  result : 
a.  That  he  should  come  to  Rome  in  peace  ;  b.  And 
might  be  refreshed  with  the  Church  in  Rome  (vera 


444 


THE   EPISTLE   OF   PAUL   TO   THE   ROMANS. 


30-32). — The  God  of  patience  and  comfort  is  a  God 
of  hope,  and  the  God  of  hope  is  a  God  of  peace 
(ver.  82  ;  conip.  vers.  5,  13). 

LtniKK:  On  vers.  14,  15:  This  is,  though  you 
do  not  need  my  writing,  yet  I  am  urged  by  my 
oftice,  whicli  I  have  by  God's  grace,  to  teacli  and  to 
admonish  every  one  of  you. 

Stauke  :  Blessed  be  the  land  which  is  full  of  the 
gospel  of  Christ !  That  is  more  than  if  it  were  full 
of  gold  and  silver  (ver.  19). — Do  not  remove  from 
one  place  to  another  without  necessity  and  a  good 
cause  ;  remain  in  your  country,  and  live  lioni/stly 
(ver.  23). — Uedixgek  :  Notice  that  Piiul  will  not 
build  on  any  other  man's  foundation  ;  but  now  it  is 
nothing  new  in  the  Cimrch  for  one  to  take  from  an- 
other Ills  good  ground,  Cin-ist,  by  clamoring,  excit- 
ing suspicion,  and  other  forms  of  wickedness  (ver. 
20),— What  docs  love  for  Christ  not  do  ?  What  a 
journey  to  Rome  and  Spain  ?  Friend,  are  you  not 
an  official  successor  of  Paul,  a  pastor,  and  a  shep- 
herd of  souls  ?  How  many  miles  do  you  have  to 
go  on  the  way  to  the  preaching  stations,  the  school, 
or  the  private  house  of  one  of  your  hearers  ?  How 
often,  and  how  willingly,  do  you  make  the  visit? 
(ver.  24.) — Praying  is  the  same  as  fighting.  It  is 
greater  labor  than  ploughing.  But  how  indifferently 
do  you  regard  it !  (ver.  30.) 

Spkxkr,  on  ver.  29 :  Such  confidence  of  the 
preacher  in  the  fellowship  of  his  flock  effects  nmch 
good,  for  it  proves  love.  A  want  of  confidence,  on 
the  other  hand,  destroys  much  edification. — To  the 
ministerial  office  there  belong :  1.  Teaching ;  2. 
Care  for  the  poor  ;  3.  Admonition  of  the  hearers  to 
prayer  (vers.  14-33). — He  is  not  wortiiy  to  be  in 
Christ's  kingdom  and  to  enjoy  it,  who  does  not  daily 
pray  that  it  may  be  e.\tendeil  (ver.  30). 

Geulacii  :  Paul  regards  himself  as  a  priest,  who, 
by  the  preaching  of  tiie  gospel,  prepares  and  pre- 
sents to  God  the  offering  of  the  whole  Goiitile 
world. 

Hkubskr  :  Paul's  solicitude  lay  :  1.  In  the  office 
which  was  given  to  him,  with  which  he  also  received 
strength  ;  2.  In  the  holy  love  which  he  had.  Where 
both  of  these  exist,  admonitions  are  never  wholly 
fruitless  (ver.  15). — A  minister  who  is  merely  a 
preacher,  becomes  a  talker ;  but,  reversely,  the 
priest  should  always  be  a  preacher,  or  else  lie  will 
be  merely  a  Japanese  bonze  (ver.  16). — Christian 
love  luw  regard  for  the  rights  of  others  (ver.  20). — 
The  highest  service  of  missionaries  is,  that  they 
must  begin  from  the  very  start,  and  labor  with  the 
rough  material  (ver.  21). — The  change  in  the  circle 
of  operation. — The  journeys  of  the  Apostles,  which 
were  holy,  abundant  in  blessing,  and  full  of  suffer- 
ing (ver.  24). — Spiritual  benefactors  are  the  highest, 
and  though  temporal  blessings  cannot  perfectly  re- 
quite their  spiritual  benefits,  we  should  nevertheless 
repay  even  with  them  (vers.  26,  27). — Christians 
shoidil  not  come  empty  to  each  other,  l)Ut  with 
spiritual  blessings  (ver.  29). — The  power  of  Cnris- 
tian  intercession  (ver.  30). 

Bessek  :  The  Apostle's  official  .seal  to  the  Epis- 
tle to  the  Romans  (vers.  14-33). — The  pure  sacri- 
ficial vessel  is  the  gospel  of  God  ;  the  Gentiles, 
brought  by  faith  in  this  vessel,  are  an  acee|)talile 
offering,  simctified  by  the  Holy  Spirit,  who  is  the 
sacrificial  fire  from  heaven  (1  Peter  i.  12),  who  con- 
tinues the  holv  burning  by  which  Christ  has  suncti- 


ficd  himself  for  a  burnt-offering  for  all  (ver.  1(>).— 
Miraclts  in  themselves  are  no  proof  of  truth  ;  but 
as  signs  of  the  real  Christ,  the  miracles  of  the  Apos- 
tles imprint  a  seal  upon  their  doctrine  for  the  joy  of 
believers  and  for  the  judgment  of  unbeliever,-  (vers. 
18,  19).— The  fight  of  faith  is  fought  by  him  who 
prays,  seeing  and  feeling  the  opposite  of  his  hope, 
and  seeking  the  concealed  face  of  God,  who  is  .»  ood 
of  hope  (ver.  30). — (Jod  gives  peace  everywhere  and 
in  every  manner  (2  Thess.  iii.  10) :  Peace  in  believ- 
ing  on  His  grace  (chap.  v.  1),  peace  in  reliance  on 
the  love  of  His  government  (chap.  viii.  28),  peace 
in  the  certainty  that  Christ  reigns  over  His  enemies 
(chap.  xvi.  20),  and  peace  in  the  love  of  the  Spirit 
(ver.  33). 

[BuKKiTT :  As  we  honor  the  God  of  peace, 
whom  we  serve  ;  as  we  love  tho  Prince  of  peace,  in 
whom  we  believe ;  as  we  hope  for  the  comfort  of 
the  Spirit  of  peace,  and  as  we  cherish  the  success 
of  the  gospel  of  peace,  let  us  preserve  it  wiiere  it  is, 
and  pursue  it  where  it  flies  from  us. — Hkskv;  The 
blessing  of  the  gospel  is  the  treasure  which  w'c  have 
in  earthen  vessels.  When  ministers  are  fully  pre- 
pared to  give,  and  people  fully  prepared  to  receive, 
this  blessing,  both  are  happy.  Many  have  the  gos- 
pel who  have  not  the  blessing  of  the  gospel,  and  so 
they  have  it  in  vain.  The  gospel  will  not  profit,  un- 
less God  bless  it  on  us  ;  and  it  is  our  duty  to  wait 
upon  Him  for  that  blessing,  and  for  the  fulness  of  it. 

[Doddridge  :  Let  us  adore  the  God  of  grace 
and  peace,  who  works  the  most  important  ends  by 
methods  unthought  of  by  us ;  and  let  us  be  very 
cautious  that  we  do  not  raslily  judge  that  He  hath 
rejected  our  prayers,  because  we  do  not  see  them 
answered  in  that  particular  way  which  might  have 
been  more  agreeable  to  our  own  wishes. — Ci.akke: 
Beware  of  contentions  in  religion  ;  if  you  (lisi)Ute 
concerning  any  of  its  doctrines,  let  it  be  to  find  out 
truth,  not  to  support  a  preconceived  and  preestab- 
lished  opinion.  Avoid  all  polemical  heat  and  ran- 
cor ;  these  prove  the  absence  of  the  religion  of 
Christ.  Whatever  does  not  lead  you  to  love  God 
and  man  more,  is  most  assuredly  from  l)eneath. 
The  God  of  peace  is  the  author  of  Christianity ;  and 
the  Prince  of  peace,  the  priest  and  sacrifice  of  it ; 
therefore  love  one  another,  and  leave  oft'  contention 
before  it  be  meddled  with. 

[HoDGK  :  As  oil  poured  on  water  smoothes  its 
surface  and  renders  it  transiinrent,  so  does  kindness 
calm  the  minds  of  men,  and  prepare  tliem  for  the 
ready  entrance  of  (.he  truth.  Besides  these  qualifi- 
cations, he  who  admonishes  others  should  !)(>  entitled 
thus  to  act.  It  is  not  necessary  that  this  title  should 
rest  on  his  official  station  ;  but  there  should  l)e  su- 
periority of  some  kind — of  age,  excellence,  or  knowl- 
edge — to  giwj  his  admonitions  due  effect. — Bahxks  : 
The  success  of  a  minister  is  not  for  his  own  praises, 
but  for  the  honor  of  God  ;  not  by  his  skill  or 
power,  but  by  the  aid  of  Jesus  (^hrist. — God  may 
disappoint  us  in  regard  to  the  mode  in  which  we 
purpose  to  do  good  ;  but  if  we  really  desire  it,  His 
will  enal)le  us  to  do  it  in  His  own  way.  It  may  be 
better  to  preach  the  gospel  in  bonils  than  at  liberty; 
it  is  better  to  do  it  in  a  prison,  than  not  at  alL 
Banyan  wrote  the  "  Pilgnm's  Progress  "  to  amuse 
his  heavy  hours  during  a  twelve  years'  cruel  imprisi 
onment.  If  he  had  been  at  liberty,  he  probably 
would  not  have  writtsn  it  at  all. — J.  F.  U.] 


CHAPTER  XYI.    l-2(k  445 


THIRD      DIVISION. 

THE  COMMENDATION  OF  COMPANIONS  AND  HELPERS  IN  A  SERIES  OF  SALUTATIONS, 
WITH  WHICH  IS  JOINED  A  WARNING  AGAINST  SEPARATISTIC  FALSE  TEACHERS 
(JEWS  AND  GENTILES),  WHO  COULD  HINDER  AND  EVEN  DESTROY  ROME'S  DESTINY 
AND  HIS  APOSTOLIC  MISSION.  YET  THE  GOD  OF  PEACE  WILL  SHORTLY  BRUISE 
SATAN  (JUDAISTIC  AND  PAGANISTIC  ERRORS)  UNDER  THEIR  FEET. 

Chap.  XVL   1-20. 
A.    Phebe  of  Corinth. 

1  I  commend  imto  you  Phebe  our  sister,  which  [who]  is  a  servant  [deaconess] 

2  of  the  church  which  is  at  Cenchrea :  That  ye  receive  her  in  the  Lord,  as  be^ 
Cometh  saints,  and  that  ye  assist  her  in  whatsoever  business  she  hath  [may  have] 
need  of  you :  for  she  [too]  hath  been  a  succourer  of  many,  and  of  myself  also. 

B.    Eoman  friends. 

3,  4  Greet  Priscilla  [Prisca] '  and  Aquila,  my  helpers  in  Christ  Jesus :  Who 
have  for  my  life  laid  down  their  own  necks  :  unto  whom  not  only  I  give  thanks, 

5  but  also  all  the  churches  of  the  Gentiles.  Likewise  greet  \salute\  the  church 
that  is  in  their  house.     Salute  my  well-beloved  Epenetus,  who  is  the  first-fruits 

6  of  Achaia   [Asia]  °  unto  Christ.      Greet  [Salute]  Mary,  who  bestowed  much 

7  laboxir  on  us  [o/-,  you].'  Salute  Andronicus  and  Junia  \or,  Junias],^  my  kins- 
men, and  my  fellow-prisoners,  Avho  are  of  note  among "  the  apostles,  who   also 

8  were  in  Christ  before  me.     Greet  [Salute]  Amplias,  my  beloved  in  the  Lord. 

9  Salute   Urbane    [Urbanus],    our    helper  in    Christ,    and    Stachys   my   beloved. 

10  Salute  Apelles    [the]    approved  in  Christ.      Salute  them   which  [who]    are  of 

11  Aristobulus'  household  [the  household  of  Aristobulus].  Salute  Herodion  my 
kinsman.     Greet  [Salute]  them  that  be  of  the  household  of  Narcissus,  which 

12  [who]  are  in  the  Lord.  Salute  Tryphena  and  Tryphosa,  who  labour  in  the 
Lord.     Salute  the  beloved  Persis,  which  [who]  laboured  much  in  the  Lord. 

13,  14  Salute  Rufus  [the]  chosen  in  the  Lord,  and  his  mother  and  mine.  Salute 
Asyncritus,  Phlegon,  Hermas,  Patrobas,  Hermes  [Hermes,  Patrobas,  Hernias],* 

16  and  the  brethren  which  [who]  are  with  them.  Salute  Philologus,  and  Julia, 
Kerens,  and  his  sister,  and  Olympas,  and  all  the  saints  which  [who]  are  with 

16  them.  Salute  one  another  with  a  holy  kiss.  The  [All  the]  '  churches  of  Christ 
salute  you. 

0.    Warning  against  false  teachers. 

1*7  Now  I  beseech  you,  brethren,  [to]  mark  them  which  [those  who]  cause 
divisions   and   offences   contrary   to   the   doctrine    [teaching]  *   which    ye   have 

18  \omit  have]  learned  ;  and  avoid  them.  For  they  that  are  such  serve  not  our 
Lord  Jesus   \omit  Jesus]  °  Christ,  but  their  own  belly ;    and   by  [their]   good 

19  words  and  fair  speeches'"  deceive  the  hearts  of  the  simple.  For  your  obe- 
dience is  come  abroad  unto  all  men.  I  am  glad  [rejoice]  therefore  on  your 
behalf  [over  you] :  "    but  \omit  but]   yet  I  would  have  you  wise  unto    [con- 

20  cerning]  that  which  is  good,  and  simple  [harmless]  concerning  evil.  And  the 
God  of  peace  shall  bruise  Satan  under  your  feet  shortly.  The  grace  of  our 
Lord  Jesus  Christ  he  with  you.     Amen  \omu  Amen.]  '* 

TEXTUAL. 

1  Ver.  3.— [Instead  of  npiVxiAAaF  (jBfc,  versions  and  fathers),  we  find  Ilpt  o-xav  in  N.  A,  B.  C.  D.  F.  L.,  ctirslTe^ 
&a    Universally  received  now. 

•  Ver.  5.— [iJtc.,  with  D^  '.  L.,  Syriac  versions,  and  fathers:  'Axoto?.  N.  A.  B.  C.  D'.  F.,  most  versions,  Latin 
flithers  :  'A  cr  ('  a  s  .    JDe  Wette  defends  the  former  on  the  authority  of  the  Peshlto,  and  also  because  tr  »  difficulty  iriaiuj 


44G 


THE   EPISTLE    OF   PAUL   TO    THE    ROMANS, 


'  Vtr.  6.—[Rer.,  C.  L.,  versions  and  fill  here:  ^fias;  D.  F. :  iv  i/xtx  ;  N.  A.  B.  C«.,  vt-rsions  and  fathers:  u/tds 
rt-nilinj  last  mcntioiu-d  is  adnpted  by  Griesbach,  Laclim:inn,  Meyer,  Alford,  Trcgellcs  ;  that  of  the  fi.r.,  by  Tiw;h« 
rf  («'d.  :!),  Ui!  Wetto,  rhilippi,  Ivtiiipe.  The  internal  evidence  is  HtioiiKly  in  its  lavor.  See  the  Ei'-g.  KoUs.—Rec^ 
N.  1>.  F.  L. :  Mi^ia^;  A.  B.  C,  I'eshito :  iAapiav.  The  latter  is  preferred  by  Lachmann,  TiscUendorf  (ed.  2), 
rd,  TregolkM.  ^         ' 


from  1  Cor.  xvi.  15,  where  Stephanas  is  called  the  flrst-fmit'«  of  Arhaia,  might  have  occasioned  the  chanpo  into  'A<riot. 
But  the  probability  is  rather  ihat  the  parallel  passage  was  written  on  the  marpin,  and  tlius  crept  into  the  tixt  •  and  at 
the  Ep  stle  was  written  in  Achaia,  the  error  was  readily  retained.  Tlie  readinij  'A<ria«  is  accepted  by  most  modern 
editors  and  commentators. 

'  Ver.  G.—\Rer.,  C.  L.,  versions  and  falhere:  ^fias;  D.  F. :  iv  v/jlIv  ;  N.  A.  B.  C«.,  versions  and  fathers-  iiuat 

The  rer '="  - '""' '■'■ '  - >  ---j  i ---.-.  -..--..    t     ,  __   __    ,,  ;,„     ,    „ .       _        .       r 

etidorf 

with 

Alford, 

Ver.  7. — [See  the  Exrg.  JVolet. 

*  Ver.  l.—[Amotiglhe  oposOes  is  ambiguous.  It  may  imply:  among  the  apogtlcs,  as  of  th<ir  number,  or  simplj 
that  the  apostles  held  them  in  high  repute.    The  latter  is  decidedly  preferable     See  the  Ex  q.  y<iltf. 

•  Ver.  14.— (S.  A.  B.  t'.  I)'.  F.,  most  versions,  sustain  the  order:  'Ep/u^f,  UoLTfio^aiv,  "Epiiav;  adopted  bj 
Lachmann,  Tisehendorf,  Meyer,  and  most  modern  editors.    That  of  the  Ric.  is  supported  by  l)^.  L.,  some  Greek  fithers. 

'  Ver.  If).  -['I'he  authority  for  iraaoi  is  oveiwhelming  (N.  A.  H.  C.  L,  most  versions  aLd  fathers).  The  omissioa 
arose  from  the  question  as  to  whether  the  Apostle  could  speak  for  all  the  churcbes. 

"•  Ver.  17. — [O  1  leuliini/  in  preference  to  duclriw,  see  ehap.  x.  17,  p.  212,  and  the  Exrg.  N<jUs. 

»  Ver.  iH.— [The  Rec.  inserts  'lr\<Tov,  but  it  is  not  founa  in  any  of  the  known  uncial  MSS.,  and  is  omitted  in  a 
number  nf  versions. 

'0  Ver.  18.— [D'.  F.  omit  icoi  cvAoyi'a; ;  found  in  N.  A  B.  C,  most  versions.  Probably  omitted  from  tba 
transcriber's  niistakiug  the  end  of  the  previous  word  for  that  of  tuAoyi'as.     So  modem  editorri. 

"  V'er.  19. — [The  Re.  ban  :  xaipui  ovv  to  i^'  vix.lv,  which  is  su-tained  by  a  number  of  versions,  and  by  N*. ;  the 
order  is  foum!  in  D.  F.,  which  omit  to,  however,  n'.  A.  U.  C.  L. :  «(^'  u/iiM  ovv  xaipw  ;  adopted  by  Lachmann, 
Ulschendorf,  Meyer,  Alfonl,  Trcgellcs.  Do  Wetto  and  Philippi  retain  the  order  of  the  R'C.  besides  the  prcponderdnt 
uncial  authority,  it  is  properly  urged  against  the  reading  of  the  Hec,  that  it  gives  the  more  usual  order,  henco  likely  to 
be  an  alteration.     Dr.  Langu  wills  it  a  correct  e.xegetical  gloss. 

'^  Ver.  20.— [No  .e  of  ibe  unci.al  MSS.  now  known  support  the  '.\m^«'  of  the  Rec,  which  is  accordingly  rejected  by 
all  critical  editors.- Alford,  Tregelles,  and  others,  bracket  Xpi<rroi>,  which  is  not  found  in  X.  B. ;  but  it  seems  best  to 
retain  it.— R.] 


EXEGETICAL  AND  CRITICAL. 

Summarij. — A.  Commendation  of  Phebe  the 
deaconess;  ver.s.  1,  2. — B.  The -salutations  to  his 
Roman  frieiuis  and  companions  in  tlieir  household 
churclies,  and  the  commendations  therein  expressed  ; 
vers.  8-16. — C.  Warning  against  false  teachers,  who 
create  dissension.     Benediction  ;  ver.s.  17-20. 

In  the  Apostle's  salutations  he  does  not  merely 
take   cognizance   of   friendly   relations   in  a   good- 
natured  way,   hut   rather   designs,   with    a   distinct 
section  of  his  Epistle,  and  in  the  wise  and  sincere 
form  of  his  salutations,  to  awaken  in  the  Church  at 
Rome  the  consciousness  that,  in  its  principal  ele- 
mcnt.s,  it  is  indirectly  a  Pauline   church — that  is, 
one  a|)propriatcd  Ity  him  in  his  universal  efforts.* 
Comp.,  on  this  point,  the  Introduction^  p.  33,  and 
the  construction  of  the  Epistle.     It  is  characteristic, 
that  Aquila  and  Priscilla  stand  at  the  head  of  those 
wiiDin   lie  .salutes  ;   by  their  settlement  in   Ephcsus 
they  had  already  pre[)ared  for  his  connection  there, 
just  sis  they  now  had  done  in  Rome,  and  afterward 
do  again  in  Ephesus  ;  2Tim.  iv.  10.    And  .«o  there  are 
many  among  tliose  saluted  who  have  preceded  him,  i 
as  his  precursors.     The  wiiole  body  of  those  greeted  , 
is  made  up  of  different  clas.ses.     Some  are  helpers  j 
of   his  missionary  labors,   who    have  labored    with  | 
him,  and  [)art  of  whom  have  exposed  themselves  to  j 
dangers  for  him  :  Prisca,  Aquila,  .Mary,  Andronicus,  , 
Juiiia,   and   Urbanus.     A  number  of   them  are  his 

*  [Ford  :  "  Some  persons,  regarding  this  chapter  as  con- 
taining Utile  m'no  tlian  a  reci^ter  of  O'lmry,  treat  it  with 
coniji  iritivo  ind  Iforenoe  ;  thereby  defrauding  their  souls 
of  mil  h  goo  I.  St.  Chrysn-itom.  in  his  day,  had  cause  to 
complain  of  the  same  neglect  sliown  by  many  to  the  con-  i 
elusion  of  tliii  Knistle.  Hence  ho  bestows  special  pains  in 
explaining  it.  '  It  is  possible,'  he  write-",  '  even  from  bare 
nnmfs  to  find  a  treasure: '  and  then  he  at  once  proceeds  to 
dLsclinc  what  the  trirasure  Is."  The  list  of  n  imes  shows: 
(I.)  Paul's  p.^rsonal  regard;  (2.)  The  hinh  place  he  accords 
to  women;  (."?.>  The  con-<fitulion  of  the  Roman  Chui-ch  ; 
(4.)  Tlie  !;r''at  intluenoe  he  exerted,  if  so  many  friends 
could  be  finind  in  a  churrli  he  had  never  visited.  (.5.)  The 
ur.dving  n  line  received  from  !.is  friendly  mention,  is  a  type 
of  the  I'temiil  blessing  wbii  h  1>ol'in(fs  to  those  whose  namci 
arn  written  in  the  Lamb's  Hook  of  Life.  l'".vidently  there 
are  lot  maiiv  rieh  or  creat  in  this  list — few  of  wliom  we 
know  any  tlii  g  save  what  is  here  hinted  ;  yet  these  names  j 
abide,  while  tlioso  of  thn  wealthy  anrl  honored  have  lieen  ' 
forgotten  Even  Horace  and  lavy  give  no  such  extendeil 
fume  as  Paul  has  done  to  hU  friends  and  aciiuaiiituuces  at  i 
Uome.-it.l 


relatives,  such  as  Andronicus,  Junia,  and  Herodion  ; 
or  very  near  friends,  as  Rufus  and  his  mother.  Be- 
sides, there  are  those  whom  he  can  distinguish  as 
discii)les  converted  tiiiougli  his  instrumentality,  or 
well-known  friends :  Epenetus,  Amplias,  Stachys, 
Apelles ;  perhaps  also  Tryphena,  Tryphosa,  and 
Persis.  We  can  further  distingubh  companies,  a 
church  in  the  house  of  Aquila,  an  assembly  at  the 
houses  of  Hermes,  Hennas,  and  their  companions ; 
at  the  houses  of  Philologus,  Julia,  and  their  com- 
panions. Perhaps  the  believers  in  the  householda 
of  Aristobulus  and  of  Narcissus  also  form  separate 
divisions  of  the  Church. 

A.     Vers.    1    and    2. — Ter.    1.     I    commend. 

[Both  an  introduction  and  a  commendation  are  im- 
plied. Tlie  descri|)tion  consists  of  two  parts  :  First, 
she  is  a  sister,  which  is  the  general  irround  for  wel- 
coming her ;  then,  more  sp<'cia!ly,  she  is  a  deacon- 
ess, who  had  faithfully  discharged  iier  duty  (ver.  2). 
The  name  is  derived  from  >l>ni,in^,  Phoebus  (Apollo), 
but  there  is  nothing  remarkable  in  this,  since  the 
etymology  woidd  be  as  little  recalled  then,  as  now, 
in  the  case  of  proper  names. — H.]  See  2  Cor.  v. 
12.  Phebe  is  usually  regarded  .as  the  bearer  of  the 
Epistle. 

Who  is  a  deaconess;  <\i(xxovoq.  On  the 
institution  of  deaconesses,  comp.  Church  History 
and  the  Pastoral  Epistles.  Meyer  furnishes  the  spt^ 
cial  literature  on  p.  530.  [The  word  thnxnritjnri 
occurs  frequently  in  hiter  ecclesiastical  (ireek.  Pliny, 
in  the  celebrated  letter  to  Trajan,  says  :  "  Xfcf.wo- 
r!um  crcilvVi,  ex  duahus  aiiciHis  i/ikv  ministr.e  dicC' 
bnntnr,  quid  rsx  t  v<ri  ft  pi'r  toniicntti  qufsrere." 
Their  duties  were,  to  take  care  of  the  sick,  poor, 
and  fltriingers  in  the  female  portion  of  the  Church. 
"  This  otfice  was  the  more  needful  on  account  nf  the 
rigid  scjiaration  of  the  sexes  at  lhat  day,  csi)ecinlly 
among  the  (Jreeks"  (Schafl").  Mi\ver  refers  to  Biiig 
ham,  Oriff.  i.  i>p.  311-3<'.t^;  Si-hocne,  GcKrhirhts. 
fnrsrh.  iifirr  d.  Kirchltch.  Ochrnuchi',  iii.  pp.  1<I2  ff. ; 
Herzog,  Knn/k-loped.,  iii.  p.  3tl8 ;  S^eander,  I'flfin- 
zuiifj,  i.  p.  2r..'i  f  The  last  named  argues  th;it  the 
deiieonesses  must  not  be  conl'ouniled  with  the  y'liint 
of  1  Tim.  V.  3-lfi.  See,  however,  I.ange's  Comm. 
in  inen.  We  may  aihl  :  Sehaff,  Api>stolir  C/ntirh, 
|>.  135  ;  Suieer,  '/'/ifinui'iis,  kh/i  vnre.  Of  l*hebe, 
Conybcare  says  {Si.  Pau/,  ii.  p.  15t):  "She  was  ■ 


CHAPTER   XVI.    1-20. 


441 


widow  of  consideration  and  wealth,  who  acted  as 
one  of  the  deaconesses  of  the  Church,  and  was  now 
about  to  sail  to  Rome  upon  some  private  business, 
apparently  connected  with  a  lawsuit  in  which  she 
was  engaged."  He  adds  :  "She  could  not  (accord- 
ing to  Greek  manners)  have  been  mentioned  as  act- 
ing in  the  independent  manner  described,  either  if 
her  husband  had  been  living  or  if  she  had  been  un- 
married."— R.] 

Cenchrea.  The  eastern  seaport  of  Corinth 
(see  the  Encyclopaedias). 

Ver.  2.  That  ye  receive  her  in  the  Lord. 
She  should  be  received  with  Christian  interest. — 
And  that  ye  a.ssist  her  [xai  Tra^affr^Tf 
ai'jTfj.  The  verb  is  frequently  used  as  a  legal  term, 
hence  the  conjecture  of  Conybeare,  that  her  business 
at  Rome  was  connected  with  a  lawsuit. — R.]  It  is 
hardly  probable  tliat  the  early  Church  employed 
deaconesses  to  travel  in  the  discharge  of  official 
business  ;  the  business  of  Phcbe  seems  to  have  been 
of  a  personal  character. 

[For  she  too  y.al  yciQ  air  fj.  She  herself 
aho,  not  arTtj  (this  one). — R.]  The  reason  why 
the  Romans  siiould  zealously  support  her  in  her 
affairs  does  not  lie  in  an  official  call  to  Rome,  but  in 
her  services  for  tlie  churches  at  home,  and  for  the 
Apostle  in  particular.  JI (joirrdToi;  is  a  specially 
honorable  designation.  [It  may  refer  to  her  official 
duties,  but  not  necessarily  so.  The  idea  it  implies 
is  of  service  bestowed  by  a  superior  on  inferiors. — 
Of  myself  also.  "  When  and  where,  we  know 
not.  It  is  not  improbable  that  she  may  have  been, 
like  Lydia,  one  whose  heart  the  Lord  opened  at  the 
first  preaching  of  Paul,  and  whose  house  was  his 
lodging  ;  "  Alford.— R.] 

B.  Vers.  3-16.— Ver.  3.  Prisca.  [This  is  the 
real  name  ;  Prhcrlla  is  the  diminutive,  according  to 
the  common  mode  of  forming  such  appellations. 
— R.]  She  belonged,  like  Phebe,  to  tiie  women 
who  were  prominent  because  of  the  energy  of  their 
faith,  and  deserved  the  honorable  position  before 
the  name  of  her  husband,  Aquila  (comp.  Acts  xviii. 
2).  See  2  Tim.  iv.  19.  [The  frequent  sneers  at 
Paul  about  his  views  respecting  the  female  sex  and 
their  prerogatives  nught  be  spared  us,  were  this 
chapter  carefully  read.  The  order  here  is  a  suffi- 
cient answer :  tlie  wife's  name  first,  because  she  was 
foremost,  no  doubt.  The  standard  is,  after  all,  ca- 
pacity, not  sex.  Both  are  called  "  my  helpers,"  and 
it  would  seem  that,  as  such,  they  were  both  engaged 
in  spiritual  labors,  which  term  includes  vastly  more 
than  public  preaching. — R.] 

Ver.  4.  Their  own  necks.  Meyer  translates 
the  I'Tti&t] /.(xv  literally:  have  laid  under,  under 
the  executioner's  axe.  But  there  has  been  no  men- 
tion made  in  Paul's  previous  history  of  the  execu- 
tioner's axe.  Even  Meyer  himself  doubts  whether 
we  should  take  the  expression  in  its  exact  meaning. 
Since  Paul  was  a  member  of  their  family,  they  were 
answerable  for  him  in  the  tumults  that  arose  in  Cor- 
inth and  Ephesus  (Acts  xviii.  12;  xix.  23). — What 
they  did  for  the  Apostle,  was  done  for  all  the 
churches  of  the  Gentiles. 

Ver.  5.  Likewise  salute  the  church  that  is 
In  their  house  [y.al  rtjv  y.ar'  otJtov  avroiv 
ixx).>j(yiav'\.  The  definite  prototype  of  an  apos- 
tolical household  church,  the  type  of  the  later  par- 
ish. At  the  same  time,  the  single  household  church- 
es in  Rome  are  already  connected  by  the  bond  of 
fellowship  into  one  spiritual  church.     Accordingly, 


the  church  in  the  house  is  almost  =:  the  assembly  in 
a  certain  house.*  Tholuck :  "  In  the  metropolis, 
which  was  at  that  time  about  four  miles  in  circum- 
ference, there  were  not  less  than  five  of  them  (comp: 
Kist,  in  Illgen's  ZeiUschrift  fur  hist.  Theologie,  iu, 
2d  part,  p.  65)." 

Epenetus.  "Unknown,  as  all  the  following 
ones  to  ver.  15.  (Rufus  may  be  the  son  of  Simon ; 
Mark  xv.  21.)  Tlie  legends  of  the  Fathers  made  the 
most  of  them  martyrs  and  bishops,  and  the  Synopah 
of  Dorotheus  misplaces  tlie  most  of  them  among  the 
seventy  disciples  ;  "  Meyer. 

The  first-fruits  of  Asia  {anaqyij  rtj<; 
L-/(Tta^-.  See  7exiunl  Note  ^'\.  Asia  proconsul aris. 
The  reading  Achaia  is  less  authenticated,  and  cre- 
ates difficulty,  inasmuch  as,  in  1  Cor.  xvi.  15,  Ste- 
phanas is  mentioned  as  the  first-fruits  of  Achaia. 
On  the  solution  of  this  difficulty  (by  supposing  that 
Epenetus  was  a  member  of  the  household  of  Ste- 
phanas, now  in  Rome),  see  Tholuck,  p.  738. — [£i? 
Xqi,(jr6v,  Meyer,  Philippi :  vAth  refh-ence  to 
Christ  ;  De  Wette,  Lange  :  for  Christ.  The  mean- 
ing obviously  is :  first  converted  to  Chiist. — R.] 
The  first-fruits,  or  those  first  converted,  were  gen- 
erally the  natural  leaders  of  the  incipient  churches. 

Ver.  6.  Mary.  Not  more  definitely  known. 
There  is  no  need  of  explaining  that  the  reading, 
bestowed  much  l&bnr  ■]•  on  tis,  is  much  more  natural 
than  the  other,  on  you,  for  elsewhere  the  Apostle 
always  brings  out  prominently  the  relations  of  the 
persons  saluted  to  his  own  labors.  [See  l^xtual 
Note  I— R.] 

Ver.  7.  And  Junia  (or  Junias).  The  word 
has  often  been  taken,  and  by  Chrysostom  [Grotius] 
among  the  rest,  as  a  feminine  noun,  Junia ;  it  seems 
more  probable  that  it  is  Junias,  an  abbreviation  of 
Junianus  (see  Tholuck,  p.  739).  [If  feminine,  it  is 
the  name  of  the  wife  or  sister  of  Andronicus;  the 
Rec.  accents  thus:  'Jowl av,  whicli  indicates  the 
feminine.  Most  editors  (not  Tregelles) :  '] ovviav. 
It  is  as  impossible  as  it  is  unnecessary  to  decide  the 
question,  though  Meyer  thinks  the  added  descrip- 
tion favors  the  masculine  form. — R.] 

My  kinsmen.  The  expression  ffcyyevftq 
has  been  understood  by  Olshausen,  and  others,  in 
the  broader  sense  of  feVow-countrymen ;  against 
which  it  has  been  remarked  that,  in  tiiat  case,  oth- 
ers than  Jewish  Christians  have  received  this  desig- 


*  [Dr.  Hodge  siijr^ests  that,  as  a  tent-maker,  Aquila 
had  better  accommodations  for  such  an  assembly  than  most 
of  the  Christians.  See  Alford  in  Inco,  where  he  quotes 
Justin  Martyr's  statements  about  these  assemblies.  C<t- 
tainly  there  is  no  warrant  for  supposin'-r  that  only  tho 
househoH  servants,  &c.,  are  meant. — It  is  clear  that  the 
early  Church  was  formed  quite  as  muc'i  upon  the  household 
model  as  lapon  that  of  the  synagogue.  No  form  of  church 
government  should  ignore  this,  nor  can  Christianity  make 
true  progress  a',  the  expense  of  the  family.  As  the  religion 
of  Jesus  Christ  has  sanc'ified  household  relations,  and  ele- 
vated them  all,  how  far  is  the  Church  responsible  for  tho 
manifestations  of  moral  decay  in  social  life?  May  not  the 
schisms  in  families,  produced  by  sectarian  propagandism, 
so  far  interfere  with  any  thing  akin  to  those  liousehold 
churches,  as  to  exercise  a  deteriorating  influence?  Cer- 
tainly it  is  difficult  to  concciTe,  that  any  Christians  at  Rome 
would  lay  in  wait  for  Prisca's  children,  to  decoy  them  with 
presents  to  some  other  assembly.  Yet  that  is  a  recognized 
form  of  ecclesiastical  (I  will  not  say  Christian)  effort  in 
these  days! — R.l 

t  [The  verb  Koniav,  when  not  followed  by  \6y<o,  refers 
to  practical  activity,  'not  to  preaching  and  teaching."  Here, 
probably,  some  acts  of  womanly  kindness  are  intended, 
such  as  Paul  would  be  more  likely  to  have  received  than 
the  whole  Boman  Church.  Hence  "us"  is  more  probably 
correct  than  "you."  Besides,  why  should  Paul  add  thij 
description,  were  she  so  well  known  to  that  Oliurch  1 — E.] 


448 


THE   EPISTLE   OF   PAUL   TO   THE   ROMANS. 


nation,  besides  the  three  thus  denominated.  Dr. 
Baur  finds  in  tliese  kiiisineu  not  only  a  mark  of  the 
uniiutlientieity  of  cha]).  xvi.,  but  oven  of  the  unfair- 
ness of  tlie  author,  wiio,  by  tills  fiction,  would  make 
for  the  Apostle  the  favorable  appearance  of  having 
sustained  a  more  intimate  relation  to  the  Jewisli- 
Christiau  Church  in  Kome. 

My  fellowr-prisoners  [mivai./H  mAwtoi's" 
/tot].  Furtiier  jjarticulars  are  not  known.  But 
as,  ai-i-ordiiif^  to  Acts  xxiii.  IG,  the  Apostle  had  a 
nepiicw  in  Jerusalem  who  took  a  deep  interest  in 
his  cause,  and  as  it  is  said  of  Andronicus  and  Ju- 
nias,  or  Junia,  that  they  were  before  him  in  Clirist — 
that  is,  were  believers — so  it  is  natural  to  make  a 
family  from  the  names  of  Andronicus,  Junias,  or 
better,  Junia  and  Ilerodion,  and  to  suppose  tiiat 
tliese,  as  the  early  converted  kinsmen  of  Paul,  had 
already  made  an  impression  in  Jerusalem  upon  the 
unconverted  Paul,  and,  after  his  conversion,  had 
taken  an  interest  in  him  in  his  captivity.  Then, 
tliese  were  specially  adapted,  like  Arpiila  and  Piis- 
cilla,  to  prepare  the  way  for  him  in  Kome.  This 
would  also  give  a  simple  explanation  to  among 
the  apostles,  iv  rot?  omoaroXoii;.  They 
were  hijjhly  respected  as  believers  among  the  apos- 
tles in  Jerusalem.  So  also  Meyer :  "  distinguished 
— that  is,  most  honorably  known  to  the  apostles. 
Thus  Beza,  Grotius,  and  most  others ;  Do  Wette, 
Fritzsche,  and  Philippi.  They  take  tlio  right  ground, 
for  a7T(nrTo).oi;  is  never  used  by  Paul  in  the  broader 
sense  (as  Acts  xiv.  4-14),  and  therefore  cannot  be 
explained,  with  Origen,  Chrysostoni,  Luther,  Cal- 
vin, &c.,  and  Tholuck :  among  [/.  «.,  among  the 
number  of]  the  Apostles.''''  *  See  Meyer  for  hy- 
potheses respecting  their  conversion. 

Ver.  8.  Amplias.  An  at^breviation  of  Am- 
pliaton. — [Beloved  in  the  Lord,  "  bi  loved  in  the 
bonds  of  Christian  fellowship  "  (Alford). — R.] 

Ver.  9.  Urbanus — Stachys.  The  Apostle's 
distinctions  result  from  an  exact  view. 

Ver.  10.  Apelles.  This  has  been  confounded 
(by  Origen,  and  others)  with  ApoUos,  but  without 
any  ground  whatever.  [Comp.  Horace,  Sat..,  i. 
5.  iDi).  Supposed  to  be  a  freedmaii,  but  the  name 
was  common  among  this  class  (Meyer,  Pliilippi). 
There  are  various  conjectures  about  the  grouping  of 
freechiicn  and  slaves  in  these  verses. — R.] 

The  approved  [t6v  f)oxi.Hor].  A  predi- 
cate of  tested  steadfastness  in  faith. — Who  are  of 
the  household  of  Aristobulus.  That  is,  the 
Christians  in  the  household,  jirobably  slaves  of  Aris- 
tobulus. See  the  additional  iv  xi^iioi  in  the  follow- 
ing verse.  [Alford:  "It  does  not  follow  that  cither 
Aristobulus  or  Narcissus  were  themselves  Christians. 
Only  those  of  their  /'a;«;7ite  (rorg  ix  riov)  are 
here  saluted  who  were  iv  KV(>io>  ;  for  we  must  un-^ 
derstand  this  also  after  \-l (>  KTrofJorXov." — R.] 

Ver.  11.  Narcissus.  (iroUus,  Neamler,  and 
others,  have  regarded  him  as  a  frecdman  of  Claudius 
(Sueton.,  Claud.  28).    [This  freedman,  however,  was 

•  [Luther:  torlctif  sind  her&hmte  ApntteK  Yet  even  so 
hi(rh  an  AnifHcan  aa  I)r.  Wordsworth  accpts  the  view  of 
Wryer  and  LaiiKC.  An  able  defence  of  the  less  restrirted 
use  of  the  tcnn  oiroaroAos  will  lie  found  in  Lii;htfoot, 
Oaliiiiitif,  pp.  92  ff.  Still,  In  every  case  whiTe  I'liul  u-es 
the  word.  It  c-in  be  referred  to  others  than  himself  and  the 
Twelve  only  liy  c;ituchresis.  In  2  Cor.  viii.  i'A,  the  artielo  is 
OMiitied,  and  Ine  word  liaa  obviou-sly  no  eC'le«ia.'itical  sense. 
Alfonl  thinks  the  me  ininR  ndopted  above  ''would  imply 
that  I'aul  hxid  more  frequent  intercourse  with  tlic  other 
apostles  than  we  know  that  he  had."  Yet  how  strange 
tint  "  noted  apostlea^'  cLould  require  this  ceiiiQcatiou  from 
raul.-K.l 


put  to  death  two  or  three  years  before  this  Epistlt 
was  written.  It  is  possible  that  the  salutation  it 
addressed  to  his  family,  known  thus  after  his  death. 
-R.J 

\  er.  12.  Persis.  [The  name  is  derived  from 
Persiii,  as  the  native  country  of  the  bearer ;  but  it 
is  not  known  that  it  was  borne  for  this  reason  ia 
this  particular  instance. — R.]  She  is  thus  candidly 
distinguished  from  the  two  just  named. 

Ver.  VA.  Rtifus.  See  Comvientary,  Mark,  p. 
151. — The  chosen.  A  very  expressive  distinction. 
[Not  nicicly  "  elect  in  Christ,"  but  a  choscfi  man,  a 
distingui.-^hcd  Christian  (Ilodge). — R.] — His  mother 
and  mine  [  z « t  t >/  v  «  >;  t t  ^  a  a. h  t  uT<  xai 
I II  or.  '''■  Hii  mother  by  nature,  m'lne  by  maternal 
kindness"  (Webster  and  Wilkinson). — R.J.  Fervid 
expression  of  gratitude  for  the  enjoyment  of  friend* 
ly  care. 

Ver.  14.  Hermas.  This  verse  contains  a  nu- 
merous group,  probably  intimately  associated,  and 
less  kn.own  to  the  Apostle.  Hernias  has  been  re- 
garded by  Origen  and  Euscbius  as  the  author  of  the 
work  :  '{)  noi-iiijv.  But  this  author  belongs  to  the 
middle  of  the  second  century.  —  The  brethren 
who  are  with  them  [  t  o  c  i;  a  c  r  «  r  t  o  T? 
«<yf/f;orc]-  This,  as  well  as  the  expression  in 
ver.  l.j  :  All  the  s<iints  who  are  iciih  them,  has  been 
understood  as  referring  to  a  household  church.  In- 
cidental  hypotheses  :  (1.)  Christian  associations  for 
common  business  pursuits,  &c.  (Fritzsclie,  Phili[ipi). 
(2.)  Missionary  unions  (Reiche).  [The  latter  is  quite 
improbable. — R.] 

Ver.  15.  Julia.  Probably  the  wife  of  Philolo- 
gus ;  for,  in  what  follows,  she  is  distinguished  from 
the  sister  of  Nereus. 

Ver.  16.  With  a  holy  kiss.  'E  v  (ftA?//<aT* 
ay  ill),  1  Thess.  v.  2t3.  Comp.  1  Peter  v.  14:  iv 
(fu/jfiuTi'  wyttTDyi;.  "  III  TertuUian,  it  is  the  o«cm- 
lum  pac's ;  the  fraternal  kiss  after  the  finished 
prayer  in  the  assemblies  of  the  Christians  is  men- 
tioned by  Justin  Martyr  (M.  Apol.  1.  Op.  65);"  Tho- 
luck.— For  further  particidars,  see  Meyer  and  Winer. 
The  continuance  of  this  Oriental  Christian  custom 
of  connecting  the  salutation  and  the  kiss  as  an  ex- 
pression of  fellowship  and  of  common  festivals,  ia 
known  in  the  Greek  church  (see  Luke  vii.  45). 

All  the  churches  [«i  f'xxA//(Tj«t  nu.ntn. 
See  Tixttinl  Xotc  '].  As  Paul  has  made  known  in 
many  churches  his  intention  of  going  to  Rome,  and 
Ijecause  of  this  o|)portuidty  had  received  many  salu- 
tations for  Rome,  he  regarded  himself  sutticiently 
warranted  to  greet  Rome  in  the  name  of  all  the 
churches,  particul.irly  of  those  which  he  had  estab- 
lished.  Grotius  limits  the  expression  to  the  (irecian 
churches ;  others,  in  other  ways.  [Stuart,  Olshaiu 
sen,  to  the  ciiurchcs  in  Corinth  and  vicinity ;  Ben- 
gel,  to  those  he  had  visited. — R.] 

C.  Vers.  17-20.— Ver.  17.  Now  I  beseech 
you,  brethren.  A  warning  against  those  who 
cause  divisions  and  variances  is  very  jiroperly  con- 
nected with  the  hearty  and  solemn  injunction  for 
the  universal  preservation  of  unity  and  harmony. 
Sec  an  analogous  instani^e  in  Eph.  vi.  10  ff.  Tliit 
section  is,  therefore,  by  no  means  "  supplrnientarv,^' 
a.s  Meyer  holds  it  to  be.  On  the  contrary,  it  is  ob- 
served, by  both  him  and  Tholuck,  that  it  may  be 
inferred  from  the  position  of  the  Apostle's  worda 
(at  the  conclusion),  and  their  brevity,  that  the  false 
teachers  here  designated  have  not  ijet  foimd  entrancB 
into  the  Church.     Ho  already  knew  that  they  exist- 


CHAPTER  XVI.   1-20. 


449 


ed,  and  that  they  increased  both  intensively  and  ex- 
tensively ;  therefore  he  could — as  he  subsequently 
did  in  his  farewell  address  at  Miletus,  when  setting 
out  for  Ephesus^-here  definitely  predict  their  pres- 
ence in  Rome.  Carpzov  has  had  in  mind  the  differ- 
ences in  chaps,  xiv.  and  xv. ;  Clericus,  and  others, 
the  early  heathen  philosophers.  In  both,  the  idea 
of  Christian  false  teachers  is  wanting.  Others  have 
decided  them  to  be  Libertines.  That  the  Apostle,  at 
all  events,  had  in  view,  besides  the  future  Judaizing 
and  Ebionitic  zealots  for  the  law,  the  gnosticizing 
and  antinomian  spirits  of  the  future,  is  proved  on 
looking  at  the  arrangement  for  the  reception  of  both 
these  tendencies,  which  he,  according  to  chaps,  xiv. 
and  XV.,  iinquestionably  found  already  in  the  Church. 
According  to  De  Wt^tte,  the  kind  of  false  teachers 
here  mentioned  cannot  be  more  specifically  deter- 
mined ;  according  to  Tholuck,  with  reference  to 
Phil.  iii.  2,  &c.,  the  zealots  of  the  law  are  meant. 

[Alford  says :  "  Judging  by  the  text  itself,  we 
infer  that  these  teachers  were  similar  to  those  point- 
ed out  in  Phil.  iii.  2,  &c. :  unprincipled  and  selfsh 
persons,  seducing  ol hers  for  their  oun  gain  ;  wheth- 
er Judaizers  or  not,  does  not  appear ;  but  consider- 
ing that  the  great  opponents  of  the  Apostle  were  of 
this  party,  we  may  perhaps  infer  that  they  also  be- 
longed to  it." — R.] 

To  mark  [anomlv.  To  notice  carefully ; 
used  in  Phil.  iii.  17,  with  reference  to  those  who 
should  be  imitated  ;  more  intensive  than  ^).innv 
(Meyer). — R.]  This,  and  the  avoiding  of  them, 
Krehl  thinks  can  be  referred  only  to  present  false 
teachers,  which  is  very  properly  opposed  by  Tho- 
luck.— [Divisions  and  offences,  t«<,-  iii,-/oa'ca- 
ffiaq  xal  T«  (J xciv()ala .  The  articles  point 
to  known  divisions  and  scandals,  whether  Paul  re- 
ferred to  any  particular  persons  or  not.  Dr.  Hodge 
seems  disposed  to  refer  the  first  word  to  doctrinal 
divisions,  the  latter  to  moral  offences ;  so  Webster 
and  Wilkinson.  Philippi  and  Meyer  seem  to  refer 
the  first  to  divisions,  however  occasioned,  and  the 
latter  to  temptations  to  depart  from  the  gospel 
ground  of  ftrith  and  life.  The  objection  to  the  for- 
mer distinction  is,  that  the  "  divisions  "  hinted  at  in 
the  Epistle  were  mainly  of  an  ethical  rather  than  a 
doctrinal  origin. — Contrary  to  the  teaching, 
TTaga  rrjv  ()iiia-/inv.  On  the  preposition,  see 
Gal.  i.  8,  Lange's  Comm.^  p.  19.  Most  German 
commentators  are  disposed  to  reject  at  least  the  ex- 
clusive reference  to  doctrinal  instruction.  As  our 
English  word  doctrine  suggests  dogmatic  theology^ 
we  substitute  teaching,  which  includes  all  instruc- 
tion.— A  commendation  of  their  teachers  is  implied, 
which  hints  at  the  indirect  Pauline  origin  of  the 
Church.  —  Avoid  them,  ixxXivarf  an'  av- 
r(T)v.  There  is  no  reference  to  official  excommuni- 
cation, but  to  personal  treatment  of  those  who  might 
or  might  not  be  church  members. — R.] 

Ver.  18.  Serve  not  our  Lord  Christ  [tw 
MXiQid)  r,,uv>v  XQKTroi  ov  S  ov  kf  v  ovtr  iv. 
See  Textual.  Xote  '].  See  chap.  ii.  8  ;  Phil.  iii.  19  ; 
2  Cor.  ii.  20.  Fanaticism,  by  its  confusion  of  spirit- 
nal  and  carnal  affections  and  motives,  degenerates 
into  disguised  sensualism.  —  Their  own  belly 
[t^  fai'Twf  xotAt'a].  This  is  a  symbol  of  their 
selt-interest,  selfishness,  sensuality,  and  of  their 
final  aiming  at  a  mere  life  of  pleasure ;  comp.-  1 
Tim.  vi.  5  ;  Titus  i.  11. 

And  by  their  good  words  and  fair  speech- 
es [ (5' t a  rTj(;  y q  tjm oloyiaci  y.al  f  v ).oyiai;. 
See  Textual  Note  '"].  Comp.  2  Cor.  xi.  14.  By 
29 


good  words  they  represent  themselves  in  a  rosj 
light,  and  by  flattering  speeches,  their  hearers.  For 
further  particulars,  see  Tholuck,  p.  741.  Melanch- 
thon  understands,  by  tv/.oyia,  religious  blessings  and 
promises  ;  for  example,  those  of  the  monks.  [Hodge 
takes  the  two  words  as  synonymous.  Meyer  thinks 
the  former  characterizes  the  tenor,  and  the  latter  the 
form,  of  their  words.  Xij?jitt.  is  found  only  here 
in  the  New  Testament.  The  view  given  by  Dr. 
Lange  is  quite  tenable. — R.] 

The  simple  [nov  a/.ciy.oyv.  The  unwary]. 
Those  who,  as  such,  can  be  easily  deceived.  [How 
many  were  deceiving  and  deceived,  appears  from 
Pliil.  i.  15,  written  from  Rome  a  few  years  after- 
ward.— R.] 

Ver.  19.  For  your  obedience  [^  y«e 
vfimv  vnaKoif^.  The  y<xQ  is  explained  in  dit 
ferent  ways : 

1.  It  implies,  indirectly,  that  they  also  are  not 
free  from'  this  nxctxia  (Origen,  Fritzsclie).  [Dr. 
Hodge  takes  obedience  as  i=  obedient  disposition, 
and,  with  others,  regards  this  as  implying  a  liability 
to  be  led  astray.  But  "  obedience,"  without  further 
definition,  would  mean  the  "  obedience  of  faith,"  in 
this  Epistle  at  least ;  besides,  this  view  implies  thai 
their  obedience  was  not  altogether  of  a  commend 
able  character. — R.] 

2.  It  implies  an  antithesis ;  as  for  the  Roman 
Christians,  he  knows  that  they,  as  being  obedient  to 
the  gospel,  cannot  be  so  easily  deceived  (Chrysos- 
tom,  Theodoret,  Meyer).* 

3.  The  '/«()  specifies  a  second  ground  for  ver. 
17  (Tholuck,  De  Wette,  Philippi).  [So  Alford.  But 
Meyer  correctly  says,  that  yd^  is  never  repeated 
thus  in  a  strictly  coordinate  relation.  Alford  finds 
also  a  slight  reproof  here. — R.] 

Explanation  (1.)  is,  as  it  seems  to  us,  very  aptly 
modified  by  Riickert.  Since  they  succeeded  in  de- 
ceiving the  simple,  they  will  thi?ik  that  they  can  also 
easily  find  an  entrance  to  you,  for  they  regard  your 
obedience,  which  is  everywhere  known,  as  that  very 
simplicity.  [Tliis  avoids  the  objection  to  which  the 
view,  as  held  by  Dr.  Hodge,  is  open.  Still,  Meyer 
seems  nearest  the  true  explanation. — R.] 

I  rejoice  therefore  over  you  [tf/'  {/iTv 
ovv  /aiQo).  See  7hxtual  JVote  ".  The  emphatic 
position  of  eifi'  t'/i  Tv  favors  Meyer's  view  of  yciQ, 
while  the  next  clause,  with  its  adversative  <)t,  seema 
to  introduce  the  real  warning. — R.]  It  is,  at  all 
events,  desirable  that  they  allow  themselves  to  be 
warned,  according  to  the  rule  which  the  Apostle  lays 
down. 

Wise  laoffovq.  >t.  A.  C,  Bee,  insert  /tiv, 
which  seems  to  be  an  interpolation  on  account  of 
(>£,  which  follows. — R.]  Tliey  should  be  receptive 
inquirers  after  what  is  good.  But,  on  the  other 
hand,  they  should  be  as  unreceptive  of,  and  un- 
teachable  in,  what  is  bad,  as  if  they  were  simple- 
hearted  people. — Harmless.  [Dr.  Lange  renders : 
ungelehrifi,  einfaltig,  simple,  as  in  E.  V.  But  harm- 
less seems  to  be   preferable,  especially  as  another 


*  [Meyer  finds  the  ground  for  this  antithesis  in  the 
position  of  OLKaKitiv  .  .  .  ifxCiv,  and  paraphrases :  "Not  ^nth- 
out  ground  do  I  s;iy  the  hearts  of  llu  simple;  for  yon  they 
will  not  feduce,  because  ynu  do  not  helong  to  the  simple  ; 
but  yo«  are  so  noted  for  your  obeiHence  (to  the  gospel),  that 
it  is  everywhere  knovvu  ;  about  you  I  am  therefore  glad,  yet 
I  would  have  you  wise  and  pure,"  &c.  "  An  elegant  min 
gling  of  the  warning  with  the  expression  of  firm  confi- 
dence." This  view  is  now  favored  by  Philippi,  and  is  no* 
open  fo  the  objection  urged  against  (1.),  nor  does  it  presen* 
any  grammatical  difficulty  whatever. — K.) 


450 


THE  EPISTLE   OF   PAUL   TO   THE   ROMANS. 


Greek  word  has  been  rendered  "simple"  just  before 
(vor.  18). — R.]  Meyer  explains  az f^ «t'o ii;  by 
pure  [/.  e.,  unmixed  with,  free  from,  evil],  which 
does  not  make  an  antidiesis  to  the  foregoing  (conip. 
1  Cor.  xiv.  20).  Malt.  x.  16,  on  the  contrary,  con- 
Btituies  a  harmonious  antithesis  to  the  whole  pas- 
sago.  For  ditti'rent  expositions  of  tiie  ciixi()aiorc;, 
see  Tlioiuck.  [i)r.  Ilodgu  :  "  Wise,  so  that  good 
may  result,  and  simple,  so  that  evil  may  not  be 
done  ;  "  so  most  connnentators. — H.] 

Ver.  20.  And  the  God  of  peace,  &c.  [6  <Je 
0f6s"  T'j';  tii>  tivrji;,  x.t./..]  In  the  divine  power 
of  the  Spirit  and  Author  of  peace.  It  is  just  as  the 
God  of  peace  that  lie  will  bruise  Satan,  wno,  by  iiis 
false  doctrines,  causes  divisions,  and  rends  the 
Church  asunder.  The  avvxQixi'n,,  shall  bruise, 
is  the  prophetic  future  ;  but  not  optativcly,  accord- 
ing to  Fhitt  [Stuart]  (see  2  Cor.  xi.  15).  The  ex- 
pression is  an  allusion  to  Gen.  iii.  15. 

The  grace,  &c.  This  is  the  usual  concluding 
benediction  (see  2  Cor.  xiii.  13).  In  2  Tliess.  iii.  16, 
18,  a  concluding  salutation  also  follows  the  benedic- 
tion. [The  presence  of  the  benediction  here  has 
led  to  various  conjectures :  that  Paul  intended  to 
close,  but  afterward  added  the  salutations ;  that 
ver.  24  is  not  genuine,  since  it  only  repeats  this 
doxology,  &c.  But  the  text  is  well  sustained  here, 
except  the  final  Amen  (see  Ttxluai  Note  ") ;  and 
certainly  no  one  has  a  riglit  to  say  that  Paul  shall 
always  close  his  Epistles  in  the  same  way,  or  to  im- 
pugn either  the  genuineness  of  the  text  or  the  in- 
spiration of  the  author,  because  he  does  not  conform 
to  a  certain  mode  (however  customary  with  him). 
-R.] 

DOCTRINAL  AND  ETHICAL. 

1.  Wc  become  best  acquainted  with  the  nature 
of  the  office  of  deaconess  in  apostolic  times  from 
the  Pastoral  Epistles.  JVom  these  it  is  evident,  first 
of  all,  that  this  office  was  not  of  a  missionary  char- 
acter, but  a  local  service  in  the  Church,  springing 
from  Christian  consecration,  and  more  exactly  de- 
fined, by  the  restraint  then  placed  on  women,  by 
the  general  destination  of  the  sex,  as  well  as  by  age 
and  cliaracter.  This  form  of  the  office  in  the  early 
Church  was  succeeded,  in  the  Middle  Ages,  by  the 


religious  orders,  which  assumed,  besides,  a  qualified 
mis-sionary  function.  Recent  times  have  attempted 
glorious  things  in  relation  to  this  office,  and  have 
accomplislied  great  results ;  but  the  full  develop- 
ment of  the  nnittcr  from  the  idea  of  a  local  evangel- 
ical service,  into  which,  in  its  wider  sense,  all  the 
female  members  of  the  Cimrch  are  called,  remains  a 
grand  problem  for  the  Evangelical  Cimrch.  [Wom- 
an's work  in  the  Church  daconal,  not  mhiistcria/, — 
All  Christian  women  called  to  a  diaconal  service ; 
some  to  a  more  special,  and  perhaps  official,  service 
of  this  nature. — TLie  danger  of  the  mediaeval  ex- 
treme best  avoided  by  regarding  the  Church  as 
founded  upon  the  family ;  not  intended  to  override 
it  (see  the  liousehold  churches  named  here).  How 
are  we  Protestants  ignoring  this  idea  ? — The  diaco- 
nal service  a  priestly  one  (chap.  xv.  27) ;  noble, 
however  humble  it  appears. — R.] 

2.  The  commendation  of  Phebe,  a  model  for 
Christian  commendations. 

3.  The  Apostle's  salutations.  Christianity  is  aa 
intensively  personal  in  a  holy  sense,  as  actually  free 
from  the  ungodly  respect  of  persons.  Tiie  Apos- 
tle's friends  as  prej)arcrs  of  his  way,  and  witnesses 
of  his  greatness  and  humility.  His  brief  descrip- 
tions of  them  are  models  of  a  proper  estimation  of 
persons,  free  from  all  flattery.  A  group  of  constel- 
lations in  the  apostolic  age,  as  a  segment  of  that 
spiritual  starry  sky  which  eternity  will  reveal. 

4.  The  warning  against  the  false  teachers.  See 
the  Ex('(/.  Notes. 

5.  The  Apostle's  glorious  prophecy  opens  a  still 
greater  future  lor  Rome.  We  also  read,  in  Matt, 
xiii.,  that  it  is  Satan  who  sows  the  tares  among  the 
wheat,  and  thereby  causes  offences.  False  teaching 
seems  liere  to  be  a  ground  of  divisions  and  ofl'ences. 
The  first  practically  evil  effect  proceeds  outwardly, 
the  other  comes  inwardly. 

6.  It  has  been  said,  that  the  Apostle  has  pro- 
nounced too  hard  a  sentence  on  his  opponents.  But 
the  Apostle  had  established  the  great  festival  of 
peace,  and  therefore  he  must  regard  the  enemies  of 
God's  Cimrch  of  peace  as  just  what  they  really  are 
— the  demoniacal  disturbers  of  the  institution  of  a 
heavenly  life  on  eaith. 

(Ttie  nomiletical  and  Practical  Notes  are  at  the  end  ol 
the  chapter.) 


CONCLUSION. 


THE  GREETINGS  OF  THE  PAULINE  CIRCLE  TO  THE  CHURCH  AT  ROME,  AND  THE  INVa 
CATION  OF  BLESSINGS  BY  PAUL  HIMSELF.  HIS  DOXOLOGICAL  SEALING  OF  TUJ? 
GOSPEL  FOR  ALL  TIME  BY  A  REAL  ANTIPIIONICAL  AMExN. 


V 


Chap.  XVL  21-27. 
A. 


21  Timotheus  my  workfellow  [salutoth  yon],'  and  Lucius,  and  Jason,  and  Sosi 

22  pater,  my  kinsmen,   salute  you   \';„ii  salute  you].      I  Tertius,   who  wrote  this 

23  [the]  ei)istle,  salute  you  in  the  Lord.     Gaius  mme  host,  and  [Me  host]  of  the 


CHAPTER  XVI.   21-27. 


45 


whole  church,  saluteth  you.      Erastus  the  chamberlain  [treasurer]  of  the  city 
24  saluteth  you,  and  Quartus  a  [our]  brother.      The^   grace  of  our  Lord  Jesua 
Christ  be  with  you  all.     Amen. 


25  Now  to  him  that  is  of  power  [who  is  able]  '  to  stablish  jam  according  to  my 
gospel,  and  the  preaching  of  Jesus  Christ,  according  to  the  revelation  of  tlie 
mystery,  which  was  kept  secret  [in  silence]  since  the  world  began  [during  eter- 

26  nal  ages].  But  now  is  made  manifest,  and  by  [through]  the  Scriptures  of  the 
prophets,  according  to   the  commandment  of  the  everlasting  God,   [is]   made 

27  known  to  all  nations  for  [unto]  the  obedience  of  faith  :  To  God  only  wise,  he 
glory  through  Jesus  Christ  for  ever  [To  the  only  wise  God,  through  Jesus 
Christ ;  to  whom  be  the  glo)-y  for  ever]."    Amen. 

[TO   THE   K0MAN8.]* 


>  Ver.  21.— [The  Rec,  with  D'.  L.,  and  a  few  minor  authorities,  reads :  do-TrafovTat.  N.  A.  B.  C.  D'.  F. : 
io-Traferai;  adopted  by  Lachmnnn,  Tischendorl",  Meyer,  Altoid,  &e.,  sincu  the  alteration  to  the  plural  (from  tha 
number  of  persons  named)  was  so  likely  to  occur. — The  E.  V.  must  therefore  be  <'meiided  as  above. 

2  Ver.  24. — [This  verse  is  wanting  in  \'.  A.  B.  C,  and  in  other  important  authorities.  In  some  cursives,  and  in 
some  copies  of  the  Peshito,  it  is  found  after  ver.  27.  D.  F.  L.,  Greek  and  L;itin  fathers,  insert  it  here.  It  is  rejected  by 
Laclimann,  Koppe,  Eeiche,  Tie-'clles  ;  brackctted  by  Alford  ;  accepted  by  Meyer  and  Lange  (Tischendorf  varies).  It 
was  not  inserted  to  form  a  proper  ending  to  the  Epistle,  since  ttie  authorities  which  omit  it  have  the  concluding 
doxology  ;  but  was  probably  omitted  on  account  of  the  unusual  eombinat  on  of  the  benediction  and  doxology.  So  Dr. 
Lange,  who  makes  the  doxology  a  liturgical  antiphony,  expanding  the  "Amen"  of  this  verse,  and  of  course  retains 
vers.  24-27  in  this  place. 

^  Ver.  25. — [The  emendations  are  from  the  revisions  of  the  Amer.  Bible  Un-on,  Five  Ang.  Clerirymen,  and  Noyes. 
Dr.  Lance's  rendering  is,  in  some  respects  peculiar :  "  But  to  Ifim,  who  cr.n  make  you  strong  (chap.  i.  II)  :  Accoiding 
to  (as  an  antiphonj-  to)  my  gc^pel  and  the  preaching  of  Jesus  Christ, — according  to  the  revelation  of  the  mystery  ;  that 
was  kept  in  silence  since  eternal  ages  ;  but  that  has  been  now  made  manifest,  as  through  the  prophcti'al  Sciipturcs; — 
according  to  the  command  of  the  everlasting  God,  made  known  among  all  nations  for  the  purpose  ot  their  obedience  ol 
faith: 

To  the  only  wise  God — 

Through  Jesus  Christ,  whose  is  the  glory — 

Into  eternity  an  (accordant)  Amen." 

It  will  be  noticed  that  this  differs  from  the  usual  view,  in  some  of  its  details  as  well  as  in  the  liturgical  view  it  presents. 
See  further  ,the  Exrg.  A'o/es. 

*  Ver.  27. — [On  Ihe  concluding  Doxology.  (1.)  Vers.  25-27  are  found  here,  in  N.  B.  C.  D.,  Vulgate,  Peshito,  and  other 
versions,  in  some  fathers.  So  the  Rrc.y  Erasmus,  Beza  (eds.  3-5),  Bengel,  Koppe,  Lachmann,  Scholz,  Fritzsche,  De 
Wctte,  Rackert,  Philippi,  Tischendorf,  Tholuck,  Ewald,  Meyer,  Alford,  Tregelles,  Lange,  and  many  others.  (■.'.)  They 
stand  after  chap.  xiv.  23  in  L.,  nearly  all  cursives  (Alforcl  says  192),  in  the  Greek  lectionaries,  in  Chrysosiom,  Theodoret, 
Theophylact,  &c.  This  position  is  accepted  by  Beza  (eds.  1,  2),  Grotius,  Mill,  Wetstein,  Paulus,  Eichhorn  (^nud  most  of 
those  who  deny  the  integrity  of  the  Epistle),  but  not  by  the  latest  critical  editors.  (3.)  They  are  found  in  both  places 
in  A.  and  a  lew  cursives,  wh'ch  is  indefensible.  (4.)  They  are  omitted  in  1''.  (or  rather  marked  for  erasure  by  the 
corrector)  F.  G.  (both,  however,  leaving  a  space  in  chap,  xiv.,  as  if  iatendi  g  to  insert  there)  Marcion,  some  manuscripts 
in  Jerome.     Sclimidt,  Reiche,  Krehl  reject  theni  as  not  genuine. — We  inquire,  then  : 

I.  Is  this  Doxology  jrtjfMmc/  A  careful  scrutiny  of  the  external  authorities  as  given  above  jtistifie- the  opinion  of 
Alfoi'd  :  '-Its  genuineness  as  a  pari  of  the  Epistle  is  placed  beyond  nil  rmsonnh'e  dnitht."  The  few  authorities  wliich 
omit  it  altogether,  seem  to  have  done  so  with  no  intention  of  rejecting  it.  The  variation  in  po-ition  is  so  readily 
accounted  for,  as  to  cast  little  doubt  on  the  genuineness.  Nor  is  the  internal  evidence  against  it.  The  style  ij?  Pauline. 
Though  the  other  Pauline  doxologies  are  simpler,  tlds  was  the  close  of  the  greatest  Epistle.  Reiche  thinks  that,  owing 
to  the  personal  character  of  chaps,  xv.,  xvi.,  the  pubic  rearling  closed  with  chap.  xiv. ;  that  then  a  doxology  was  spoken, 
which  crept  into  the  text  at  that  point,  and  afterward  was  transferred  to  the  close.  But  this  is  mere  conjecture.  (See 
Meyer.) 

II.  Wh.at,  then,  is  its  true  position?  We  answer,  without  hesitation,  at  the  close  of  chap.  xvi.  (1.)  The  weight,  if 
not  the  number  of  diplomatic  authorities  favors  this  position.  (2.)  In  accounting  lor  the  variation,  it  is  much  easier  to 
account  for  the  change  from  this  place  to  chap,  xiv.,  than  for  the  reverse.  The  doxology  forms  an  unusual  conclusion; 
it  was  preceded  by  the  usual  closing  benediction;  the  words  u/nay  cmjpifai.  wou'd  seem  to  point  to  the  "weak" 
(chap.  xiv).  Other  theories  are  advanced,  but  this  seems  the  .simplest  explanation  of  the  change.  -  The  repetition  in 
some  authorities  is  easily  accounted  for,  since  the  early  criticism  could  not  decide  where  it  jsroperly  belonged,  and  yet 
feared  to  reject ;  the  omission  arose  from  the  same  doubt  (since  F.  G.  both  have  a  blank  space  in  chap,  xiv.).— Dr. 
Lange's  view  of  the  connection  renders  extended  critical  discussii>n  unnecessary. — R.] 

*  [Subscription.  That  of  the  Rec.  is  probably  correct,  but  not  genuine.  65.  A.  B>.  C.  D.  G.  have:  irpot 
Twuacovt;  to  this  B''.  and  others  add  :  cypd<^r)  airb  KopiVflov  ;  G. :  ereAeVerj. — R.] 


EXEGETICAL  AND   CRITICAL. 

A.  The  salutations. — B.  The  doxology,  in  con- 
formity with  the  fundamental  thought  of  the  Epis- 
tle, in  the  form  of  a  liturgical  antiphony.  The  ever- 
lasting Amen  of  the  Church  as  a  response  to  the 
everlasting  gospel  of  God,  as  an  Amen  :  1.  To  the 
proclamation  of  the  gospel  in  general ;  2.  To  Paul's 
proclamation  of  the  call  of  the   Gentiles ;    3.    To 


God's  command  to  bear  the  gospel  forth  unto  all  na- 
tion.s,  for  the  consummation  of  which  our  Epistle  is 
designed. 

A.     Vers.  21-24. — ^Ver.  21.    Timotheus.    See 
Acts  XX.  4;    also   the   Encyclopaedias.*  —  LuciuS: 

*  [Comp.  Van  Oosterzee  (Lange's  Comm.),  I  TimMy 
Introd.,  §  1.— R.] 


452 


THE   EPISTLE   OF   PAUL   TO   THE   ROMANS. 


Not  Luke  (Oi  igcn,  and  others).  "  It  is  uncertain 
whether  this  is  the  Lucius  of  C.vrene  in  Acts  xiii. 
1."  —  Jason.  Conip.  Acts  xvii.  o.  —  Sosipater. 
Acts  XX.  -1.  Tlie  identity  is,  at  least,  by  no  means 
improbable.  [In  regard  to  these  three  persons  eoni- 
nientators  diH'er.  All  three  >//«//  he  identical  with 
those  mentioned  in  tlie  Acts,  yet  all  the  names  were 
common,  while  Sosipater  and  Sojiater  (Acts  xx.  4) 
may  be  the  same  name,  without  the  identity  of  per- 
sons being  thereby  established. — My  kinsmen,  o  l 
a vyyt  vtli;  /tor.  Sec  vers.  7,  11.  It  seems 
probable  that  some  relationship  more  close  than  that 
of  I'ellow-Jew  is  here  referred  to. — K.] 

Ver.  22.  Tertius.  Probably  an  Italian  (he  has, 
without  anj  ground,  been  identilied  with  Silas ;  * 
see  Meyer).  The  writer  of  this  Epistle,  which  Paul 
dictated  to  hnn.  On  other  untenable  hyjjotheses  (a 
clean  copy  ;  a  translation  into  Greek),  see  Meyer. 
It  was  natural  that  he  should  pi-esent  his  own  salu- 
tation. [Tholuclv  considers  this  irregularity  a  cor- 
roboration of  the  genuineness  of  the  chapter. — R.] 
Groundless  suppositions :  1.  Paul  wrote  from  ver. 
23  with  his  own  hand  (Kambacli) ;  2.  From  ver.  23, 
Teitius  wrote  in  his  own  name  (Gliickler).  ["En- 
tirely groundless  also  is  the  view  of  Olshausen  :  Paul 
wrote  the  doxology  immediately  after  ver.  20,  but 
on  a  special  and  small  i)arehment,  the  vacant  side 
of  which  was  used  by  the  amanuensis,  Tertius,  in 
order  to  write  vers.  21-24  in  his  own  name  ;  "  31  ey- 
er.  The  internal  evidence  is  altogether  against  this. 
— In  the  Lord,  iv  y.i<itito.  Wordsworth  follows 
Origen  in  joining  these  words  with  what  immediately 
precedes,  as  implying  that  the  work  of  an  amanuen- 
sis, not  loss  than  that  of  an  apostle,  is  done  "  in  the 
Lord."  Most  coimnentatoi'S  connect  it  with  aand- 
t^o/tai,  which  is  preferable. — K.] 

Ver.  23.  Gaius.  Caius.  See  the  Lexicons  on 
tlie  freciuent  occurrence  of  the  name.  The  identity 
with  the  Caius  in  1  Cor.  i.  14  is  very  probable ;  per- 
haps he  is  also  the  same  person  as  the  Caius  in  Acts 
XX.  4.  Paul  was  now  lodging  with  him,  as  he  had 
already  done  with  others. — Pr(jbably  also  a  house- 
hold congregation  gathered  in  his  house.  [Or  he 
may  have  been  universal  in  his  hospitality  to  Chris- 
tians (Alford).— R.] 

Erastus.  The  city  treasurer.  The  same  name 
in  .Vets  xix.  22  and  2  Tim.  iv..  20  does  not  seem  to 
denote  tlie  same  person,  unless,  as  Meyer  remarks, 
Erastus  had  given  up  his  position.  —  Quartus 
[  Koi'aijToi;.  This  shows  how  the  Greeks  trans- 
ferred the  sound  of  the  Latin  Qu  into  their  lan- 
guage.— R.]    A  brother  in  a  geneial  Christian  sense. 

R.  Vers.  25-27.— Ver.  25.  Now  to  him  who 
is  able  to  stablish  you  ['/'/.*  <)i  i)  wan  ivm 
V/IU4  IT  T  ij  n  iini,.  To  this  tlative,  that  of  ver. 
27  corresponds,  all  that  intervenes  being  dependent 
in  .some  way  ui)on  i)frccii{yi.i.  The  real  ginm- 
malieal  difHculty  is  therefore  in  ver.  27. — R.l 
2't//(.  j'iret.  See  chap.  i.  11  ;  1  Thess.  iii.  2; 
2  Tliess.  ii.  17.  He  is  very  soljcitous  that  the 
Church  in  Rome  be  steadfast  and  faithful.  He 
clothes  his  .solicitude  in  the  form  of  a  liturgical 
ontiphony,  in  which  he  again  tidves  uj)  the  first 
Amen,  in  order  to  m\y  Amen  to  the  three  solemn 
representations  of  the  gospel  of  (Jod,  in  the  name 

•  [The  fcround  of  this  supposed  identity  is  thnt  the 
Hebrew  word  nnswcring  to  the  Lntin  Terliun  (^f'bttj) 
Bound.s  like  Siluu.  But  the  latter  Is  a  contraction  from 
Bilvaiiu.i.-'B..] 


of  the  Roman  Church,  and  of  all  God's  churchcB  in 
general.  Comp.  the  liturgical  meaning  of  the  Amen 
in  1  Cor.  xiv.  16. 

According  to  my  gospel  [z«Trt  ro  finy 
yi/.i,6v  /(oc].  According  to  this  view  of  the  dox- 
ology, we  do  not  explain  xutu  in  reference  to  my 
gospel,  but  according  to  my  gospel,  as  an  anti|)hony 
to  my  gospel — and,  mentally,  for  the  first,  ^econd, 
and  third  time.  If  we  mistake  this  liturgical  form, 
this  doxology  becomes  a  network  of  exegetical  difti- 
culties.  The  first  xara  is  explained  by  Meyer: 
may  He  establish  you  in  relation  to  my  gospel,  that 
you  may  remain  perscveringly  true  to  my  gospeL 
For  other  explanations,  see  the  same  author,  p. 
551  f.  [Philijipi,  Alford,  and  othei's,  agree,  in  the 
main,  with  Meyer :  in  reference  to — i.  e.,  in  my  gos- 
pel ;  He  can  establish  you,  or,  "  in  subordination  to, 
and  according  to  the  requirements  of"  (Alford),  my 
gos])el.  I)r.  Hodge  prefers  t/irout/h,  which  is  scarce- 
ly defensible  lexically.  Dr.  Lange's  view  of  the 
preposition  depends  on  his  view  of  the  doxology  as 
a  whole. — R.] 

And  the  preaching  of  Jesus  Christ  [xai 
TO  y.ti(ji'yiia  'J/j(to7'  X(ji,(Tro7^,  As  it  is  not 
only  si)read  abroad  in  his  gospel,  but  also  outside  of 
it,  in  all  the  world.  Explanations :  1.  The  preach- 
ing concerning  Christ  (Luther,  Calvin,  Tholuck,  and 
Philippi)  ;  2.  The  preaching  which  Christ  causes  to 
be  promulgated  through  him  (Meyer,  and  others) ; 
3.  The  preaching  of  Christ  during  His  stay  on  earth 
(Grotius).* 

According  to  the  revelation  [zara  «yTo- 
xcc/.i  V'"'.  The  /.ard  is  taken  by  Meyer,  and  oth- 
ers, as  coordinate  to  the  former  one,  and  dependent 
on  (TTijtjticu  ;  by  Tholuck,  and  others,  as  dependent 
on  the  whole  opening  clause,  in  the  sense  of  in  con- 
sequence  of ;  by  Alford,  and  others,  as  subordinate 
to  xt'mvyiia. — R.]  This  is  the  specific  designation 
of  the  universality  of  the  gospel  according  to  Paul's 
view  ;  Eph.  iii.  3,  9  ;  CoJ.  i.  26,  &e. — The  mys- 
tery relates  particularly  to  the  freedom  or  national 
enlargement  of  the  gospel.  [Philijjpi,  and  others, 
uniieces.<arily  limit  )iii/<tt'ri/  here  to  this  enlargement 
of  the  gospel.  It  seems  best  to  take  it  in  its  full 
meaning.     See  chap.  xi.  25. — R.] 

Ver.  2|).  [But  now  is  made  manifest, 
(fiavntoi  0  ivToi;  ii't  vTv.  This  is  obviou.-iy  in 
antithesis  to  the  latter  part  of  the  iireceding  verse. 
The  question  respecting  the  relation  of  the  clauses  is, 
however,  a  difficult  one.  Beza,  Flatt,  Meyer,  Do 
Wette,  and  others,  join  these  words  closely  with  ver. 
25,  making  the  rest  of  this  verse  subordinate  to 
yvifioifrOirTo-.  They  render  somewhat  thus:  "But 
which  is  made  manifest  in  the  present  age,  and  liy 
means  of  the  pro|ilietic  Scri|)tures,  according  to  the 
eimimand  of  the  everlasting  God,  is  made  known 
unto  all  nations,  in  order  to  lead  them  to  the  obedi- 
ence  of  the  faith."  Hodge,  Alford,  and  others,  join 
together  the  first  part  of  the  verse  as  far  as  "  the 
everlasting  (Jod  ;  "  while  Dr.  Lange  takes  the  third 
xftrci  as  eoilrdinnte  to  the  first  and  second.  Be- 
sides, there  is  room  for  a  gr<*it  variety  of  o])inion  in 
regard  to  the  relation  of  the  ditVereiit  phr;ises. — R.] 

Through  the  Scriptures  of  the  prophets 
[()*«  Tt  y(t(i(foiv  ,T  II  ()(/>;  T(  X  nil'.  The  pre.s. 
ence  of  rt  seems  to  favor  tlie  connection  with  what 
follows,  Itut  Dr.  Lange  renders  "  as  through,"  &c., 

•  [Of  those,  (.3.)  Hpi'ins  most  imlonnWc.  (l.>  m.iUeu  this 
plimse  iin  cxtmsiop  of  llip  ivp  nslinj;  iine  ;  (i.)  an  oxpl-ii  n- 
tioii  iif  It.  'I'liey  lire  not,  luiwevcr,  ronlnKii^-lnry  <>f  cuch 
otlier.    Dr.  Lauge  seems  reuUy  to  combiuc  tbeiu  — R.] 


CHAPTER  XVI.   21-27. 


453 


thus  adopting  the  other  view. — R.]  By  this  addi- 
tion, Paul  proves  that  this  present  revelation,  whose 
special  organ  is  Paul  himself,  is  not  neologically 
new,  but  according  to  the  analogy  of  faith.  Throucfh 
the  Scriptures  of  the  propliets  means,  that  their 
sense  has  now  become  fully  clear.* 

According  to  the  commandment  of  the 
everlasting  God  [ z a t'  i/n^rayijv  rov  aivi- 
viov  OioTi.  See  Textual  JVoie  ^,  on  Dr.  Lange's 
renderuig. — R.]  Here  Meyer's  view  of  the  con- 
struction of  xard  does  not  hold  good  any  longer, 
and  therefore  he  makes  the  third  principal  piopo- 
sition  as  a  supplement  to  the  second  :  a7id  by  means 
of  the  prophetic  writivffs  according  to  the  command- 
ment of  the  everlasting  God,  &c.  This  command- 
ment is  the  last  form,  the  last  word,  because  it  brings 
very  near  to  the  Church  at  Rome  the  obligatory  duty 
of  interesting  itself  in  the  work  of  the  world's  con- 
version. The  commandment  of  the  eternal  God 
should,  as  an  injunction  continually  resounding,  find 
an  eternal  reecho  in  tlie  Amen  of  the  Church. I 

Ver.  27.  To  the  only  vrise  God,  &c.  [ftov  <» 
(ToqxTi  010),  x.T.A.]  Meyer:  "To  the  only  wise 
God  through  Jesus  Christ."  X  Curious  words  !  Bet- 
ter :  To  the  only  wise  God  be  the  glory  through 
Clirist  (Luther,  Beza  [E.  V.]  ).  Yet  the  w  op- 
poses this  view,  if  we  refer  it  to  Christ.  The  w,  in- 
deed, has  been  cancelled  by  Beza  and  Grotius,  ac- 
cording to  cursives  33,  72,  and  Rufinus ;  but  it 
stands  firm,  and  is  also  no  obsti'uction  to  the  proper 
construction  of  this  doxology.  For  by  all  means 
there  belongs  to  Clirist,  or  the  Lamb,  the  honor  of 
unsealing  the  book  of  God's  mysteries,  and  in  eter- 
nity the  Church  can  utter  tlianksgiving  and  praise  to 
Him  for  it  iu  the  Amen  of  the  Church.  Comp.  Rev. 
V.  12.  [It  must  be  added,  however,  that  while  the 
glory  may  be  very  properly  ascribed  to  Christ,  it 
is  grammatically_  harsh  to  refer  the  relative  w  to 
Christ,  since  Oeoi  is  the  leading  word  in  this  verse, 
and  by  implication  throughout. — R]. 

Because  the  force  of  the  last  Amen  was  mis- 
taken, many  supposed  that  the  Apostle  was  gradu- 
ally led,  by  the  parentheses,  from  the  doxology  to 
God,  to  tlie  doxology  to  Christ  (Thohick,  Philippi). 
Such  a  great  obscurity  would  be  a  bad  crown  to  his 
grand  and  clear  work.  Besides,  the  previous  repe- 
tition f.t6v(i)  aoqiT)  &H0  is  against  it.     Other  suppo- 


*  [The  sense  is  accordingly  much  the  same,  whether  this 
phrase  limit  "  made  manifest  "  or  "  made  known."  In  the 
lonner  case,  the  thougrht  is  Bupplcmentary  :  "It  is  made 
manifest  in  these  Rospel  times,  and  that,  too,  by  means  of 
the  prophetic  writings ; "  in  the  latter,  more  emphasis 
would  rest  upon  it.  It  is  objected  to  the  latter,  that  the 
writings  of  the  prophets  were  not  actually  the  means  em- 
ployed in  the  universal  diffusion  of  the  gospel ;  to  the 
formiT,  th:it  there  is  an  inconi^ruity  in  thus  speaking  of  a 
mystery  "  kept  in  silence,"  ami  yet  mnde  manifest  now  by 
writings  of  the  earlier  date.  Either  of  these  may  he  readily 
met.  On  grammatical  groutids  the  preference  should  be 
given  to  the  connection  with  what  follows,  unless  Dr. 
Lanse's  syntax  be  adopted,  which,  liy  taking  the  following 
Kara  as  Coordinate  to  the  previous  ones,  precludes  this 
view. — E.] 

t  [If  Dr.  Lange's  view  be  not  accepted,  then  Meyer's  is 
to  be  prefeiTcd  :  Tliis  general  making  kno\\-n  took  place: 
(1.)  By  means  of  the  prophetic  Scriptures  ;  {•:.)  According 
to  the  ciimmand  of  God  ;  (3.)  For  the  establishment  of  the 
obedience  of  f:iith  ;  (4.)  Among  all  nations.  So  most  com- 
mentators.— The  word  altaviov,  evirh'Slhigi,  has  been 
deemed  superfluous  ;  yet  it  seems  specially  appropriate.— 
"Thefiist  61?  indicates  the  aem— in  order  to  their  becom- 
ing obedient  to  the  faith  :  the  second,  the  local  exlml  of  the 
manifc.'tation  "  ( Alfbrd). — 11.] 

*  [■'  T'l  G'mI,  wJin  through  Christ  appears  as  the  only  wise  ; 
so  wisi',  that,  in  comparison  with  Him,  the  predicate  wise. 
ean  be  attriliUted  to  no  other  being,  the  nbsnlulehj  wise;" 
Meyer.    Ttiis  view  now  meets  ■n-ith  much  favor.— ll.J 


sitions — that  the  ^5  is  a  pleonasm,  standing  for 
avTO)  * — as  well  as  the  proposed  supplements,  prova 
only  that  there  must  be  a  mistake  in  the  whole  com 
ception  of  the  doxology.  We  may  regard  it  as  re« 
moved  by  the  liturgical  construction  of  the  conclu- 
sion corresponding  to  the  fundamental  liturgical 
thought  of  the  Epistle.  The  Amen  of  eternity  shall 
again  ascend  to  God  through  Christ,  just  as  the  eter- 
nal gospel  has  come  from  God  to  man  through  Him. 
But  we  do  not  read  to  ciftfjv,  because  the  conclusion 
is  not  didactic,  but  a  prayer. 

[Dr.  Lange  thus  avoids  an  anacoluthon,  by  mak- 
ing a  double  doxology,  as  it  were — to  God  an  eter- 
nally accordant  Amen,  to  Christ  the  glory.  It  must 
be  confessed  that  this  view  is  novel,  with  scarcely  an 
analogy  in  the  New  Testament  or  elsewhere  ;  yet  it 
is  beautiful,  poetic,  and  appropriate.  For  the  Apos- 
tle, in  closing  such  an  Epistle  as  this,  must  have 
been  filled  with  thoughts  not  less  grand  than  these. 
Still,  should  we  accept  the  view  of  Meyer,  the  thought 
remains  grand,  Pauline,  and  appropriate.  (See 
Winer,  p.  528,  on  the  anacoluthon.)  For  he  who 
had  dived  so  deeply  into  the  riches  of  the  knowl- 
edge of  God  in  Jesus  Christ,  might  well  close  by 
declaring  that  God  was  revealed  as  absolute  wisdom 
in  Jesus  Christ,  and  ascribe  to  Him,  as  such,  the 
glory  forever.  And  when,  through  the  preaching 
of  Jesus  Christ,  according  to  this  gospel,  the  mys- 
tery of  God's  love  in  Jesus  Christ  shall  be  made 
known  to  all  nations,  and  they,  through  the  knowl. 
edge  of  the  revealed  Scriptures,  become  obedient  iu 
faith,  then  to  Him,  whose  wisdom  shall  be  thus  re- 
vealed, be  all  the  glory.  The  true  antij^honical 
Amen  is  pronounced  by  those  who  labor  for  and 
await  that  glory,  who  to-day,  with  uplifted  heads,  ex- 
pect the  final  triumph,  not  less  than  he  who  closes 
his  great  Epistle  in  such  confidence. — R.] 


DOCTEINAL  AND  ETHICAL. 

1.  See  the  JExeg.  Notes. 

2.  The  doxology  is  presented  to  God,  as  the  only 
wise,  in  the  same  sense  as  His  wisdom,  in  the  econ- 
omy of  salvation,  is  glorified  at  the  conclusion  of 
chap,  xi. 

3.  On  the  liturgical  meaning  of  the  Amen,  comp. 
Deut.  xxvii.  15  S. ;  Ps.  cvi.  48  ;  1  Chron.  xvi.  36  ' 
1  Cor.  xiv.  16  ;  but  especially  Eph.  iii.  21. 


HOMILETICAL  AND  PEACTICAL. 
Chap.  xvi.  1-16. 

The  abundance  of  apostolic  salutations  (vers. 
1-16). — The  Apostle's  good  memory  of  his  friends 
(vers.  1-16). — Phebe,  a  pattern  for  every  Christian 
deaconess.  1.  Every  one,  like  her,  should  minister 
to  the  poor  and  sick  in  the  Church  of  the  Lord  ;  2. 
Every  one,  Uke  her,  should  not  teach  God's  word, 
but  bring  it  over,  as  Phebe  brouglit  the  Epistle  to 
the  Romans  to  Rome  (vers.  1,  2). — The  evangelical 
office  of  the  deaconess  arose  from  living  faith :  1. 
In  the  apostolic  Church  ;  2.  In  the  Middle  Ages ; 
3.  At  the  present  time. — How  should  our  churches 
act  toward  the  deaconesses  ? — He  who  exercises  love 
may  also  lay  claim  to  love  (ver.   2). — Aquila  and 

•  [Hodge:  "To  the  only  wise  God,  through  Jesue 
Christ,  to  Him,  I  say,  be  glory  forever."  So  Stuart,  taking 
(5  in  the  demonstrative  sense. — E.] 


454 


THE   EPISTLE   OF  PAUL   TO   THE   ROMANS. 


Priscilla,  a  Christian  couple  of  the  apostolic  age ; 
coiup.  Acts  xviii.  2,  26  (vers  3,  4). — Aquila  and 
Priscilla  contiasted  with  Ananias  and  Sapphira ; 
comp.  Acts  V.  1  ff. — The  Christian  Church  originally 
a  household  church  (ver.  5). — The  family,  the  birth- 
place of  Christian  service  in  the  Gentile  world ; 
comp.  Acts  X.  17  ;  xvi.  ;^4,  40  ;  xviii.  7;  1  Cor.  xvi. 
19  (ver.  6).— The  Marys  of  the  New  Testament.  1. 
Mary,  the  mother  of  our  Lord  ;  2.  Mary,  the  sister 
of  the  mother  ot  Jesus ;  3.  Mary  of  Bethany ;  4. 
Mary  MagdiiJene ;  5.  Mary,  the  mother  of  John 
Mark  ;  6.  The  Roman  Mary  (ver.  6). — See  the  Con- 
cordance. 

The  Marys  of  the  New  Testament  grouped  in 
pairs.  1.  Two  of  them  belong  to  the  immediate 
family  of  Jesus ;  2.  Two  are  friends  of  our  Lord  ; 
8.  Two  are  protectresses  of  His  apostles  (ver.  (5). — 
The  various  yet  well-considered  designations  of  the 
individuals  saluted  by  the  Apostle :  Helpers  in 
Christ  (ver.  3) ;  well-beloved,  my  beloved,  beloved 
(vers.  5,  9,  12);  beloved  in  the  Lord  (ver.  8);  ap- 
proved  in  Christ  (ver.  10) ;  chosen  in  the  Lord  (ver. 
13) ;  sister  (ver.  1). — The  salutation  with  a  holy  kiss 
(ver.  16). — The  holy  kiss  of  fraternal  fellowship, 
and  the  Judas-kiss  of  the  betrayer  (ver.  16). 

Llthkr,  on  ver.  17  :  This  is  said  against  all  doc- 
trines of  men. 

Starke  :  Christianity  does  not  abrogate  worldly 
transactions  and  external  business,  but  rather  directs 
them  aright,  and  brings  a  blessing  upon  them  (ver. 
2). — Hedingkr  :  How  beautiful !  Pious  women  in 
the  service  of  the  Church,  taking  care  of  widows, 
children,  the  poor,  and  the  sick  !  Oh,  how  sadly  has 
this  zeal  died  out  in  the  Church  ;  every  one  is  for 
himself  in  his  own  house  !  Yet  who  does  not  see 
the  footprints  of  a  God  still  living?  (ver.  2.) 

Spenkr:  We  see,  at  least,  that  women  are  pro- 
hibited from  no  spiritual  employment,  with  tlie  ex- 
ception of  the  public  office  of  the  ministry  (ver.  2). 
— With  a  holt/  kiss,  without  any  wantonness,  actual 
or  imagined  (ver.  16). 

IIeibnkr:  Commendations  of  the  Christian  are 
very  different  from  merely  worldly  ones,  for  they 
have  a  holy  cause  and  a  holy  purpose  (vers.  1,  2). — 
Natural  weakness,  strengthened  by  grace,  accom- 
plishes much  (ver.  6  ff.). — The  tri;e  Christian  must 
read  all  these  names  with  hearty  interest,  even 
though  we  know  but  little  or  nothing  of  their  work.s. 
Their  names  stand  in  the  Book  of  Life. — Celebrity, 
BO  called,  is  something  very  ambiguous ;  the  lowest 
faithful  servant  of  Christ  is  more  than  the  most  ad- 
mired worldly  hero. — Pious  souls  can  even  wish  to 
remain  concealed^  la&nv  Biu'iirai;  (vers.  5,  6  If.). — 
The  kiss  can  be  most  unholy  and  most  holy  (ver. 
10). 

[BcRKiTT,  on  vers.  5-Y :  0  happy  houses,  and 
thrice  happy  householders,  whose  families  are  little 
churcties  for  piety  and  devotion  ! — Observe  :  1.  That 
seniority  in  grace  is  a  very  great  honor  :  and  to  be 
in  Christ  i»ef<jre  others,  is  a  transcendent  preroga- 
tive. 2.  That  God  will  have  the  good  works  of  all 
His  saints,  and  the  services  especially  which  are 
done  to  His  ministers  and  amba.ssadors  by  any  of 
His  people,  to  be  applauded,  valued,  and  recorde<l. 
— IIknrv  :  In  Christian  congregations  there  should 
be  lesser  societies,  linked  together  in  love  and  con- 
Terse,  and  taking  opportunities  of  being  often  to- 
gether.— DottnRinoE :  Many  women  have  been  emi- 
nently useful.  The  most  valuable  ministers  have 
often  been  assisted  by  them  in  the  success  of  their 
work,  whih  their  pious  care,  under  the  restraint  of 


the  strictest  modesty  and  decorum,  has  happily  and 
effectually  influenced  children,  servants,  and  young 
friends ;  yea,  has  been  the  means  of  sowing  the 
seeds  of  religion  in  tender  minds,  before  they  have 
been  capable  of  coming  under  ministerial  care.— 
Scott  :  We  should  hope  tlie  best  of  others,  and 
commend  what  is  good  in  their  conduct. — Hoioe  : 
The  social  relations  in  which  Christians  stand  to 
each  other  as  relatives,  countrymen,  friends,  should 
not  be  allowed  to  give  character  to  their  feelings  and 
conduct  to  the  exclusion  of  tlie  more  important  re- 
lation which  they  bear  to  Christ.  It  is  as  friends, 
helpers,  fellow-laborers  in  the  Lord,  that  they  are  to 
be  recognized. — Bar.ves  :  Religion  binds  the  hearts 
of  all  who  embrace  it  tenderly  together.  It  makes 
them  feel  that  they  are  one  great  family,  united  by 
tender  ties,  and  joined  by  peculiar  attachments. — 
J.  F.  H.] 


Vkes.  17-27. 

Warning  against  disturbers  of  the  Church.  The 
Apostle  pronounces  against  them :  1.  With  all 
frankness,  designating  them,  a.  as  those  who  cause 
divisions  and  offences ;  b.  whom  tlie  otiiers  should 
avoid,  because  they  are  not  in  Christ,  but  serve 
themselves,  and  deceive  simple  hearts  by  honeyed 
words  and  false  speeches.  2.  With  all  coiifidence  in 
the  members  of  the  Church  at  Rome ;  because,  a. 
tlieir  obedience  is  come  abroad  unto  all  men  ;  6.  he 
himself  is  glad  on  their  behalf;  r.  but  desires  that 
they  be  very  careful,  wise  unto  that  whi(;h  is  good, 
and  simple  concerning  evil.  3.  With  the  strongest 
hope  in  the  God  of  peace,  who  he  expects  will 
shortly  bruise  Satan  under  the  feet  of  believers 
(vers.  17-20). — On  divisions  and  offences  in  the 
Church  (ver.  17). — We  can  cause  offence,  not  only 
by  a  bad  life,  but  also  by  bad  teaching  (ver.  17). — 
Good  words  and  fair  speeches  very  easily  deceive 
simple  hearts  (ver.  18). — Not  every  thing  which 
tastes  sweet  is  healthy,  nor  is  every  thing  wliich  has 
a  pleasing  sound  true  (ver.  18). 

Wise  unto  that  which  is  good,  and  simple  con- 
cerning evil !  Comp.  Matt.  x.  16  ;  1  Cor.  xiv.  20 
(ver.  19). — The  God  of  peace  conquere,  Satan  is 
trodden  upon  (ver.  20). — To  God  alone  be  glory 
through  Jesus  Christ  forever  !     Amen  (vers.  25-27). 

Starkk,  Hedinger  :  Christians  are  not  dumb 
blocks  (Ps.  cxix.  100,  104) ;  but  industrious,  wise, 
zealous  in  that  which  is  good,  full  of  excellent  coun- 
sel and  wise  execution.  But  it  is  owing  to  their 
godly  simplicity  and  love  that  they  do  not  under- 
stand wickedness,  intrigues,  and  all  kinds  of  low 
tricks  (especially  when  men  make  themselves  pleas- 
ant, according  to  the  fle.sh,  by  shifting  about,  talking 
politics,  and  flattering  with  the  cross  of  Christ),  and 
are  often  deceived  (ver.  19). 

Speser  :  A  lie  cannot  stand  long,  but  must 
finally  be  exposed  (ver.  20). 

Benoel  :  In  this  whole  Epistle  the  Apostle  men- 
tions (he  enemji  but  once ;  in  all  his  Epistles  he  men- 
tions  Satan  nine  times,  and  the  drvil  six  times  (ver. 
20). 

Lisco :  Warning  against  deceivers.  1.  Import; 
2.  Description  of  false  teachers ;  3.  Ground  of  warn- 
ing ;  4.  Comfort  (vers.  17-24). — The  a.«cription  of 
praise  to  God,  and  the  wish  for  His  blessing.  1. 
The  subject  of  the  ascription  of  praise ;  2.  Its 
ground  (vers.  25-27). 

Heuuner:  The  holiest  union  can  be  dissolved 


CHAPTER  XVI.   21-27. 


45£ 


by  evil  desire  and  unbelief;  the  purpose  of  the  evil 
spirit  ii  always  separation  and  destruction  {Divide 
et  impera  !).  This  takes  place  especially  by  means 
of  false  teachers  (vers.  17,  18). — The  world  is  wise 
in  doing  evil,  and  unskilful  in  doing  good  (ver.  19). 
— By  God  and  His  Spirit  we  can  conquer  Satan  and 
bis  works.  Christ  has  begun  to  destroy  the  works 
of  Satan,  though  the  task  is  not  yet  finished  (ver. 
20). 

[Farinpon,  on  ver.  20 :  If  the  devil  inspire  evil 
thoughts,  God  is  both  able  and  willing  to  inspire 
good ;  and  in  all  our  trials,  in  all  time  of  our  tribu- 
lation, and  in  all  time  of  our  wealth,  in  the  hour  of 
death  and  in  the  day  of  judgment.  His  "  grace  is 
Buffii-ient  for  "  us. 

[Jeremy  Taylor  :  All  people  who  desire  the 
benefit  of  the  gospel  are  bound  to  have  a  fellowship 
and  society  with  these  saints,  and  communicate  with 
them  in  their  holy  things,  in  their  faith,  and  in  their 
hope,  and  in  their  sacraments,  and  in  their  prayers, 
and  in  their  public  assemblies,  and  in  their  govern- 
ment ;  and  must  do  to  them  all  the  acts  of  charity 
and  mutual  help  which  they  can  and  are  required 
to;  and  without  this  communion  of  saints,  and  a 
conjunction  with  them  who  believe  in  God  through 
Jesus  Christ,  there  is  no  salvation  to  be  expected : 
which  communion  must  be  kept  in  inward  things 
always,  and  by  all  persons,  and  testified  by  outward 
acts  always,  when  it  is  possible,  and  may  be  done 
upon  just  and  holy  conditions. 

[Bcrkitt  :  God  is  only  wise,  because  all  wisdom 
is  derived  from  Him  ;  all  the  wisdom  of  angels  and 
men  is  but  a  ray  from  His  light,  a  drop  from  His 
ocean.  Let  the  wisdom  of  God,  in  all  His  dealings 
with  us  and  ours,  be  admired  and  adored  by  us  ;  for 
all  His  works  of  providence  are  as  orderly  and  per- 
fect as  His  works  of  creation,  though  we  perceive  it 
not. 

[Henry  :  Mark  those  that  cause  divisions ;  mark 
the  method  they  take,  the  end  they  drive  at ;  there 
is  no  need  of  a  piercing,  watchful  eye,  to  discern 
the  danger  we  are  in  from  such  people ;  for  com- 
monly the  pretences  are  plausible,  when  the  projects 
are  very  pernicious.  Do  not  look  only  at  the  divi- 
sions and  offences,  but  run  up  those  streams  to  the 
fountain,  and  mark  those  that  cause  them  ;  and  es- 
pecially that  in  them  which  causes  these  divisions 
and  offences  ;  those  lusts  on  each  side,  whence  come 
these  wars  and  fightings.  A  danger  discovered  is 
half  prevented. 

[Scott  :  In  order  to  maintain  communion  witli 
the  Lord  and  with  His  saints  uninterrupted,  avoid, 
with  decided  disapprobation,  those  persons  who  aim 
to  prejudice  believers  against  each  other,  to  draw 
them  off  from  faithful  pastors,  or  to  seduce  them 


into  strange  doctrines,  contrary  to  the  simple  truths 
of  God's  word. 

[Clarke:  The  Church  of  God  has  ever  been 
troubled  with  pretended  pastors,  men  who  feed 
themselves,  and  not  the  flock ;  men  who  are  too 
proud  to  beg,  and  too  lazy  to  work  ;  who  have  nei- 
ther grace  nor  gifts  to  plant  the  standard  of  the 
cross  on  the  devil's  territories,  and,  by  the  power 
of  Christ,  make  inroads  upon  his  kingdom,  and  spoil 
him  of  his  subjects.  By  sowing  the  seeds  of  dis- 
sensions, by  means  of  doubtful  disputations,  and 
the  propagation  of  scandals ;  by  glaring  and  insin- 
uating speeches — for  they  affect  elegance  and  good 
breeding — they  rend  Christian  congregations,  form 
a  party  for  themselves,  and  thus  live  on  the  spoils 
of  the  Church  of  God. 

[Hodge  :  However  much  the  Church  may  be  dis- 
tracted and  troubled,  error  and  its  advocates  cannot 
finally  prevail.  Satan  is  a  conquered  enemy  with  a 
lengthened  chain. 

[Barnes  :  Let  men  make  peace  their  prime  ob- 
ject, resolve  to  love  all  who  are  Christians,  and  it 
will  be  an  infallible  gauge  by  which  to  measure  the 
arguments  of  those  who  seek  to  promote  alienationa 
and  contentions. 

[M'Clintock  :  There  is  nothing  in  religion  in- 
compatible with  the  natural  affections.  Nay,  you 
will  find  that  he  who  loves  God  most,  has  the 
strongest  and  most  trustworthy  love  for  kindred 
and  friends.  The  human  affections  are  purged  of 
all  dross  by  the  fire  of  love  to  God.  A  heart  full 
of  charity  prompts  to  all  good  and  kind  actions, 
just  when  they  are  called  for.  It  will  give  tears, 
when  tears  and  sympathy  can  bless  or  save  ;  it  will 
give  sacrifice,  when  sacrifice  can  help  or  save  some 
suffering  soul.  Earnest  love  to  God  mxist  display 
itself  in  tender  attributes,  in  good,  kind,  and  gentle 
ministrations — in  all  forms  of  benevolence  and  per- 
sonal  sacrifice.  And  these  things  become  the  more 
easy,  the  more  we  know  of  the  love  of  God. 

[Homiletical  Literature  on  ver.  1*7 :  John 
Eeading,  Serm.  (London,  1642) ;  G.  Croft,  The 
Evils  of  Separatioti,  Bampton  Led.,  163  ;  Johnson 
Grant,  The  Primitive  Church,  Disc.  (1843),  204. 
— On  ver.  19 :  John  Jortin,  Religious  Wisdom^ 
Serm.,  vol.  i.  300 ;  Bishop  Hurd,  Sermons,  Works, 
vol.  vi.  215  ;  John  Morley,  Disc,  99 ;  Joseph 
HoRDERN,  77ie  Christianas  Wisdom  and  Simplicity/, 
Serm.,  199 ;  A.  N.  Darnell,  Serm.,  247 ;  C.  Sim- 
eon, Practical  Wisdom  Recommended,  Works,  vol. 
XV.  592. — On  ver.  27  :  Charnock,  Uie  Wisdom  of 
God,  Works,  vol.  ii.  146  ;  Daniel  Whitby,  Th6 
Wisdom  of  God,  Sermon  on  the  Attributes  of  God, 
vol.  i.  226  ;  G.  Burder,  The  Wisdom  of  God^  VU. 
lage  Sermons^  vi. — J.  F.  H.] 


i 


/ 


V 


BS2665  .L274  1872 

The  Epistle  of  Paul  to  the  Romans 

Princeton  Theological  Seminary-Speer  Library 


1    1012  00068  0019 


:('.!' 


Uii' 


